Cantousent

That just confused the hell out of me. I think you're losing your touch. I don't think overall Caed Nua is bad. I enjoyed it quite a bit. However, and I'm not one of the folks who clamors for everything to be 'more like BG2,' I think it fell short of my favorite dungeon in the IE series, which was Durlag's Tower. In fact, while I enjoyed the action better in IWD and PS:T is one or two on my all time favorites list, Durlag's Tower was a masterpiece. There was plenty of action, but the tricks, traps, and puzzles really made it shine. If I replayed BG:TotSC again, it would be specifically for that dungeon. Caed Nua fell short of it. Good solid dungeon, but it just didn't flow as well, wasn't as creepy, and was actually a bit long in my opinion. EDIT: damn it, forgot my main point for posting in the first place. I reread the first post and it doesn't seem to rise to the level of spoilerism. Someone mentioned spoilers in the thread, but I think we've been general enough not to break anyone's ability to play the game fresh. It's simply a reality that, although we try to keep everything spoiler free, things do loosen up in that regard just a wee bit after the game's been out for a while. However, if you see something truly spoilerish, just report it and we'll try to clean it up or move it as needed.

I like the idea of time progressing during rest, but folks will complain about *that* in Tides because, as Amentep says, devs truly can't win on some issues. Just follow your vision and manage angry and vocal backers.

lol now we can take offense at your offense. okay okay, we've all been reading into things too much. :Cant's crooked grin icon: Fair enough. I figure, as far as logical and authentic seeming answers, aweigh has had the best responses, but it still comes down to whether or not Obsidz will pop in to let us know, which they have no obligation to do. Otherwise, I figure we can all just speculate. After all, this is the interwebs. It's what we do.

I don't know about anyone else, but I was never trying to convince you, Heijoushin. The problem is, no one seems to have a purely logical reason for why the hatchet has a deflection value. There might not be one. Unless and until one of the devs comes in to give a more or less official answer, speculation will be all we have. ...But I don't think anyone means disrespect. We're just discussing the issue that you broached. My point about the utility of the hatchet wasn't that it started out as a tool and therefore could block. Rather, it was from the angle that, just because it serves as a tool does not mean that it doesn't function very well as a weapon and could *not* block. The relationship between utility and blocking wasn't causal. It might have utility as a tool but nevertheless have utility as a weapon and one such utility *might* be deflection, but I don't know. At any rate, I gladly give opinions. All the time. I don't know that they mean much, but I seem to have a bag of infinite holding that contains nothing but personal opinions. :Cant's wry grin icon:

Okay, I've removed a couple of posts from this thread. I'll be contacting Fionavar for admin involvement in order to straighten out the issue. I'm closing this thread indefinitely. If there is a problem that has spilled out of this board and we can find out evidence of such, then we will take appropriate action. For shame, folks. We're talking about class builds. It should *never* have gotten to be personal enough for me to be forced to seek admin involvement. I'm dead serious, I'm disappointed.

This is why I hate congratulating opposing parties in a thread. I swear, someone's going to end up reporting someone else and then I'll actually have to work at something other than pushing new member posts. Stop taunting each other or I'll time out the thread and berate you all or something. Well... I'm too lazy to berate you. I'll ask you to go to a corner and berate yourself for ten minutes or so. That's a lot less effort on my part. Come on guys, get back to logical, long winded, and convolutedly clever arguments. Sure, it makes them harder to read but at least folks can recognize the thought that went into them. ...And, here's the deal with barbs: (Notice how I'm going to be careful to nod to both sides? It won't be an accident.) First of all, if you're looking for the most powerful build, I can't make an intelligent argument. *Most* powerful is a completely theoretical argument and only requires one person to find a clever exploit. However, in terms of playing the game, QA is the tops when it comes to things like this. Really. I think even Sawyer would own that the QA team comes up with crazy ways to break the game and make hugely powerful characters. It's their job to do so. If we get away from *most* powerful, then any class is powerful *enough.* I think every class is viable. Sure, some will be more powerful, but, at least on hard, it seems to me you can make them all work. Conversely, why do you care if other folks think barbarians aren't all that and a bag of chips? If some folks observe that, in their experience, barbarians are sub-standard, you could probably take for granted, unless they're out and out trolling (which I don't believe) that they've looked into barbarian builds and find them lackluster. Saying your barbarian isn't as good as other classes is simply not the same as questioning you or your personal integrity. It just means that they've looked at the figures and have concluded that one class is not as good as another. I'm going to let you guys duke it out, but I'll probably give this thread a timeout if you guys start reporting one another. ...And I don't want to because I've had fun reading your responses.

Actually, reading the posts from home, I can see that it's been a heated debate, but no name calling. That's a plus. Folks get invested in these arguments, and heated exchanges are part of the fun, but don't let one argument (especially class, which is a lightning rod for heated debate) turn into a vendetta. If it's getting too hot, take a breather. Be a happy warrior. Just a quick thought. Other than that, I see that the arguments are far too involved for me to address from a 'member' standpoint and I can't see anything really bad anyone's done. So, I guess I'll pop back out and let you guys keep fighting the good fight. Very interesting exchange to me, and I have no stake in this debate.

You know, I should probably warn you for being a relentless jokester, aweigh, but I have to admit that I tend to find you damned funny. 'hatched an idea.' What a doofus. On a more serious note, I did a search to see if maybe there was some reason given in the wiki and around, but no dice. Maybe there is and I'm just not seeing it. Considering Sawyers penchant for history and weapon depiction, it wouldn't surprise me if there is some sort of logical basis for it. After all, there are plenty of weapons besides hatchets, so they didn't *have* to put them in. Anyhow, I think of them more as tomahawks.

I'm not going to pre-order or even get Fallout 4 when it first hits the shelves, but I simply don't trust the vids we've seen so far. Maybe the complaints are true, but the fact that so many people are willing to lie and misrepresent the truth in order to further crazy assed campaigns against gaming companies makes me suspicious these days. If it weren't for the fact that I just plain don't have the time to play right now, I would go buy a copy just to thumb my nose at the whole bunch of 'em!

Which is really the point. I don't mind folks advocating an opposing position but as long as the system works as is, it's merely matter of preference rather than, say, the mechanics not working or being so manifestly incongruent as to be 'illogical.'

I'm on my phone, so I can't read everything just now, however, I don't know why we would limit ourselves by denying something so ubiquitous as lots, scrolls, and food in the game. Sure, a club beata a pistol without bullets. If someone has already observed this oddity in limitation, please accept this post a supportive.

I can see the future. Role: chump Okay, I actually took it and I got: Protagonist? What? lol Nope, folks, my role really *is* chump.

Let us know how much you gathered for the wee ones, will ya?

Honest Hearts is my favorite also. I especially loved the further explanation about the Burned Man, and even moreso his depiction.

Most weapons evolved from utility outside of combat and that utility tends to predate its use as a weapon. Spears were for hunting. Axes for chopping wood. Pole arms for pruning trees, especially in orchards and the like. Even daggers have utility outside of combat. Hell, while I don't carry a 'dagger' on hikes, you can rest assured I take a more or less equivalent length knife with me and, like folks throughout the centuries, I find having a relatively short, sharp blade quite useful. I don't deny that sometimes those weapons looked wildly different from the original functional tools, but they still reflect their history. Take swords and battle axes. Hell, take some of the crazy assed pole arms from the so called middle ages. As far as why the hatchet carries a deflection bonus, that's a good question. Njall had a pretty good point about game balance, although I would contend that tomahawks are quite marshal in nature. A hatchet tends to be a term that we use for the tool, and I would agree that the game tends to emphasize the utility aspect in the description, but they're basically small battle axes. ...But all this sounds kind of argumentative as I read over it, and that's not my intention. I'm also curious myself if it's just balance or if there's some historical basis for the deflection attribute. Maybe it's like our Zenbane friend here says and it has to do more with it's speed and construct being more useful for 'deflection' or some such, although I'm sure I understood that completely. Not uncommon as I get older, I'm afraid. :Cant's sheepish grin icon:

I've had a little extra time the past few days and I've taken advantage to try to get to Dragonfall's ending. I *think* I'm at the end soon, finally, after weeks of playing. It's truly a splendid game and, unlike the first one, I feel a real connection to the NPCs. They did a wonderful job with them.

Yeah, Eder is clearly the most sympathetic character, easiest manner, and whatnot. You're *meant* to like Eder. However, in terms of adding a lot of flavor or fun conversations, I think Durance is actually probably the best written character in the game. You love to hate him, and he's a complete jackass about... well... just about everything, but he's got great lines. He's a great foil for other NPCs' lines. He brings utility to the game. All in all, I think even some folks who hate him probably actually enjoy the party more with him in it. That's just my take, of course, but it's how I see it.

X-com in the old west with supernatural overtones and no base management? Hmmmm. You guys who buy it keep us posted. I'm thinking I might pick this one up. I picked up The Long Dark on ol' H-shot's recommendation and that's been great even if only in sandbox mode so far.

Fenstermaker makes me ill. Why the hell should he be so talented and I'm... not? Bastard!

I think camping gear entails more than wood, and I'm not sure you'd want to cook your food over heavily lacquered shield wood. You'd also be too tired to cook having exhausted yourself trying to get the shield wood in a condition to burn. :Cant's crooked grin icon: Seriously, though, you're not the only one who finds the camping gear aspect highly irritating. We'll put you in the 'not for it' column. No matter what, thanks for signing up for the boards, man! Stick around, grab a burger and beverage of your choice and enjoy the fun.

Yeah, Blod, I was getting confused. Well, if we weren't disagreeing, then we must be in agreement. :Cant's broad grin icon: ...Not that it's always better to agree. Sometimes, more often really, more comes out if disagreement. That's why trolls can be a good thing. Kind if like fertilizer for an online community.

The point of this board is nothing if not to nitpick? Anyhow, while I wouldn't feel guilty about nitpicking Bloodlines, we're advocating for what we want in a prospective title. If this were a thread about Bloodlines, I would say I greatly enjoyed it. It's not, so I'm saying what I would want. ...But, as always, I say folks should advocate for what they want.

Good Lord, Aweigh, you clever bastard, that was a good read. Two things though: a whole bunch of quest rewards are goofy in the same way. In the same way, dual wielding pistols would be okay for the same reason, but you've got to draw the line somewhere. For my part, I wish they hadn't included firearms, but it does have a real Darklands feel to it. To be clear, that's good. As for ammo... What you said.

I'm slowly but surely working towards the end of Shadowrun Dragonfall, DC. I've been *greatly* impressed with the game, although I haven't been able to binge play it as would normally be my wont. Anyhow, I did my first game on hard and that's been a reasonable experience with the single exception of one mission where I forgot to upgrade my spells and that was quite frustrating. Otherwise, the gameplay seems fairly straightforward and not unreasonably tough. I don't think I'll bother doing very hard, but if I do another run it will be with a deck as I haven't as yet used one. I always play a mage, but I think a decker would be interesting. With my excess points, I've got into summoning, but I think I should have done mage/adept. When I do Hong Kong, that's what I'll do.

I dunno, Zen, there are weapons smaller than greatswords in the game. If it comes to that, using a rapier to parry a greatsword is probably going to hurt in much the same way. lol I can see having a special talent called 'pistol whipping' or some such. How to use your pistol as an effective melee weapon. Forget sword and board. I'll take pistol and tower shield for the win! ...And what it lacks in reach it makes up for in panache!