Ganrich

Pretty sure that the rights to use the D20 system in video games are owned by Wizards of the coast. Maybe Hasbro. I'm not sure. I am pretty sure that is why there isn't a Pathfinder RPG out there. So, even if you create a new IP, you are dealing with the same headache as using an existing IP. It's probably best to create your own system if you want autonomy.

They have been saying 90fps was recommended for a long time. IIRC, less than that would cause screen flicker in your peripheral vision and cause headaches. Not to mention that I am sure lower frames cause some input delay, and that would lead to "VR sickness." So, if you don't want headaches and vomiting then make sure your PC is beefy enough to run your game on 2 displays. Yeah, that's the point. Not only do you have to pay 700€ for the device, you'll also have to spend *at least* as much on a machine that can run the games well enough. So based on this, I'd say VR is still far away from this "available for everything"-thing they talked about in their kickstarter years ago. Indeed. I think we are looking at a "first to market" gouge here, myself. Keep in mind that they are "the" brand name in VR, as well. I honestly was also waiting to see the Valve/HTC Vive in comparison to the Rift. Valve's SDK is likely to be less propriety sans the usual "game can be on any store front, but has to be on Steam" clause. It will also support Linux out of the box. Where as Occulus is bringing their support at some vague "later date." That's the reason I'm waiting on AMD as well. Their current GFX cards have been solidly better than Nvidia in 2k resolutions. While they tend to lose in 1080p, and trade blows in 4K. Occulus is closer to 2k. So, IMHO AMD could be the better option when trying to get your PC to be a single Card solution and avoid SLI/Crossfire setups. Also, Directx 12 and Vulkan could play an interesting part here. At the moment, I would say a $1000+ rig would be recommended to run a VR headset. I would build to ensure I had a cushion so you never dip below 90fps in most games. @keyrock - I think VR headsets should be compared to buying trends of people getting top of the line monitors (2k, 4K, etc). Because they are more likely people with PCs capable of maintaining 90fps at the HDM's required 90fps already, and now having to build a rig specifically for it. I personally think the $300 -$400 window is what they should be aiming for. We will see if competition brings that number down.

They have been saying 90fps was recommended for a long time. IIRC, less than that would cause screen flicker in your peripheral vision and cause headaches. Not to mention that I am sure lower frames cause some input delay, and that would lead to "VR sickness." So, if you don't want headaches and vomiting then make sure your PC is beefy enough to run your game on 2 displays. Other than the price tag... I am waiting because I don't want to build a new main rig just yet (I'm waiting to see what AMD's Zen processor line, and their Polaris graphics cards look like before buying. I'm tired of blue and green, and need red to bring some competition again. I have a bit of faith in AMD this go around), and also... The only game I know of that is worth a crap that supports VR at present is Elite: Dangerous. I love ED, but not that much.

I agree. Monks are reactive in nature. They take damage, and their abilities are fueled. Ciphers are the opposite, but still reactive. They hit things, and fuel their abilities. They can also attack before abilities are fueled. All the while chanters... wait, and a person versed in the game will rarely use anything but chants with their chanter. They won't see much use for invocations, and when they do it is usually just a clean up of the trash still on the field. Aniother idea to potentially toss around to alleviate this: A talent/ability that speeds up counter generation based on the number of friendlies being buffed by a phrase, or the same for enemies being debuffed. That way some more positioning is required. The problem is it would incentivize high Intellect as a byproduct, and imho chanters already benefit far too much from intellect. It's almost a must have attribute as is. Perhaps a talent that gives the chanter a bonus phrase counter when they are put under the effect of CC would be interesting too. I like the idea of their Invocations being more devastating than other casters, but fewer and farther between. However, right now they almost never cast and some invocations aren't devastating at all. Since they build so slowly, the non summoning invocations likely need a value pass. Perhaps after the update. Other ideas: Ancient memory and its secondary talent should become a buff with a status on friendlies, and it should be unstackable so that it can do more healing. Then you could have other talents that do other effects to friendlies or enemies while they are in range of the chanter that work in the same unstackable fashion. IIRC Ancient memory was nerfed because 6 man Chanter teams were out healing damage. I think talented it healed 6 damage every few seconds, and 6 chanters made that 36 damage. This would stop that from being a thing and make that talent, and others like it we could create, useful again. Focused Chanting - this talent causes the chanter's phrase effect values to double on a target that is being attacked with the chanter's weapon if he is inside the chanter's pbaoe circle. EG. Thick Grew their tongues causes -10 concentration on enemies within the effect, but with this talent if you are attacking the caster in the back then they suffer -20. I also think that burning extra phrase counters is a terrible mechanic. Why do I lose all 4 counters if I use a level one(3 count cost) invocation instead of a level 2 (4 count cost)? I understand the Lore reason for it, but the mechanic is bad. This garbage doesn't happen to monks or ciphers. Not that it matters in the present game... Since you rarely get one invocation off anyways... Much less 2. It irritates me. Perhaps, effect numbers could be increased if you have 4+ phrases built up and use a level 1 phrase that isn't a summon? Actually, I rather like that idea. It would make those level 1 damage conal abilities be more useful into late game. If you cast a level 1 invocation when you have more than 3 counters then you get +% increase to the effect per extra phrase counter over 3. If that makes sense. The scroll talent I suggested doesn't step on Cipher's toes much, nor monk's, but it does a bit on priest's, druid's, and wizard's. However, only having a single cast per encounter of a limited list of 4-6 spells from all 3 classes makes them much less potent than the dedicated class, but it lets the Chanter fill in gaps in party makeup when you are missing one or two of those casters (priest, Druid, wizards). @Evilcat - I am also not a fan of most level 2 invocations. They are, as you said, mostly gimmicks.

Well, I don't disagree, but the neat thing about this talent idea is that it keeps the Chanter from stepping on the other caster's toes too much. If they could get too many slots for those scrolls it could get a bit insane coupled with their buffs/debuffs and invocations. Four to six spells that can be cast only once per combat (3 times per rest, etc) means they aren't as potent as the casters those spells belong to, but it also allows the chanter to fill in gaps in party composition. This also is kind of what bards did in their DnD form. They could be helpful in melee (with pre-buffing in Nwn2 they were silly good there as well), they can be ok archers that supplements their inability to hang with rangers and archery based fighters with spells, or they could be an ok caster that can off-heal. All while they wore better armor than the casters in DnD. Since chanters are a bit underwhelming in casting because of mechanics (getting phrase points is too long in the tooth, but I know the upcoming patch is supposed to fix that), in melee (because of lack of talents that aren't also available to fighters rogues, barbarians, monks, Paladins), and with ranged weapons (same reason as melee). I think giving them talents that play into those pockets a bit more is good. I could even see talents that increase their potency in melee while hurting their ranged casting and/or ranged weapon efficiency, or vice versa. Right now, I think we can all agree, chanters are only good at buffing/debuffing... and summoning when the fight is more or less over. Heck, I would like to see an early level talent (or talents) that give some focus to melee or archery/guns while potentially inhibiting summoning. I personally hate summoning classes, but I love playing bard classes. So, at present PoE has left me with very little to enjoy. I'm not knocking the game at all, but I have only completed the game twice because of how chanters operate as of present. Heck, a very early talent that greatly increases phrase counter generation, but inhibits the chanter from summoning invocations would be amazing. My last 2 cents... I think it was a bad call making the summoning class a class without limits to casting, and I think the long build up to cast is the very reason the decision was made to make the chanter the summoner (perhaps, it was the the other way around, though. EG. The decision to have such a slow build up to cast was because the chanter was made the summoner). I would have made a necromencer or conjurer class that was limited per rest or encounter to summons, but I know that with their Kickstarter financial allowance that they did what they could and consolidated.

Indeed. That's why I like it. Reciting the language of the scrolls via memory fits the setting's lore on chanters, they are a Lore centered class, and it makes them a little more versatile while allowing them a little more active play style. It just fits all around, and it makes Deep Pockets a very worth while talent for synergy.

Yeah, I've said it before (probably in this thread), chanters need some talents specific to them. I think they need some active talents too. That way they can have a play style that is a little more active while waiting for Invocations. I still think a talent that allowed them to cast a spell from a scroll without consuming the scroll once per encounter, or 3 per rest, or whatever would be good. Obviously, some scrolls should be omitted, but it also would make the talent to increase quick slots by 2 an interesting option.

Underrail, Rebel Galaxy, Grim Dark (these 3 on my main Windows rig), and doing a Kotor 2 run on my recently built steam machine.

Arcanum sequel or spiritual successor with Tim Cain in charge (I can't type this onto these forums enough, imho), Beyond Good and Evil 2, and the things listed by Undecaf (more Tex Murphy is good for the world) and Shady Sands all sound terrific. Also, something Weird West in an RPG would be fantastic.

Happy New year, fellow Obsidianites!

Talk about a day ruiner. We lost a rock god.

I caught this, finally. I saw it a few days ago on the morning of Christmas Eve. I enjoyed it. I thought it was better than Episodes 1, 2, and 3. That's all I asked for. I wasn't surprised by anything in the movie, and I did survive to avoid spoilers prior to seeing it.

Drove an hour to see the 70mm version of The Hateful Eight by Quentin Tarantino. It was good. It was dialogue heavy (pretty typical of Quentin Tarantino), but it had a mix of elements from other Tarantino flicks, other western movies, and I saw a little of The Thing in there via that snowed in isolation that causes mistrust amongst the cast. It is a good movie. Not my favorite Tarantino movie, but not my least favorite either. Worth catching. I especially recommend the 70mm version if you have one playing close to you. It benefits from no pre-movie commercials, no previews, a free program (typical of the old movie viewing experience), an overture, and an interlude. Seeing the 70mm experience is likely the last time you will get to see a movie in this format. So, it is more than just seeing the movie, but also experiencing a dead version of the movie going experience.

Elves in Shadowrun also have the potential for facial hair. Not medieval fantasy, but it is close enough.

I also don't see a need in PoE, but I like spell components as an old Ultima player. It's a better system than mana IMHO, but to each their own.

I don't think anyone is saying Chanters are bad. As someone who likes the Bard concept I also really like Chanters, but they don't do anything in a large portion of the combats but auto-attack. I just think they need a way to be more active in combat.

An idea I had for chanters was a talent that lets them cast scrolls once per encounter without consuming it. It would make the talent for an extra 2 quick slots more interesting to them as a byproduct. Thus giving them 2 interesting talents that is unique to chanters. It is also lore friendly as their ability to memorize the scrolls is what is being used. If the chanter casts a second scroll in combat then that scroll gets consumed as normal. This gives them the ability to be a spellsword (or a better one), or a more solid support in the back line. There could be limitations placed on what scrolls work and don't work, but I didn't want to muddy the idea up with technicalities.

Yeah, I've played all that. I'm not huge on Bethesda these days, but I enjoyed a romp through Skyrim when it came out. I do want meaningful NPC interactions. Bethesda doesn't want that anymore. So me and Bethesda must part ways until FO4, and any future games, are dirt cheap. STALKER is phenomenal, and I agree that it always needs recommending. I feel the same about New Vegas, though. I am not sure if Underrail is linear or open, but I like what I see. I am going to try and get a few minutes play time tomorrow. This time of year is working, shopping for presents, and small get togethers with friends and family. No time for games lol.

Haven't played Age of Decadence yet, but it's on my radar. From what I have read it is fairly open in many ways, and I am excited to get into it. I have only just started fiddling with Underrail. I'm not saying that turn based games don't get made, but that they don't get made like Arcanum or the first 2 Fallout games anymore. No one tries to give you an open map to explore. It is missions (like Shadowrun) or a linear storyline like many others (Pillars of Eternity). That's fine, and I enjoy them. However, Those 3 titles Nonek mentioned gave you an objective and dropped you into the world, and let you go explore or get right to the main mission. That's what I miss. The sense of wonder, of exploration, and not being railroaded down a story which, let's face it, ain't gonna be PST level story telling 99 times out of 100. Hell, the odds are probably much worse than 99 outta 100.

You just described my dream game, pretty much. Take ToEEs combat, Arcanum's setting and tone, Arcanum's open class system with magic vs tech theme, slam them together, say good bye to real life.

Just wanted to riff off this. The ambition and scope of these 3 titles are what I really miss. Particularly with Arcanum and Fallout. Blank Slate character, open world, bypassable combat with the right skills, interesting setting, etc. they drop you in the game and let you role play a character. I can't help but wonder if the 3D technology (and the price of developing with it) keeps smaller top down efforts to recapture the ambition of these titles. I don't know. If any developer hits Kickstarter with efforts to do something like Arcanum or Fallout... I will do everything I can to fund it heavily.

I don't disagree with those top 3. Arguments could be made that Fallout 1>2, but I have always loved both equally. Torment is easily in my top 3, and the BG series (as a whole) is too. I disagree with a great deal of the rest of the list, though. DAO is higher rated than Arcanum and VtMB? Um, no. Diablo 3? Better than 2? I don't know about that. I also prefer 1 for its darker, more gothic atmosphere (at least over 3). I would have put NWN2 higher because of MotB since it is the next closest to Torment in writing. At least imho. Article calls it Shadows of the Betrayer, and that makes me sad. ME2? I... Guess...? It wouldn't be on my list, but whatever. List is missing ToEE, Darklands, and Krondor. Ultima is represented, and that is good. Things I agree with that I feel worth pointing out. Kotor 2 is on there and 1 isn't. This is good. 1 was more polished, but in standard Obsidian fashion the sequels story makes it stand up over time a bit better. Which is what happens with NWN2 and MotB in my eyes. The restoration mod tips the iceberg further. Also, how you gonna make a D20 Star Wars game and not include Weapon Finesse, Bioware? Jedi/Sith are all about that weapon finesse. At least from an RP stand point. Morrowind is on there, but not Oblivion, and it is higher rated than Skyrim. This is the way it should be. I am not a Skyrim hater, per se. I like it, but Morrowind is great. More interesting setting, better writing, you can't do 99% of the game in a single play through. I still play a game of Morrowind every couple of years, but can't get much past killing my first Dragon in Skyrim these days. Also, an arcane archer type character with Levitate is a blast. Bring back levitate, Bethesda. Anyway, yes all RPG fans should play Torment. Build a Mage, and follow a guide online to stat out for conversations. It's a great experience. I play it again here and there because the writing is that good. It has a lot of emotional moments. I will second that the high res mod is great for torment.

I won't vote for Clinton because I read one of her books years ago. Simple as that. Too many Orwellian ideas for my taste. If you want to be bothered with her sex... That's fine. I couldn't care less. I just don't think her ideas are worth a damn. I would vote for a woman in a heartbeat if there was one of value in politics, but between her, condy rice, and Sarah Palin... It gives women a bad name. Also, she can't manage 2 email accounts, but you want to give her an entire country? No, thank you.

I'm not even talking about it being a one off, though. I am just talking about not being able to use it every encounter. It's personal preference though. We could probably run in circles on the topic for hours.

When I suggested it (components/reagents for casting), I was thinking about big spells from IE games like time stop, or things of similar potency. Basically, the best of the high level spells. I think using components for big hitting spells, large AoE (fireball), big time CC would be fine. Where minor spells like Missiles, some buffs, etc could have a per day/per encounter limit. If the use of those components truly changes the course of a hard fight then that loss would be worth it. You wouldn't rest spam because that won't bring back the mandrake root you need for that high level spell. You wouldn't dump your best spells based on mana availability. Etc. It solves those issues, but brings its own as well.