Amentep

Or - they could always use this as a basis for a battle bards:

Lmao. First you use High Fantasy idea to prove that monks can exist, and now you use it to prove that monks can't exist. Actually I think its more like "High Fantasy proves the idea that monks who punch through armor and evade blows can exist and because it is high fantasy it won't be using real world religions, like Buddhism."

Why would you think in the midst of a high fantasy setting you'd find Buddhism? Monks, and Monk styled classes, in most RPG settings you'll come across have philosophies unique to the setting. They aren't going to insert real world religion of any sort into the game. It's a fantasy game. Not a historical documentary. This isn't even a question, it's automatic. I don't think they will. I said I hope they won't. I think we're actually agreeing on this! Which is just really neat to watch by the way. Actually even apart from the weapon training, one video is just a series of excersizes, mostly stretching, that are impressive in their own right. Yes, it is. Very impressive; I admire their dedication.

New Old Thanks, yeah I remember the old logo now. Think I like the new one better. Is it just me or does the inner ring design on the new logo look like a series of snakes biting one another (so still kinda ouroborusy?)

Would it still be okay to show that a choice is a skill limit choice but only if you meet the threshold. Something like [intellect] - I'm smart, so I can say this But if you're not smart you just don't get the choice? KILL IT!!!!!!!!!!!!! KILL IT WITH FIRE, DROP THE REMAINS IN TANK OF ACID, THEN PUT THE ACID IN A ROCKET AND SEND IT TO THE SUN!!!!!!!!!! So you don't want intelligent dialogue at all, or you don't want intelligent dialogue to be denoted as intelligent (the latter being which people were favoring)?

I don't get this 'Shaolin' thing people keep bringing up. If by Shaolin you mean, "He doesn't wear plate armor" which, yeah, he doesn't. He looks like he wears a combination of Cloth and Leather at the most. Which is quite apt for what the Class seems to be trying for. If by Shaolin you, "He doesn't use weapons, he uses his fist," then, yeah. He uses his fists. We have an example of the Monk in this setting, and a lore example of how magic can be used. This Monk in the art obviously enhances himself magically to have superhuman attributes. Though I'd note actual Shaolin Monks train with swords and other weapons as well (you can see some interesting video documentaries of it). I'd also just plain note that the Monk in P:E's art looks nothing like a Shaolin Monk. This is a picture of a Shaolin Monk: The picture of the adventurers, including the Monk, for P:E, looks nothing like the above. I was more talking about the philosophy behind the Shaolin monastary being an outgrowth of real world Buddhism; obviously if the vision for a PE Monk is based in any way on Shaolin monks, they're still going to need to change what the monks believe in, so that it fits the setting (and thus the clothing associated with Shaolin monks and other things aren't necessarily going to follow through). And yes, Shaolin Monks train - as far as I know - with the 18 arms of Wushu (sabre, spear, straight sword, staff, halberd, axe, battle axe, hook sword, trident, chain whip, mace, hammer, talon, trident-halberd, long handed spear, cudgel, walking stick and meteor hammer). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxPO6nwQvxY

I...can't tell the difference. Anyone able to throw both up (not literally) for a compare/contrast?

3 starting (Human, Dwarf, Elf), 1st Stretch Race, 2nd Stretch Race, Godlike Race ?

ie, PUNCHING ZOMBIES IN THE FACE WITH FLAMING FISTS!!!!!111111one I agree, though, I thought the 15 pic was a lot of fun, had depth and monsters and stuff. And looked good. And how in the world are they going to get out of that? I think they're headed for a TPK. Game over, man!! Game over!!!

You can't go wrong with that movie.

Since they're building the world from the ground up, I hope that they can give the Monk its own flavor within the context of the world, not just drop a shaolin fighter into the middle of the game. I also think that its possible to find them a role within the party so that there is a reason to have a fighter or a reason to have a monk (or both) and not feel like you're missing something.

Historically, Paladins where essentially knights, some of whom later became seekers of holy relics. They were lawful in the sense of being the champions of the king and were perceived as "good" because of their chivalric code. In this view they were not all that different from samurai. I don't think you need an alignment system in order to be able to model a character like this. But perhaps you need a system that modifies their soul-based powers depending on their ethical choices and loyalty. You're thinking of Templars I believe. Paladins were the historical champions of Charlemagne's court. I'm not sure if they actually existed or not. The word predates the original fiction cycle "The Matter of France", though, but I've not seen the context. Its derived from a latin word referring to high level court officials. The Charlemagne cycle makes the Paladins the 12 knight peers of Charlemagne's court. Roland/Orlando is typically one of the 12. I mention this so that I may say that not only do I support Paladins in the game, I support funky headgear as seen in 'I paladini - Storia d'armi e d'amori' aka Hearts and Armour an adaption of the Italian version of the Paladins from Orlando Furiouso http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9H3TJZy2CE&feature=related

I think the only issue (assuming optional) would be if doing it wasn't easy (thus needing time/development/resources) to implement. And I don't think any of us can answer that.

Something like - Normal response might be: "Why yes, I'll donate some money for your excellent charity!" "No thanks, I gave at the office" "If you come around here, I'm going to your orphanage and kick the children! And then you in the face!" Int response might be "[lie]Why yes, I'll donate some money for your excellent charity if you come back tomorrow..." (then you can contact the police to be there tomorrow) "I am exposing your scam to the police, I suggest you get running." "You can't fool me, I'm going to expect 10% of your profits from now on unless you want me exposing your scheme to the authorities"

Love Fog of War; I think if they can make the area revealed realistic (appropriate large in open spaces, not showing things behind objects) it could be amazingly awesome. But even as it was, I enjoyed it. Well except when the obsessive / compulsive part of me got frustrated because there was a tiny "fog or war" cloud I couldn't clear on a map.

because you have a different opinion than they do. you mentioned action RPGs in a positive light. Just be happy you didn't suggest anything like an MMO. I loved Times of Lore for the C64 - one of the first games I played where you could kill NPCs (including quest givers, making it impossible to continue on). Nothing wrong with action role playing games, IMO. That said when I first played Baldur's Gate (the first PC game I'd played in a long, long time) I couldn't figure out how to move the characters for some time. Oops! Once I got used to it I had no problem. It was also relatively easy to highlight the party and move them all as a group, so once I got the hang of it, it was fine.

Yeah, I actually agree with Trashman, an attack on the back is an attack on the back; a fighter is going to be trained to end the fight quickly just as a rogue is. Both are going to be looking at opportunities to do that.

Tep, I think the Codex runs a controversial facility where dual-identity-gamers can be made 'natural' again. The techniques are... unusual, and some don't make it through. But if you do, apart from the large scar across your forehead, nobody will ever knew that you had The Treatment. Yikes! Sounds a little radical, but I'll keep it in mind in case my inner-turmoil boils over!

I'd imagine that there are ways to control this - guideline given up front, smoothing out things on the back end - so that everything works well. Or I'm an optimist, nearing Pollyanna proportions. One or the other.

Hmmm, I enjoyed DA2. I also enjoyed Plan 9 from Outer Space. Something doesn't have to be good or well made to be fun (to certain audiences or with the proper context). I don't need every movie to be Citizen Kane / Rashamon / your choice of superior movie or every game to be Fallout / Planescape: Torment / your choice of superior video game. I also prefer turn-based combat for party based RPGs and think romances can be used as part of character and story development if the developer chooses to. I can only assume this means I'm actually a double personality and any day now I'll wake up unable to breathe, finding my inner Codexian traditionalist is using my arms to try and strangle my inner Biowarian rube.

Right, not showing the line (thus the player doesn't know 15 int or above triggers extra dialogue) was what I meant.

Sports *usually* don't involve people trying to kill you but sometimes you can *see the field* and get an idea of where people are (opponents and team mates) and react accordingly. And other times an opponent can seem to drop out of the sky on a parachute next to you, DA2 style, without you sensing them. Its also usually fairly chaotic during transitions. But if someone is trying to stab you in the back and you can't turn around (because you're already fighting, because you don't sense them, because you slip on a banana peel, etc), whoever is trying to stab you in the back has an opportunity to strike in a way that isn't going to be defended like going in for a face-to-face duel. A lot of the "kill quickly" scenarios given assassins or rogues or thieves apply to any mortal combat. All sides will want to end it quick and are going to look for the literal **** in the armor to slide their blade home. To that sense, perhaps assassins, rogues and thieves would be better suited to "quick strike and out" roles than a fighter, using mobility over strength. Unexpected blows or blows from behind should just be treated as situations where the opponent can't defend, regardless of who initiated it. At least that's what I'm thinking.

Heh, I actually couldn't remember how Torment did it (been ages since I played one of the IE games) I'm torn on this myself, on the one hand not guiding the player helps the player stick to their characterization (ie choosing the dialogue that's fits the view of the character, not the dialogue that's the most special) on the other hand I can also appreciate the encouragement having the tag gives me as a player in showing how my choices are influencing what I can do in the game.

I see souls as the unifying concept of the game, therefore I have no problem with it effecting everyday life in the setting.

I don't like that concept actually, well, where it's seems to be going (the X-men path). And that's fair - I don't know that *is* where its going, but I kind of think it is. Could be wrong, I'm a terrible prognosticator. If the fighter can't harness their soul power then there is still the idea of the monk as a mage whose magic is channeled inwardly as opposed to outwardly so there's still the way to justify it in the setting regardless, I think. I'd still like to see a fist fighting grappler character (who primarily is going to be concentrating on getting single opponents off their feet and under their control than dueling or crowd control roles) to traditional D&D style monk. But I don't have a problem with something more akin to the D&D style monk either (but accept that not everyone feels the same).