Faerunner

It looks great so far. Can't wait to see more!

My guess is they're going to be like the Planetouched of NWN2, with some angelic, demonic, and elemental inspiration. In fact, since the creators have control over who the gods are and there aren't hundreds of them like in the Forgotten Realms, I'm guessing the godlike will have minor features similar to their deities; fire-like features for those touched by the war goddess, etc. I rather hope for diverse choices.

Does it bother you that no one is going to take the bait since we all know you're a troll and we're used to those in internet forums?

Woohoo! (Cried the Kenny fan.)

Oh my gosh, the concept art is gorgeous! This all sounds so very exciting and I can't wait to learn more! <3

For NWN2, I love the dry, witty, sarcastic humor and the story and roleplay elements, like the Harvest Fair (yes) and especially the Act 2 Trial. Unfortunately, most of the game is "go kill this baddie" or "go fetch that item" or "go save that idiot," but the few instances of dialogue, role-playing, creative problem-solving and non-violent solutions were very fun. In fact, the entire Trial sequence from beginning to end was so great I actually couldn't continue with the game for several weeks because going back to just killing enemies, saving hostages and fetching items quests felt so boring and disheartening by comparison. For MotB, I love virtually everything. I love how the game has a central theme ("Mask of the Betrayer") and the entire game revolves around that theme. The characters, companions, story, quests, aesthetics, lighting, colors, ending... the entire story is tight as a drum and every bit is relevant to the central theme or idea. The only thing I don't like about NWN2 is the combat. I don't think it's great or terrible, but I wouldn't mind losing it. Same with the way classes are structured, partiulcarly nature-based classses like rangers and druids. The ranger animal comanions leave a lot to be desired and same with druid shapeshifting. Since the creators have already shared how they basically intend to structure their classes and handle combat though, I'm not worried.

That settles it. Gonna buy it on sale for less than 10 bucks I guess. I hoped Obs would be able to influence the core of what makes South Park but hey. I guess this is the first RPG where I'm going to be evil or at least, enjoying calling names to everyone. From what I've read, Trey Parker and Matt Stone hated every SP game that came before this and insisted on giving creative input because they wanted a video game that stays true to the core of the series. The ads seem to market it as being just like the show, only we get to be in it. I guess if you hate SP it's no sell, though.

I personally don't see much point in an official aging system, not just because of the age stereotyping that others have pointed out, but because I think it would require time and resources that might go to something else. I don't think it's necessary either because you could manually adjust your character's stats if you wanted. For example, you could determine the age of your character, figure out what stats s/he (would have) had at a certain age, then adjust it for the age you want for your character; like the -1 str, -1 dex, -1 con you mentioned in your post. Even if there is no official aging system, you could still adjust your stats for your character for your personal enjoyment. =)

Oh, I see now. I agree. As long as the roleplay and gameplay advantages and disadvantages are roughly balanced out, I'll be happy. Again, those are how the races have been portrayed so far but it does not have to be universal. Let's face it, humans can also be very lazy, sedentary, unambitious, unwilling to change, and uninterested in anything beyond their own backyards too. Most authors have simply chosen to portray humans as being "universally" whatever way happens to place them top and center and give other races whatever combination of traits happen to place them at the bottom or off to the side. It does not have to be that way because humans also have self-defeating, self-destructive tendencies too and fictional races, by virtue of being fictional, can have traits that also place them higher in significance. Tweaking elves to have more ambition on top of longer lives, greater magic, greater understanding of the world and giving dwarves higher birthrates on top of already being very diligent and hardy can make them a force to be reckoned with for humans. Yet the same old formula and fantasy social hierarchy keeps being regurgitated back to us and I think fantasy authors and fans should think more about it.

I agree, and I know that Tolkien set the tone for worlds where humans are an emerging surface power while elves and dwarves are dwindling. Too often the standard in fantasy games seems to be the tired old formula of humans being at the top and other races petering out. What I question is why people mindlessly follow and copy the formula rather than questioning or tweaking it, as you've said. At the risk of sounding offensive... have you looked around? Humans are pretty closed-minded and self-interested in real life too. Even if that were not the case, these fantasy worlds, cultures and races are works of fiction. A fantasy author can choose to depict other races as smarter, faster breeders, less self-interested, more open-minded and/or more interested in expansion too. Those traits do not necessarily have to be exclusive to humans, and fantasy races do not have to have traits that conveniently place them at the bottom. (Though I still question some of those traits resulting in those places, like humans dominating elves just because they're faster breeders, as simply being faster breeders don't place orcs or goblins above humans.) As Auxilious implied, it's just the way Tolkien chose to depict them and it's the way most fantasy writers and fans alike have chosen to copy, rather than questioning or tweaking it. Another way of looking at it is that we know these fantasy races don't exist in real life and so part of the fun is interacting with and playing as them in these fantasy games. One appeal of role-playing is being someone you can't be in real life. We can all be human (obviously), but we can't be orlan, elves, dwarves, aumaua or godlike. Part of the fun of race options is being those races, yet constantly having humanity's superiority shoved in our faces can take the fun out of it. I know all the players are human, but will the vast majority really go in expecting to play male humans and enjoy the "power fantasy" of lording over women and other races? Should they even be pandered to? Is it worth it to add overt racism and sexism to pander to male human players' desire for dominance (which sounds like a desire to have an outlet for real racist and sexist feelings and therefore should be presented in a way that makes them question their feelings rather than mindlessly act on) at the expense of female and non-human playing characters' enjoyment? Again, I'm not saying prejudice should not exist at all. I think it can be interesting if handled well, I think Obsidian will handle it well, and I think overcoming socially-imposed obstacles can feel very empowering for female and minority race players. But I question voting for the same level of racism and sexism in P:E as in The Witcher and Dragon Age, keeping in mind that the protagonist for the former was a male human (though with prejudice of his own to deal with as a witcher) and the later has been human only after the first game due to the majority of players finding the racism unrewarding (surprise surprise). At the end of the game, would the players who benefit from overt racism and sexism be players on the receiving end or the giving end? And are the people advocating for overt racism and sexism doing so because they want to play characters on the receiving end, or the giving end? It's a question I keep asking because I want people to think about it rather than mindlessly repeating "We should have sexism against women and racism against non-humans." For what purpose? If the purpose is indeed to have a "power fantasy," as you have very helpfully put it, I think the topic should be discussed on the forums and presented in the games (if it is presented at all) in a way that makes people question their desires rather than just pandering to it. I agree with Auxilious, Lurky and other posters on this forum that fantastic bigotry, if it is in the game, should be presented in a way that is subtle, balanced, insightful, and makes people to think about the reasons behind it rather than just having it. EDIT: Sorry, I'm still getting used to MultiQuote.

No offense, I'm not surprised that when people call for racism in a fantasy setting, they mean for humans to be on top of the social hierarchy. It's just become so common to depict and so predictable to request that it's driving me to question why. Why should races like humans get clear social and economic advantages like "luxurious shops" and lifestyles while races like elves and orlan only get "grubby pawnshops?" Why should other races strive to be "honorary humans" for social or economic gain, rather than humans striving to be honorary elves, dwarves, aumaua, etc? I keep seeing people call for racism and sexism, but almost never toward humans or men. The request seems to be for clear in-game disadvantages to characters of some races (like insulting comments, higher prices, quest denial, being barred from "luxurious" shops and honorable institutions) with clear advantages to others (humans might be barred from some "grubby orlan pawnshops," but since those would theoretically offer such undesirable equipment, it would be nothing to cry over). Unless there would be clear in-game advantages and disadvantages to both sides (humans being denied shops that carry amazing magical items and equipment reserved only for elves or orlan as well as elves/orlan being denied "luxurious shops" with theoretical great equipment, humans needing to be "honorary orlan/elf/aumaua" in certain places, etc) I don't see who really benefits from the system.

This is actually something I've been wondering too. If Obsidian put in overt racism and sexism (not that I think they will), who really benefits from it? I'm guessing the original poster means racism toward non-humans and sexism toward women, right? I'm hoping I'm wrong, but if so this pretty much ensures that only players of female and non-human characters go through aggravations that human male characters don't. While I'm all for the role-play value of being a minority and exploring that side of interracial, gender and cultural relations, I don't see the point of being on the receiving end of constant ignorant, malicious, bigoted comments just for the sake of having them. As you and others have said, the player shouldn't have less agency or deal with more insults just for certain races or genders they choose to play. As Auxilious has said, "if I'm playing an elf, I'd like to move around without getting insulted over my pointy ears. It's boring and unfunny."

I seems Dyrwood will have racial tensions anyway, as there seems to be a semi-colonial theme going between races. In fact, the Orlan especially are constantly oppressed by the bigger races. With that said, I would rather the topic of prejudice be handled sensibly and thoughtfully, not just dark and oppressive for the sake of being dark and oppressive. That gets just as boring just as quickly. I personally see little point in racism or sexism just for the sake of having it. "Dark fantasy" settings that serve no purpose but to depress or infuriate the audience can be just as boring and pointless as utopias because it's the same predictable spiel in reverse. Plus, many people already have to deal with prejudice and discrimination enough that they don't wish to have it shoved in their face in escapist fiction. (Fantasy is, at its core, escapist fiction.) It might be historically accurate for a medieval setting, but then Medieval Europeans did not have everyday magic, polytheist religions, magical creatures, or sapient fantasy races like elves, orlan or aumaua running around. If we can have a world where magic and fantasy races exist, we can have a world where discrimination is not as overt without it being less "realistic."

No need to apologize for working on the game, Darren. We'd much rather you keep designing a game you love The monk sounds like an interesting class. I remember reading a poll a few months ago that asked what people would play once the game came out, and I think monk was one of the least popular, along with rangers and barbarians. These monks sound very cool though, so I imagine its popularity is going to rise above what anyone anticipated. ^^

Now, like I said, that doesn't really address what you asked, but you can infer from that that any potential animal companion will have more to it than those in D&D-based RPGs in terms of out-of-combat interaction. At least, that's what I think/hope. Hey, it's a start. Thank you for trying to answer. =) To be honest, just knowing the animal companions is meant to have more roleplay and combat significance than usual is good news.

I whanna nymph fammiliar from NWN : This is demeaning on many levels. Are you trying to be obnoxious? It was a weak attempt at humor... What? I'm dead serious. I like having animal followers of some kind, but it doesn't have to be a dog for me. I'd be as happy with an arcane familiar like a cat, bat or weasel, or nature-oriented animal companions like wolves, boars or bears. I also like how we can interact with animal companions in NWN similarly to how the players can interact with the Dog in DA:O (but couldn't for NWN2). You don't have to agree, but you don't have to dismiss it either.

The concept art looks beautiful so far, and the skuldr look appropriately menacing. I can't wait to see more. =) I'm also glad to see that the ranger is coming along. It's one of my favorite classes. ^^ Um, I feel foolish asking since I'm not as familiar with animal companions from IE games (and I'm still embarrassed about my lore assumption last update), but I remember NWN2 animal companions and wanted to make a request. BioWare's NWN1 rangers could interact with their animal companions (like pet, feed, play with, scold them, etc), while Obsidian's NWN2 did not give the option. I was wondering if it would be possible for rangers (and/or druids?) to interact with animal companions in P:E? Even just basic interactions like feeding, petting, playing, scolding, etc. would increase roleplay value and help players feel more emotionally connected to their animal companions. If not, I understand, but I thought it was worth asking. I also wonder about combat mechanics. Specifically, will they all mainly function as secondary fighters with different stats; some strong like bears and boars, others frailer like badgers and spiders? Or will their combat efficiency be more even? Will some or all of them have special abilities like the NWN2 badger that could berserk, spider with the poison bite, wolf that could knock down, etc? I'm very curious, though if you don't wish to answer, I don't wish to pry.

Could we just split the difference and agree that it would be nice to have the option to romance for those that want it, and the option not to romance for those that don't want it?

I think familiars and animal companions of past fantasy games would be enough; as long as we can interact with them like in Neverwinter Nights. ^^

They seem like excellent core ideas, if you don't mind me saying so. =) This is so cool! And rather well-organized too. I know which races I want to try out when the game is out! (Wood Elf, Boreal Dwarf, Wild Orlan, maybe a godlike... you guys are going going keep me really busy with replays!) NO! That won't do at all! It should only be realistic! Don't you know realistic art is supposed to look brown and ugly?! I'm just kidding. It sounds gorgeous. I love fantasy beauty can't wait to see more of your fantastic art and animation. <3 This... is... actually a fantastic idea! Beautiful forests and ruins are my favorite parts of most fantasy games and the entire continent seems to take place in it. I also think it sounds like a rather simple but effective way to introduce fairly realistic racial and ethnic conflicts (besides the old "good against evil" or "ancient evil arises to conquer" conflicts of many old games) without necessarily resorting to the old "people are bastards" idea that seems to permeate modern fiction. (Not that I think people won't be jerks in this story, but it sounds like fertile moral grey ground for realistic conflict.) Actually, this confuses me. Why are the elf and orlan protagonists new to Dyrwood if his or her people are native there? Well--that's a dumb question--I guess the individual was born and/or raised elsewhere and only recently came over? It seems believable, though I confess I was hoping for the chance to play one of the natives when playing an elf and orlan; after reading the last paragraph. Oh well, it matters little. I'll have fun anyway. This game sounds fantastic in every way. I can't wait till it comes out! It seems like you're creating a masterpiece! <3

Oh... my... God. Just... wow. This game is so gorgeous! It's stunning! I am stunned by how beautiful it is! I literally stopped breathing when the water rose and receded and half-gasped, half-laughed and stared breathless when the little light illuminated the statues. The scenery, the background, the texture, the movement, the colors and angles and lighting just all look so intricate and incredible! I'm so used to video games looking a certain way. Most 3D video games have a CGI look and texture that, while pretty at times, really looks close to the same. That's not to say it's all bad or even uniform, but for the most part you can look at two CGI scenes and you can tell which is for a video game and which is for a movie. (Especially the way CGI has evolved for movies now.) I am both pleased and shocked to say that this game looks beautiful enough to be in an animated film. In fact, the way the characters move is closer to movies and shows than video games, which is again so shocking. And it's in 2D?! That just kills me! I always loved 2D more than 3D animation--yet it always seemed like a lost art--yet here it's back! Yet somehow you manage to make it LOOK like it's 3D! (Like those sidewalk painters who make areas look real and interact-able from a certain angle but look like flat, stretched images everywhere else.) While watching that scene, I kept thinking it must take such advanced computers to render it... but you're saying this gorgeous animation can be rendered on any old computer? (Dare I hope, my 5-year-old gaming laptop?) It just blows my mind. This sample is utterly gorgeous. If the entire game is going to be half as beautiful as this, then it deserves to win game of the year and any other award just on that merit alone. (Though I also have a lot of faith in the characters, story, quests, combat, etc.) A wonderful job to everyone on staff for Project Eternity, especially Hector Espinoza and Michael Edwards. You've really outdone yourselves! <3

Ideally, different characters would embody different traits listed so that we would have a mixed bag. I don't think any one is more important than the others; what makes them stand out is having those differences to compare and contrast.

Please no. There are so many modern warfare games, the traditional fantasy RPG is practically a dead genre, and P:E was advertised and funded as a revival of that genre. If we wanted to play a modern warfare game, there are already so many titles to choose from. There aren't many old school fantasy RPG's, and I think many of us don't want to lose this one too. Not to mention hundreds, if not thousands of funders would feel angry and betrayed for getting a modern warfare game after paying for a traditional fantasy RPG. (Plus I don't think the creators would do it.) I also love that the folks of P:E are breaking the mold of standard fantasy Medieval European bows and broadswords by adding late Medieval and Renaissance weaponry and technology (and in a way that's believable and appropriate for the world) but I don't want it to turn into a world and genre it isn't. If you want a modern warfare game, then I IMPLORE you to browse through the literally dozens of titles at your local game store and leave this one alone. EDIT: I looked more closely and see that you're not necessarily saying this game should be a modern warfare. Still, I think the developers would have to go through a serious time skip and a lot of canon blasphemy to get to the "modern" stage you're talking about. It took about 500-600 years for our real, magic-free world to go from the one-shot musket Renaissance to modern war era. The people of P:E have magic, diverse sapient races, likely fantastic creatures (beasts, spirits, golems, ents, etc) and various gods to interfere with their lives. I seriously doubt the so-called "traditional" would slip away like a dream (not when the resident mages, spirits and gods can put up a fight) and I doubt we could go from "traditional" to "modern" within just a few sequels unless--again--the developers wanted to go through centuries worth of time skips to get to that period. I both doubt they would do it and hope they don't. DOUBLE EDIT: You also seem to be making the assumption that magic/traditional and modern/technology are glued together and mutually exclusive from each other. That "tradition" can only involve "magic" and "modern" can only involve "technology," and the two cannot mix in any way. While this is very common in fiction, I don't think it's right to assume it's the same for this world. That "tradition" can only involve magic and no form of technology (which is ridiculous because the bow and the blade were new technologies once) and society has to forsake magic in order to gain new technologies or social advancement (which I can't understand because magic and fantastical races can inspire social and/or technological change). Magic-induced stasis aside, I see no reason why both the fantastical and the technological can't continue to grow in the world of P:E. Dare I say it: feed each other? If magic and technology don't get along (which I'll assume they might not since the developers have hinted that people seem to be creating technology as a way to fight magic) it's more than possible the traditional will rise to the new technological challenge rather than shrink away. For example, based on what the developers seem to have hinted: magic is more powerful than the blade, so muggles invent bullets, so wizards start wearing more armor, so (maybe) muggles invent better bullets, so (maybe) wizards create more efficient magic. It goes back to my theory that "magic" isn't passively fading in the presence of the "modern." That "tradition" and "technology" aren't mutually exclusive (as the traditional mages are taking advantage of new technologies to fight new technologies). And that the two might be improving each other rather than one simply sitting back and letting the other swallow it whole. I feel like your theory only works if we assume that "tradition"/"magic" and "technology"/"modern" are mutually exclusive and one passively lets the other crush it, rather than mixing and challenging each other. And again, it took centuries for us to get where we are now without magic, fantastic creatures or gods getting involved with our daily lives. How on earth can it happen in this world with these?

I haven't video game that does this. Most of them focus on human kingdoms, cultures and conflicts first and foremost. Other races are only presented in how they relate to humans. Either in how they coexist, like those were raised in human societies or live within human walls. Or in how they provide conflict, like those that attack human settlements (like the reptilian cult of NWN1, the kobolds of NWN: SotU, the drow of NWN: HotU, the githyanki of NWN2, the darkspawn of DA:O, etc). I think his comment of "I’ve been mostly focused on the human interaction. So, the human cultures that Josh is developing -" took a little wind out of that sail. Again: "I’ve been mostly focused on the human interaction. So, the human cultures that Josh is developing -" Wait to be bummed until my fears are confirmed; got it. =)

This interview was very interesting to read. A few passages that stood out to me were... This makes me very happy. I guess in a time when most gaming companies are watering down their RPG's to appeal to mass audiences (especially games that were already critically and financially successful: Dragon Age), it makes me so happy to see game designers that want to make a specific game for a specific target audience (old school fantasy RPG fans =). This sounds very promising. Medieval fantasy settings have been pretty common since Tolkien. While I enjoy them immensely, sometimes a little variety is nice too. However, many other writers' and game designers' attempts to add variety have come off as a little... gimmicky. I like how there are logical reasons within this world for changes in the standard Medieval European fantasy mold. This sounds very promising. ^^ I'll admit this actually disappoints me. Most fantasy settings focus more on humans than any other race already. I can play just about any game if all I cared about was stories involving human characters, kingdoms and cultures, with little fantasy races sprinkled around like garnish. What's the point of pouring so much creativity into fantasy races like elves and dwarves if we aren't going to actually see them, or we only see them in relation to how they interact with humans? Otherwise, there is a lot about this interview that I enjoy immensely. I am still looking forward to this game very strongly.