MrBrown

It's a question of prioritization, not whether something exists or not. Gamism refers to competitiveness. Player vs. player, players vs. GM, or (most often in PnP RPGs, D&D included) players vs. GM-created-opposition. Gamism is about encountering problems, and figuring out a way to solve them, and most likely getting some sort of reward out of it (or getting a "penalty" if you don't). There's alot more that can go to it, but that's the basic idea. A gamist RPG is an RPG that prioritizes this above other needs. That is exactly what gamist RPGs are about, though they certainly can be simpler or more complex in rules. That certainly doesn't mean that that is everything a gamist RPG can be about; it is simply a question of prioritization. As a gamist RPG, D&D gives the player the option to overcome a problem by making a character that can survive such a fall. Or it might as well not, if it is not relevant to the Game at hand... But apparently the designers felt it is, so realism automatically takes the back seat because it becomes a question of the Game. Again, prioritization. Your problem is that you're trying to prioritize something else in your game than what the rules system prioritizes. You might call it realism, or whatever you want, but the fact itself that you are having these problems with the system proves that you're looking for a different thing in your game than what the system is trying to provide. Neither you or the system are wrong, just different kind of goals. (Though it can certainly be argued whether D&D manages to do well what it tries to do; as long as you don't confuse it with what it isn't trying to do.) There's alot more that can be said on gaming styles, incoherence in gaming styles (in rulesbooks and actual games), and ways to use rules for different kinds of styles... But I'll stop here this time.

This is an incorrect assumption. D&D for one, is a gamist RPG, that tries to create an interesting game for the players, similarly to (for instance) chess. Trying to find an in-world representation for its rules is somewhat futile, as it is not the point of the game. Some rules will have it, some won't, but in general it is beside the "point" of D&D; D&D simply doesn't prioritize it. Some other systems naturally will. However, it is not the main priority of all RPG systems, even if it is important to your way of playing.

Are these patches supposed to give me a ridiculous amount of random encounters? Because they're getting pretty unbearable. Can't move an inch.

If you prefer a more point-based system for spells, check out the Expanded Psionic's Handbook. It presents the system as Psionics, but it's really just a varian rule for magic. As for the races, check the subraces provided in various supplements. Most of them already cater to the ideas you presented for your races.

But those grunts are actually a part of the language! Some that come to mind: un = yes. uun = no. eeh!? = What? (As in, the "I can't believe it!" sense), notice the prolonged 'e'. ha? = What? (As in, the "What the hell are you talking about?" sense) chi/che = damnit. There's lots of others, but I'll spare you the details...

Well, you can basically go either way with it. Making SR simply not affect it only works if you give PR to creatures that have SR and make getting PR items as easy as getting SR items. Basically it seems your GM purposefully gave a _huge_ bonus to that PC. The basic rule, in any case, is that SR==PR... In other words, SR works against psionics. Psychic CrushTelepathy [Mind-Affecting] Level: Psion/wilder 5 Display: Auditory Manifesting Time: 1 standard action Range: Close (25 ft. +5 ft./2 levels) Target: One creature Duration: Instantaneous Saving Throw: Will partial; see text Power Resistance: Yes Power Points: 9 Your will abruptly and brutally crushes the mental essence of any one creature, debilitating its acumen. The target must make a Will save with a +4 bonus or collapse unconscious and dying at

In 3(.5) edition, Psionics is game mechanically just an alternative magic-system. And a better one at that, IMHO, though I've yet to use it much. @ Kaftan Barblast: Per the books, Psionics should be either affected by SR, or every creature having SR should also have an equal amount of PR (Power resistance, SR for psionics). My guess is that you were playing it wrongly... The huge majority of psionic abilities are also just basic spells in a different system, so there shouldn't be any more save-or-die stuff than the basic spells have. Though whether you use the 3 or 3.5 version makes a big difference as well.

I'd rather they not base their game on an existing PnP rules system. I don't mind converted PnP settings, though.

Bioware let Obsidian have KotOR 2 simply because BIO is more interested in making it's own IPs succesful, now that they have been succesful with D&D (several times) and with Star Wars. I'm not sure what you're trying to imply with your wording, but this is hardly a case of the BIO CEOs coming before Fergie, bowing and presenting KotOR2 on a silver plate.

I personally would also prefer something completely original. For Obsidian as a company, the decision about their next game will depend alot on how succesful they expect KotOR2 to be, I guess. If KotOR2 is a success, and seen as one as the result of Obsidian's efforts (not simply because it's a sequal to KotOR1), Obsidian might be able to take the risk and go with something original for their next game. Also depends on how much pull Fergie has among publishers.

Another way of doing this (and IMO, better) would be that the secondary methods help out the combat indirectly. For instance, lessen the amount of enemies, weaken them somehow, give you allies, get you powerful items earlier, take away traps/stationary defenses, etc., anything that fits in the game. I think this kinda designing method would be a better solution than simply making all the classes equal combatwise, as that would lessen character development options for the player. Otherwise, I agree with you 100%. D20 is combat=primary method, everything else=secondary method.

I haven't played KotOR1, but the computer skill and spikes things sounds like it should be made to work like lockpicking in Geneforge. Basically, the difficulty of the task and your skill level should determine the amounts of spikes you need to use to perform the task. If you have high skill, you can do stuff without using any spikes, but if you have zero skill, it'll take alot of spikes (and the resources spent to get those spikes) to do it. This way, both the spikes and the skill are meaningful, and it won't become a case of having the skill or not (which kinda sucks because it means that whatever that task does would only be available to character with the skill; would mean that only pointless non-necessary stuff can be achieved with the skill).

@Macolio: I agree you on the resting thing. It serves no purpose but to waste the player's time in most games these days. As for the "console style character development", I'm not sure what you mean. If you're saying that your characters should be getting more than just a simple bonus to their attack roll and HP, then I agree. I think the best idea is to make character development interesting and give the player alot of choices. Not sure if some kind of a clear PC-RPGs vs. Console-RPGs division really works here, though. Lastly, don't pay attention to Sargy here.

I think it was simply assumed when Bioware mentioned (on a press release on their site) that they get more offers from publishers than they can handle, and that they gave one of these to Obsidian. This was shortly after KotOR came out, I think.

Stalking through the candy store, clutching a burning branch, cometh MrBrown! And he gives a bloodthirsty scream: "I'm going to f*** you until you're pissing s***, and roll you in creamy neugut!" <_< :ph34r:

I have a feeling a company the size of Obsidian will rely on the QA sections of their publishers or other companies they're working for (Bioware, for now). What little actual QA they do by themselves, will probably be done by the developers.

After FFIV, FF games seem to have started being more about the skill/magic system rather than the levelling up. Both in what matters more and what the player can affect more. Jobs in FFV, the Espers (or whatever they were) in FFVI, Materia in FFVII, etc. This attitude seems to have spread into other JRPGs as well. Personally, I'd prefer all the stuff would work relatively in the same manner / using similar math, but that's just me. Not like western RPGs do that always either.

The problem with the instant-kill/save vs. death stuff is, IMO, not in the fact that it kills stuff quickly, but rather that when implemented in most RPGs it tends to make it just a game of chance rather than requiring any skill from the player. If lightsabers would almost always kill on one hit in an SW game, then the majority of combat would just be move next to enemy -> attack -> hope you hit and he doesn't -> reload if he does. Not much player input, not much fun. I don't think making combat extremely dangerous like this is bad itself, the developers just need to make certain it doesn't end up a game of %s. One way to do this, for instance, would be to simply have a large party where the death or incapacitation of a single character doesn't matter much. More action oriented games are, of course, a totally different matter. Hitting and dodging the enemy itself takes alot of player involvement.

Will do. BTW, I don't think turning 3E into classless would be that much of a hassle. Most of the variant systems, however, seem to also want to turn it into leveless, point-based, and what-not. That's too far IMO, and you'd be better of making your own system at that point. Here's a somewhat simple idea I had for classless DnD: http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?...light=classless It does require 'some' work in balancing the numbers, and changing class abilities into feats, though. :ph34r:

I think we've discussed this alot of time in various forums related to BIS/IP... I think the best way of fixing this problem (classless systems being harder to approach than class-based ones) is having templates, guidelines (or whatever you want to call them) that can choose the skills and abilities for the player. These templates should be created according to familiar stereotypes. Using DnD types as an example, the Fighter template would choose only combat stuff, Ranger mostly combat plus a little nature/survival, Rogue a little combat and alot of thievery type skills, etc. In an ideal case, these could be turned off or on at anytime. I think Arcanum had something like these, but I don't remember anymore (and I didn't use them in the 1st place ). BTW, talking mostly about CRPGs here.

I don't mind the D&D settings. The majority of the fantasy RPGs out there use similar Tolkien-esque settings anyways; even if D&D suddenly disappeared, I doubt this would change. I do mind the ruleset though. I'm just totally bored with class-based. IWD2 introducing 3e toned this down a little, but with ToEE I'm getting angry at it again. Classless, please. (I'm fine with most of other aspects of the 3E rules though, just not classes).

The GC still has those small disks, right?

@Iolo: In Japan, animation and comic books in general are made for people of all ages. Naturally, different shows are made for different ages/groups, so a show made for 8-12 year old children doesn't have nudity (or doesn't use in the same sense) while a show made for 18-21 year olds might have. Japan also has animated porn (and it's not an oddity there). Obviously, things are different in most western countries. EDIT: Oh, and don't listen to that roshan says about it.

Well, judging by the amount of people asking for STDs in Van Buren and the people getting angry at Atari for taking out the Tim-Cain-Brothel from ToEE, I think it's about time western companies start making porn games as well. BTW, if you really want to know what hentai games/dating sims are about, I suggest you take a look at getchu.com, and click around. (I wonder if I'll get in trouble for posting this...)

On the BIO boards, when you click on the dev symbol besides the thread, you'll see all the posts any devs made on that thread (and only the dev posts, excluding the post that started the thread). I never had trouble searching for all dev posts, unless I wanted them from all forums on the boards (which I never did). If you want this kind of function, then I can see a special search function being useful.