khalil

I'm hoping that something magical will happen and I'll start liking rtwp or something, I dunno. It's not like combat is really that central to RPGs anyway. They live and die by the story, and given the writing staff on this game we know that'll be good. Plus, it could be worse. It could be a romance thread.

That brings up another thing: companions should have something memorable about them. They should not be like companions in bg1, a group of cookie cutter stereotypes whose deaths affect me less than that of one of the eighty snipers I get burdened with whenever I play TF2.

I don't see why management of individual arrows has to be such a big thing. While the black arrow should be special, the hobbit never went into bard's 100+ ordinary arrows for the same reason games shouldn't: no-one cares about them.

You're kind of missing the point. I was trying to say that pointy hats are like a uniform or something in that they inform everyone who looks at you that you're a mage, akin to how a lab coat informs everyone that the person wearing it is a scientist.

@Jarrakul I'll give you the slow bit. I'm OK with that, it's a personal thing. I will say that having the enemies in a turn based game all act at one would be kinda nice, but sometimes I like seeing what each individual mook does. Some kind of toggleable option perhaps, I dunno. However, the second point is a bit odd, as it holds true for real time with pause as well. When a wizard in BG casts fireball, no amount of button mashing will change my character's save versus spells, and no amount of running will get him out of the 20 foot radius. Even in games where almost everything is based off of reaction (such as first person shooters) you still get stuff like hitscan weapons where your reactions don't change the outcome. As a general rule, the closer to RPGs you get the more things end up based on statistics and the less they end up based on personal skill.

No, I described every badly written game ever. It just so happens there's a lot of games like that. Have you played Planescape Torment? What about Spec Ops: The Line? Scratch that. I described every badly written game that has conflict at the center of it's plot.

It's exactly as interesting as tracking arrows in BG was. This is because tracking arrows is boring no matter what game you are doing it in.

I had Jan Janson cover for divination. And while redundancy isn't bad, there's another problem: party size. I want to have Viconia, Jan Janson, Minsc, Edwin, Mazzy, Korgan, and Immoen in the same party. As this is impossible, I have to start cutting people. This is where redundancy hurts. I end up either having a sub-par wizard (because I don't have Edwin), or missing a character I wanted to have with me (because I dumped Mazzy instead.)

@juanval Try Shadowrun Returns. @Wolfenbarg I know the combat was going to be similar, I just didn't (and still don't) understand why people like said combat. @Jarrakul Huh. What don't you like about turn based?

It's not so bad, but it's still pointless. Basically what happens is whenever you gain a new spell level, you go buy an absurdly large amount of whatever components are needed for spells of that level. Components are 1cp each, so it's not that much of an obstacle. I hear that the more expensive spells require diamonds and things in addition to the ordinary components, but I'm not at that level yet, so I'm not sure how that works out.

Crowns are symbols of mortal authority, telling everyone who sees you wearing one that you're a king of some sort. Pointy hats are symbols of magical authority, telling everyone who sees you wearing one that you can reduce them to a pair of smoking boots. Also, you can't pull rabbits out of a crown.

I hope at least one portion of each race confirms to stereotype, because otherwise there's no point in using the standard races at all.

That was the reason I went for the PST refrence in one of mine. (Adahn was a fake name you could use.) Actually, here's another one: The Grave of the Nameless Soldier (choose one of these) Poor berk messed with the wrong power. OR His love for her burned as bright as the flames that killed him. OR Justice finally caught up. OR The shadows that surrounded him were but reflections of those in his heart. and here's another Vhailor He was the best Mercykiller(replace with officer, if the original would create legal trouble) we've had since Javert. His disappearance is a loss not just to the Bread Crimes Division, but to the planes(universe or planet if planes creates legal trouble) as a whole.

Aww. I felt the vampire one was fitting. I was trying to go for the sort of stuff you found on gravestones in Arcanum: random goofy jokes. Here's a few more: Here lies Magus the Eternal He has a mouth, but screaming won't do him any good. Here lies lay lies Azkaban the Lich King If out, please leave a message with Ms. Wittaker next door. Here lies Mr. Hong Apparently opening a sushi bar on Dagon Street during the winter solstice under the full moon in the middle of a lunar eclipse was not one of his better ideas. Here lies Terrance the Astrologer Told to marry a Leo with the Ebola Virus Here lies Timmy, age 7 The astrologer told us Timmy would have a long and happy life. It would appear the stars were left.

I've got some back on the first page, and I'd like to enter those for the second stone too.

You forgot spamming summons and drinking fifty buff potions at the same time, but other than that it seems fairly accurate. Really? When I played it, spells were a great way to solve problems, but melee was usually required to keep attention away from the casters. I didn't mean to imply I had an objective definition of fun. Sorry if I gave that impression. I meant to imply that there are some things most people consider to not be fun (level grinding, large areas with little to no content, and Metroid: Other M, just to name a few).

Still, the suck version should be included too in case someone wants their wizard to wear a dunce cap.

I prefer the wide brim. It comes from Odin's guise as the wanderer, which Gandalf was based off of.

I could probably use stealth or melee combat in Skyrim. I could use summons to do all the work. I could use buffs in combination with melee combat. Also, is it even possible to get through the BG games without using melee combat? I ask because Minsc casting fist was shorthand for just having my melee fighters wail on whoever I don't like. The antimagic scrolls were only used once, I put that in because that was the only way I managed to defeat the demilich. Kangaxx or whatever he called himself. He kept devouring everyone's souls no save, and antimagic were the only way I could figure out to stop him. I will admit I cheesed through the game, which brings me to another point: the optimal strategy in any game should be fun, because the purpose of playing a game is to have fun. (Story based games get an exception, the purpose of playing those is to read a good story.) The most common manifestation of this problem is grinding, because victory dancing in the woods until you arbitrarily become powerful enough to slay the gods themselves is the opposite of fun.

That's not why. It just feels like turn based combat makes strategy and planning easier. If a game doesn't give you any options for strategy, being turn based won't make it any better. For example, the FF games have terrible combat. One guy attacks with swords, one guy attacks with spells, one guy heals the other guys, and one guy casts protection from death or whatever spell is required to neutralize the current boss's gimmick. I'll be honest, I prefer twitch based combat for when I'm controlling one person. Turn based and real time with pause combat is suffered because it's the only way to make strategy work. One is like a sport, the other is like a game of chess. They both scratch different itches. Turn based and RTwP also get merits for being more likely to include dialogue, alternate ways to solve problems, and interesting characters. See, here's the thing: I don't find IE combat to be very dynamic. I use these strategies and they have never failed me: PST: Spam missile of patience. Cast Cloudkill or some other big spell that kills everything on the screen. Just avoid it. Any lout can beat people to death and take their stuff, but only a few special men can talk people into handing over their stuff willingly. BG1: Cast AOE spells at offscreen enemies. Have Minsc punch things until they stop moving. Spam wands. Spam summons. BG2: Continue casting AOE spells at offscreen enemies. Have Minsc punch things until they stop moving. Spam summons (at offscreen enemies). Have Minsc use a scroll of antimagic globe to render the demilich harmless. Then have him punch it until it stops moving. Wait for the enemies protection spells wear off, then punch them until they stop moving. Apply buffs until you can't see any of the character portraits through all the little symbols. Then punch things until they stop moving. TOB: Cast timestop. OH GOD TIMESTOP DOESN'T WORK AGAINST DEMIGORGON! Return to spamming AOE spells against offscreen enemies. (Like Demigorgon). Have Minsc put on the big metal unit and punch things until they stop moving. Spam epic level summoning spells. Put sticky bombs traps all over the control point wherever the boss is going to stand.

ToEE and Shadowrun Returns had nice turn based top down stuff. VTMB, Deus Ex, and Fallout: New Vegas had enjoyable shooting. (also Skyrim and Fallout 3, but only if you're concussed enough to mistake them for roleplaying games) If we count Roguelikes as RPGs(I don't but apparently some people do), DCSS has gameplay that manages to somehow be slow and tactical while also being quick and simple, and DF combat is extremely realistic, which results in absurdity when you throw impossibilities like dragons or necromancers into the mix.

I did like them. More specifically, I liked the writing. I loved how Planescape Torment managed to deliver a beautiful narrative while still being an enjoyable game. I had never seen it's like before, and the closest I've seen since was Spec Ops: The Line, a third person shooter that was simultaneously ripping off Gears of War and Call of Duty. I'm not sure if this will be the game for me, but I'm holding out hope that Avalone will shine through. A game with a plot deeper than "Those guys [are enemies of america/are terrorists/killed your father/burned down your peasant village/are other highlanders bhallspawn/wear blue shirts even though the dress code states that they should be wearing red]. Stab them until they stop moving." So far, I've played four games that met those standards: KOTOR2, Planescape: Torment, Bioshock, and Spec Ops: The Line. Two of those games were written by Chris Avalone, so I will support anything that might result in him giving me a fifth game I can add to that list.

I'll be honest here. I didn't play the infinity engine games until recently. I played PST two years ago, the Baldur's Gate series last year, and I played IWD this year. Anyway, this project claims to be a callback to the infinity engine, especially it's combat. However, there's one thing I don't get. The infinity engine did not have good combat. I can't see any reason people would want it back. The only thing the Infinity engine was good for was plot, which is why it's such a shame only one game had one. Here's my experiences with combat in the games: PST: a thing that happens on occasion to spice up conversations 50% of the time, a boring slog through robot hordes sitting in identical rooms 10% of the time, a boring slog through demons sitting in very large and boring rooms 25% of the time, and running away from greater shadows 15% of the time. BG1: 25% your mage pc getting eaten by a wolf five seconds in, 25% luring away single enemies to kill them one at a time, 25% getting killed by a kobold with a lucky crit, and 25% spamming wands at a boss with absurdly high MR. BG2: 33% using AOEs on offscreen enemies, 33% buffing yourself to absurd levels, and 33% playing through the following scenario: TOB(I'm counting this as a seperate game): 75% timestop, 25% OH GODS THE MONK IS IMMUNE TO TIMESTOP IWD1 and 2: 5% diablo, 95% me getting bored and wandering off because the plot isn't engaging and I have no investment in what is going on. Am I missing something? What do people see in this that I don't?

What I mean is specifically when they clash with the main character. A bad NPC is Edwin. If you're a wizard, he is you but better. While he would fit with a fighter Bhallspawn, he makes a Bhallspawn wizard redundant. An optimal party would ditch a PC wizard and put Edwin in that slot. A bad NPC is that halfling fighter you find right outside Candlekeep. If you're a mage, he can be a meatshield to protect you from the Candlekeep wolf. However, if you're a fighter, he's you but worse. He takes up a party slot that could instead be used on someone useful, like Edwin. A good NPC is Dakkon. If you're a wizard, than he can be a fighter who occasionally buffs himself to absurd heights in order to take out important targets. If you're a fighter, he can be the magical artillery, but can still pull out a sword and start slashing if the need arises. He can be used no matter what the PC is, and will never compete with the PC. A good NPC is Fall from Grace. She does something you can't do. She doesn't make any pc redundant, as she is unique.

Apparently you don't. It means the state DF is in, a game I play constantly.