Gromnir

the most common, versatile and effective asian battlefield weapons are already in the game: spear and bow. HA! Good Fun!

didn't follow the ama today, but otherwise, 'ccording to the twitch stuff, it were a no on additional orders and gods. HA! Good Fun! ps missed half o' the most recent twitch too.

am recalling from a twitch-- no new gods or orders. could be wrong, but is how we recall. idea were to increase reactivity to existing rather than adding more. priests will have more limited spell catalogs and will be a deity-based limit. however, am much wanting a faithless priest option. turns out magran were blind to durance in poe 1. also, durance could continue to contribute to your party in poe 1 even if he lost faith in magran. so, a faithless priest already has precedent. HA! Good Fun!

pj shows a post european influence junk. naughty. the junk, traditional junk, has no keel and is far more brick-like than pj suggests. a junk will often use an over-large rudder for stability and other options. because it has no deep keel, the junk is predictably quicker, but terrible to the leeward... is other issues, but the junk were also more brick like. is a reason we suggested just going with the junk above. HA! Good Fun!

Naw, I'm good. I never expected you to concede, I was mostly playing to the gallery there for a while now. :smug: reason we brought up the resting point is 'cause we figured it would force you into a corner where you need be hypocritical or concede. :smug: and we never figured you would admit largely uniform and rectangle decks were a practical concession worth embracing in spite o' your willingness to be gameplay practical with sails. nevertheless, by dragging it out we got to point we could use an inglorious bastard clip and get you to tie yourself in a argument knot. HA! Good Fun!

yeah, an open space, which maximizes our already limited positioning options? gosh, how could we possible advocate such a thing. limiting is not making necessarily better. space is necessarily already limited to two deck surfaces. sure, we still expect gangplanks 'n such, but given we got no z axis, why limit total gameplay space more than absolute necessary? you already is conceding a submission to practicality with sails but refusing to do so with decking. what you is arguing is therefore already admitted a kinda wispy and ephemeral aesthetic preference. fine. is nothing wrong with arguing aesthetics. 'course when you voluntarily pick and choose your gameplay arguments, you make far less convincing. based on past experience, am not thinking you is actual planning on resting either. just a guess. HA! Good Fun!

Yes. Would that make for better -- more varied, more interesting ship to ship combat? (Also, you still haven't answered mine.) yes just did answer a yes/no. you're welcome. HA! Good Fun!

I know. See, sometimes you need to make concessions for gameplay reasons. (A simple yes or no is still impossible for you, I see. Don't ever change...) I would expect the ships to grapple, be drawn together, and then the boarding crew climb over at the point where the ships touch. It would be narrower, for sure, but then it's a choke point. Having them exactly alongside and the crews just be able to walk over the whole length of the ship would be boring. yes or no, would having rectangular and uniform be easier and allow more congruent combat space during boarding party combats? see? HA! Good Fun!

and you drew it wrong. serious. sails is all wrong. honest. would need wind coming from two separate directions at once. as for deck, you are ignoring actual smaller size and less practicality in boarding party combats. make the beam largely uniform as widest point amidships and you get more space. am not seeing how it can't be more clear or obvious. two largely rectangular ships is also gonna make for far easier boarding party combat, yes? that should be obvious. HA! Good Fun!

we could, but you would never forgive us. HA! Good Fun!

*brain freeze* as we said, unless you wanna make boat significantly bigger, she is gonna look tubby. so, you wanna make "significantly wider at the beam." a largely rectangular deck with same beam 'tween perpendiculars is gonna be maximizing space. and yeah, put the boat on a windward port tack and you can let out the boom. which also means you take in your jib and use the mainsail, obscuring pretty much everything in front o' the mast. *shrug* am thinking pj needs actual see the 3d models o' alternatives to get a better notion o' what is going on with obsidian's awkward, but gameplay efficient, boat. HA! Good Fun!

you aren't looking in 3d, are you? and yeah, if is exact same length, and same beam amidships, even without worrying o'er the second mast, and your brushed-off superstructure issues, you got much less functional deck space. what are you seeing? HA! Good Fun!

your complaint is bricklink, but any attempt to significant narrow fore or aft is gonna necessarily pinch the gameplay space. to keep same current gameplay space one needs either keep relative uniform beam 'tween the perpendiculars, making her look tubby, or you need increase overall length. *shrug* current got a basketball court deck, and a relative unobtrusive sail plan. want teardrop or sleek or cannons on decks and space is gonna be problematic 'less one makes a larger ship. and more sails and rigging is gonna necessarily be more obtrusive. let out boom and your mainsail sudden obscures deck 'fore the mast. obsidian can do better with the boat, but she is gonna be tubby and have simple sails, 'less they is transparent o'er the decking. make transparent and kinda defeats the point o' more and fuller, eh? HA! Good Fun!

given the aesthetic and description o' ydwin, this will be an increasing common query. am hopeful the campaign, even after paypal, fails to break $4.9 mil. HA! Good Fun!

am thinking we are talking past each other. for example, canons on deck means even less room for party maneuver, and giving space to make party formation and maneuverability viable is exact why the current deck has so much wasted space and is so wide from bow to stern. your changes is working 'gainst gameplay concessions. you are worried 'bout aesthetics. Gromnir suggests aesthetics must be sacrificed for gameplay. you add suggestions which further limit party mobility, so am not seeing a meeting o' minds being possible. ... serious. go with the junk. nice and fat from bow to stern. HA! Good Fun!

a rifle who sounds like sergeant hartman from full metal jacket. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEk0aK-GqR0 HA! Good Fun!

There's no reason the aftcastle has to be that tall. Likewise no reason the hull has to be so rectangular. It can be broad-beamed and tubby without looking like a brick. Just let the sides curve out more. You could get there by mildly exaggerating the proportions on that sloop model I posted for reference. As to the sails obscuring the deck, they can just trim them so they're seen nearly edge-on, except the foresails where it's not a problem anyway. That works equally well with square, lateen, or gaff sails. Yeah sure they'll always be the same way but that's an understandable concession to visibility. make adjustments you request, and she is gonna look close to what we current got. is relative wide from bowsprit to rudder precise 'cause obsidian is making use of space for formation combats. the more sleek you make her is gonna result in increasingly wasted/diminished gameplay available space. and as for the sails, they can simple leave as is rather than worrying 'bout it further and making concessions to visibility. dunno. she is gonna be a tub. am not thinking there is much way to get 'round it 'less you vast increase length. whatever aesthetic changes you see from this point is gonna be minor and won't address your main gripes. make it a junk and call it a day? that way you get simple sails and a nice fat deck from bow to stern. the anime fans will be happy too. get goth glasses-girl scientist companion and a junk? open up a whole new demographic for obsidian. HA! Good Fun!

am thinking its not as much 'bout historical accuracy and seaworthiness as is making concessions to gameplay. the ship needs a sail plan which won't obstruct a top-down view too much. from a gameplay pov one is also gonna need the deck to be wide enough to accommodate your 5-man/person/whatever formations and allow for some mobility in the inevitable boarding party combats. so, 'cause the ship ain't a man'o war in terms o' displacement, we get a wide little boat with a simplified cutter's sails plan. am thinking obsidian will only be able to fix so much. given her relative size, your boat is gonna be a tubby little lass with good intentions and simple sails. HA! Good Fun!

well, somebody is channeling their inner jonathan frakes good on you for not keeping it all pent up. HA! Good Fun!

athame godlike HA! Good Fun!

as already stated, josh has frequent advocated aspects of d&d editions post 2.0. and again, there were common (unfair) criticisms o' josh attempting to turn poe into d&d 4.0. as such, your perceived marginalization by josh does not align with our observations or the consensus feedback o' much o' the poe beta folks. HA! Good Fun!

josh don't need Gromnir to defend him, and it is always weird when we do so as we has been so critical o' him at times. *shrug* a willingness to point out shortcomings in game systems is perceived as josh elitism. similarly, a kinda cold-blooded approach to exposing bad arguments o' those advocating alternative game systems has resulted in the perception o' josh brashness or rudeness. we has seen josh say plenty positive 'bout d&d, though only 3.0 and later editions. in fact, is more than a few folks who complained during poe development 'bout s'posed attempts by josh to turn poe, a s'posed homage to infinity engine games, into d&d 4.0. but for those advocating per kill xp, josh weren't gonna pretend as if people were making wonderful defenses o' a d&d/ie staple when they were not. 'course if it makes you feel better, past josh were far less diplomatic than he is today. obvious initial hurdle: d&d is a class system. many folks do not like class-based systems. josh is not a fan of class-based rpgs. level caps? okie dokie. HA! Good Fun!

too much emphasis on wacky plot and setting while recycling characters and themes. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/64528-anime-for-adults-or-kids/?p=1381947 http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/47994-anime-recommendations-part-2/?p=834605 http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/44779-anime-recommendations/?p=744096 am nothing if not consistent. so far all we got o' ydwin is a short character sketch and one bit o' artwork. we find the art troubling on multiple levels, as already discussed, but such doesn't define a character. somebody at obsidian is a big fan o' gaiman's sandman and anime? am not shocked. however, one paragraph o' background is too small a sampling for us to be complete dismissive. the setting needs more in depth scrutiny o' animancy, and a companion would be an ideal starting point from which to delve. we wanna like an animancer companion, but so far we don't have much positive other than animancy. even so, we agree with assessment regarding the remote possibility o' obsidian surrendering to clichés and tropes in spite o' a dubious start with the art and biographical blurb. HA! Good Fun!

that would indeed be older. HA! Good Fun!

we do not. have friends who invariably recommend new anime to us every couple years in an attempt to change our pov. being a broad minded fellow, we do indeed watch a couple episodes o' whatever is the proffered show/movie dujour before once 'gain concluding that anime is a perpetual pus filled boil affixed to the devil's hairy arse. ... apologies for our understatement. is exceptions such as grave of the fireflies, spirited away and a few episodes of cowboy bebop. is so few exceptions. HA! Good Fun!