Randomthom

I like some of the ideas being spouted here & far be it from me to crush them but they may need to be tempered with some elements of realism. Consider; 9 potential different reactions to the player/group means writing 9 different conversation options for many conversations. This also increases the likelihood of quest bugs etc. which eats up more development time. One thing I do think is important and should be included is the concept of fame/notoriety/visibility. Why do you gain a +/- to a reputation score if nobody saw you do what you did to earn it? Killing someone in the centre of town for all to see (righteous or not) will definitely earn you some respect/fear/badass points. Killing them in a back street where nobody saw you do it shouldn't earn you anything (unless you take their head off & wear it as a trophy!) I'd love to see the game have different options at certain points depending on your fame/infamy/obscurity. It might be that you can't do a certain quest because you'll be recognised (or at least you'll need to do an extra quest first to secure a good disguise). Equally another quest might rely on your fame to get you into a high-to-do party to dig up dirt on a questionable noble. It would be fun to play a character who kills people indiscriminately but secretively who also atones by anonymous giving to a temple of a good God, all-the-time remaining a relative unknown to most people.

I've got to say that this is probably the best & most elegant solution to all this that I've seen. Maybe add some attack penatlies, spell failure & increased chance for weapon fumbling at high levels of exhaustion & you've got a proper built-in rest control system! I'd like to see druids/barbarians/rangers have reduced fatigue penalties because of their being used to 'roughing it' too. Could also be a feat* that other characters can take, call it "Sleeping Rough". *Or whatever they're calling feats in PE. There's lots of good suggestions going around in here. I'll throw my own into the mix... Watch orders... When you rest while away from civilised places you set a watch order, taking it in turns etc. to take watch. 8 hour rest, 2 hour watches. Each hour the following checks are made. First, constitution/endurance check to stay awake. Second, chance of random encounter. Third, perception/wisdom check (with appropriate modifiers) for it to be noticed. Failing the first of course gives heavy penalties to the perception checks but also means that the next person doesn't get woken up for their turn so all further perception checks take this heavy penalty.

I personally think that BG2 is probably the best game I've ever played, particularly in regards to it's story. When you break it down it's essentially a linear story with a couple of this-or-that options along the way. Thieves or Vampires. Portal or Ship. This didn't disadvantage it simply because it was such a good story. I think that choice is good, the illusion of choice is almost as good. Even better is not caring about the choice because everything is just so frickin' awesome anyway that whatever happens, it'll be worth the ride.* *Note to the developers of CoD etc. Explosions do nor make things frickin' awesome. BG2 was great because of all the rest of the game was binary non-linear (i.e. do it or don't). The characters were rich and interesting. the interactions between the NPCs was fantastic. On my first playthrough I couldn't believe it when 5 minutes after I'd told Imoen to sneak off in Spellhold, Haer'dalis left me when Aerie chose me over him. It's moments like that that make a game great. I've played through BG2 about 6 or 7 times (just finished my first solo run) and I discover new things all the time (also thanks to the awesome modding community but often stuff that was always been there). AGX makes a good point to differentiate narrative and game design linearity. I would argue that Fallout: New Vegas is probably the least linear game I have played (outside of sandbox) with regards to it's core story. You can choose right at the beginning, change your mind mid way through and switch factions, each of which has a very different experience. The game has many flaws but it did a very good job of allowing real player choice with it's core narrative. It is also non-linear in game design of course (open world). Many people laud Skyrim for its non-linearity but this is a half-truth. The core story is actually 100% linear with the sole exception of who you kill along the way, the end result is always the same. The only things that are non-linear narratively are outside of the core quest and even those are generally binary linearity. Mass Effect, for all their talk about player choice, was essentially a linear game. It didn't make it a bad one (well, the final ending was a disappointment but the whole experience was still great). Linear can be great, non-linear can be bad. A good story goes a long way to making people care less either way!

I'm going to jump back in on my own topic to comment on a few things that have been mentioned by others. Designated party spokesperson: I like the idea that, for non-main-quest conversations, the party could have a designated spokesperson. In traditional D&D this would usually be the rogue/bard/sorceror/paladin (high charisma & conversational skills). It would help with things like getting lower prices with merchants and generally offering you favourable options in many conversations. Skills in conversations. Despite what NWN2 does to you tactically speaking (i.e. bends you over and applies the lube) it did handle skills in conversation very well, especially in the MotB expansion. High enough Arcana, you can comment on the magic, high perception, you see/hear something etc. It's also something IWD2 did well with regards to intelligence changing your speech from "Defy me again and I will see you and your compatriots hang" to "Hulk smash". Regarding stealthing up to a big-bad mage and backstabbing them, why shouldn't it be allowed? It's a legitimate tactic. If you REALLY don't want it to happen then have the mage already with stoneskin (or equivalent non-WOTC spell of uncannily similar name) to mitigate this somewhat or simply with his back to a wall... Wizards are meant to be smart right? Alternatively, if in a brightly lit room have the game apply location-based penalties to the stealth checks, have alarm traps on the floor etc. If your rogue still manages to get around all of that and get in a good backstab then I think they've earned it! I love the idea that initiating a conversation from stealth could offer different conversation options. Regarding AGX's concerns (which are legitimate despite the derisory tone) that the protagonist's voice is somewhat taken away with the party spokesman's idea, I tend to think that the party, as a whole, think as one (hence why you, the player, actually make the decisions in conversations). This does give me a cool idea though, that designating an NPC as the spokesperson might sometimes mean that you DON'T get the choice in what they say if there's a particular conversation option that they would definitely choose. Finally it would also be nice to see as few "forgone conclusion" conversations as possible. I mean conversations that will always result in a fight no matter what. If that was the case then why did we talk in the first place? Some of the most irritating moments in CRPG have been conversations that take your PC rogue out of stealth, place them smack-bang in front of the half-blind half-orc fighter who would never have seen you, he then offers you a 1-2 line dialogue that basically says "me smash" and proceeds to pummel you into oblivion, all the while you're stood there thinking "how the f*** did he see me?"

I agree with Umberlin, Steam is DRM done right. It's non-intrusive and once-signed-always-active. Steam itself has a tiny memory & cpu footprint and provides an excellent way to communicate with your gaming friends. It's also worth noting that many devolpers like to use Steam because of the way they can apply patch updates universally. As a backer of this project I'm unsure how I will receive my free copy of the final game but honestly I don't really care. Gog.com is preferable but I have no qualms about using steam.

I love CRPGs, I've actually been on something of a CRPG marathon lately. I've played through IWD, IWD2, BG, BG2, BG2:ToB, NWN & all expansions, NWN2 & all expansions. PS:T is next. One thing that many of these games are guilty of is what I'd call plot-related forced character positioning. Essentially I'm describing what happens when the plot demands a conversation before a fight and forces your character to stand close to and in full sight of your aggressor, even when it will obviously become a fight and even when tactically it is suicide. NWN2 is by far the worst culprit of this but the others suffer from it to one degree or another. When playing as a sorceror there is little more frustrating than sneaking ahead with your party's rogue, running across an invisible zone which triggers a conversation in which your main character & your rogue mysteriously switch positions, leaving your rogue nice & safe with the rest of your party and your squishy sorceror all alone to face the music... I like to play Archers, Rogues or Spellcasters in these kind of games, never the kind who like to be 'in the thick of it'. Thus it frustrates me immensely where I'm forced into a conversation which results in a fight for which I am immediately disadvantaged. It especially frustrates me when the conversation starts even though I'm successfully sneaking or invisible etc. What I'd like to see in Project Eternity is for this to be handled differently. If my main character rogue sneaks into the room where some enemy wants to start up a conversation, I'd like the game to allow one of my companions to speak for me so I can remain hidden. I'd also like to see the game allow me & my party to remain standing in their original positions after the conversation is over rather than seeing Aerie (or similar character) placed next to something with more swords than braincells. Obviously plot must prevail but I'd like to see that tactical options are never denied me when they shouldn't be!