Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

14 Good

About TRoar

  • Rank
    (1) Prestidigitator
  1. I agree with the both of you about keeping the 360 degree view around party members. It does sound like it would be too tricky to manage a 'realistic' field of vision in a game like this.
  2. That's the kind of pen and paper knowledge that I don't have. Awesome ideas, Lephys!
  3. Perhaps resolve could be used as a kind of willpower/concentration spell shaping/controlling mechanic.
  4. Good question JFSOCC. I think they could, if not script, then at least make it so that there is an object blocking the view of the top of a building. I like where that's going, because then it's the party that's exploring (i.e. the game is more from the parties perspective than the players). Indira, I had someone on rpgcodex refer me to company of heroes 2, also. I really like what I saw of it. One of the nicest touches was smoke obscuring vision. Really cool I thought. I know this isn't really an exciting subject, but does anyone else agree that the fog of war needs some work? That it could improve the game? Should mechanics come into it? Or that it's not really relevant for some reason?
  5. I would still prefer there to be friendly fire in the int bonus area, but maybe half damage instead of full damage.
  6. Nice, I totally hadn't considered that, and it makes very good sense.
  7. In the friendly fire thread I mentioned that the infinity engine fog of war wasn't the best, and could do with an upgrade. I posted some suggestions about how I thought the fog of war might be improved on the rpgcodex forums and thought I'd share them here for people to discuss and for the devs to consider. Something I've never seen done with fog of war in iso games is gradation of fog of war. It could be too dark to see into in the distance, murky at mid to far distance where you might vaguely see something move but more than likely not, mid distance where movement is more noticeable and objects start to take shape and size, near distance where the player can tell if a creature is humanoid or other and have a better idea of it's size (and at this distance the creature could be targeted with a ranged weapon if desired with a negative modifier to hit it...), before being in direct and clear view in the immediate vicinity of the PC. Also, if the engine is 3D, being in an elevated position could increase the diameter of the players field of view to get the lay of the land, spy enemies, etc... Night time could reduce the diameter. If your PC carries a torch at night, creatures could be scripted to hover at the edge of the field of light... This kind of 'dynamic' fog of war I think would be nice. I also think it would be nice if the view distance were greater and the interaction distance with npcs (of the highwaymen/thugs/enemy party/Tarnor's party [bG2 sewers reference] type) was less than the view radius so you don't suddenly find yourself having a conversation with Tarnor a group of psychopaths that will butcher you. Thoughts?
  8. To me the real problem here isn't friendly fire or size of the aoe, although I really like Lephys' suggestion of being able to control the aoe radius/diameter. Magical magic! To me the problem is view distance. The IE games view distance/fog of war was one of the few things that often peeved me. It was too small. I really got annoyed whenever I stumbled upon an enemy party in tight spaces and couldn't use range effectively for aoe spells (i.e., cast spells behind enemy party). If the view distance and spell range were both increased, then it would help accommodate larger diameter aoe's. Also, I think the fog of war system generally needs an upgrade over the IE one.
  9. It's looking seriously great! At this point my only graphical polish concern are animations. We haven't seen much of the animations, so I may be concerned about nothing, but please maintain the high standards. I say this, not because I'm a graphics type, but because of the lack of consistency between animations in the IE games. BG2 reused animations and models from BG while introducing new and much improved ones, and it really stood out. You guys, I hope, have the opportunity now to follow the 'do it right, do it once' way of thinking. I think this game is going to age very well! Well done, Obsidian. a great idea. A sort of mini-inventory. Derived stats like defenses, concentrations, damage output and anything else to help deliver the information quickly without having to switch over multiple screens would be ideal. that way you can make informed decisions quickly without having to hunt for the information you need. BG:EE and BG2:EE incorporated that kind of info into the inventory screen. Probably would be nicer if it was integrated into the record screen to save doubling up the info, but an idea nevertheless... Maybe it would be less busy if it was shown in the inventory? Food for thought...
  10. Thanks, Indira. I picked up on that too. Brainstorming, discussing can lead to good innovations and a slicker gaming experience without compromising the depth of the game play. Personally, I'm all for it. The IE was a great engine, and I even wouldn't mind playing new games in it using the 2nd edition rules, but we all know that there was a lot of room for improving it. Onwards and upwards. I like that idea.
  11. The problem I found generally with status effects was their immediacy. In BG running across a couple basilisks unprepared was as good as game over for a low level party, because the effect was immediate if the saving throw was failed. If petrification, for example, initially slowed the character upon a failed save for 30 seconds before fully petrifying them, the player would at least have a window of opportunity to try counter it. I never found level drain that bad in comparison after the first few times I encountered it, because while it affected you immediately upon being hit, you still had time to dispatch the enemy before dying from level drain or casting a restoration spell. I think giving the player time to counter status effects would reduce the need for reloading and pre-buffing, and the game flow would be interrupted less often. I would answer to a slightly greater degree the latter. I like a good story, and when I first started playing BG/BG2 I had never heard of AD&D. The system was unfamiliar, and getting to the next juicy bit of story was often frustrating.
  12. Agreed. I also think the most valuable feedback will come once we've all played the game for a few months...
  13. any permanent debuff makes me reload my game after the fight. that said I am usually pretty good at avoiding level drain. I had my cleric remember a few restoration spells, and led the attack against vampires with the amulet that protects against negative energy as well as the upgraded mace of disruption. Level drain wasn't too bad if I was prepared for it.
  14. That's a great approach. I have faith in you guys. I think you'll do a great job, and I understand that every creation has an experimental aspect, as evidenced by the differences in the IE games. What I've seen so far of PoE is balance through the major aspects of the game, which is what encourages my faith - seems to me like you're bringing together the best parts of the IE games. Besides that, I'm sure this will just be the first installment, an important stepping stone, no doubt, but there will be time for evolution/refinement. Keep up the great job, Josh.
  • Create New...