Shevek

But there are no sneaky or diplo characters in this game. All builds are combat characters.

Gotta say the words...

The interrupt thing seems cool to me because you can make a dude that isn't all about damage. It also gives speedy weapons added value even against dudes with high DT. I can see a ranger with a speedy short bow being very valuable - so much so, that I might opt for that instead of a might heavy ranger with a gun. This opens up more viable builds and thats a good thing.

Ya, the label doesn't really matter. What matters is that they made a combat heavy game that shies away from rewarding combat. I do think its funny that people see "dungeon crawler" as a pejorative though. I freaking love a good dungeon crawl.

CatatonicMan: I'm cool, thanks.

CatatonicMan: Naw, you are over complicating things. If you go into a labyrinthine environment, kill crap and find loot, then thats a dungeon crawl. If the game is so full of dungeon crawls that most of play time is dedicated to it, then its a dungeon crawler. There really is no need to try to make some silly argument to the contrary. If you disagree, then disagree but stop trying to find logical fallacies where there are none.

The type of game and core gameplay is inextricably tied to location and style of game. Dungeon crawler connotes all those things (KILLING CRAP in a DUNGEON). Stop splitting hairs. Its dumb.

Really? You think 8 slots per character is enough? Ya, I think with the stash, it works out. *shrug* /end of discussion. Ok with me. *waves*

From the Wiki YOU LINKED: I think you should read your "proof" before you post it.

Naw, I think games where you spend the lion's share of your play time crawling through dungeons (looking for loot, truth, whatever) are dungeon crawlers.. Pretty simple really. Hey, you can think whatever you want. PoE will have some C&C, thats true but, that being said, it was also have a megadungeon with gobs of loot. I am pretty sure the vast majority of its gameplay will be dungeon running too but, hey, you never know I guess.

Naw, in BG2 you stumbled from dungeon to dungeon killing dragons (red ones, black ones, white ones...) and making jackets out of their skin. It was a dungeon crawler. Sure, you could meander away from the main story... to go to some other dungeon. You could do a dungeon filled with large floating eyes or a dungeon filled with dark skinned elves or a dungeon filled with dead things or a dungeon filled with vampires or a dungeon filled with trolls or a dungeon filled with puzzles, dungeons with illusions, or a dungeon filled with brain eaters, etc etc etc. As for IWD, that was DEFINATELY a straight up dungeon crawler. BG1 tried to mix it up with overland crap but even those basically devolved into dungeons (like that wooded area with the wyverns and crap.. dungeon with trees more or less ). Hell, most players bitched after BG1 and demanded more dungeons which is why they did Durlag's for TotSC and why BG2 is a dungeon-palooza. Those games had little to no choice or consequence. The character development was all made at level 1 (unless you Dual Classed, but that was crap) and the development was entirely related to combat. Look, they had a nice narrative. I am sure it was like playing a table top game with Gary Gygax himself. But, they were dungeon crawlers and dungeon crawlers should have combat xp. Look at what Zeits wrote, he himself said combat was the damn focus. Btw, I do not dislike this. I love dungeon crawling. I just recognize it for what it is.

It is not a dungeon crawler. Sure it is.

I agree with him on combat xp (this is a dungeon crawler; we need murder xp) but I disagree with his criticism on inventory size (opinions..opinions...). I think he was too quick to judge combat speed considering, as he mentioned, that the state of combat is a bit buggy (moreover, I believe the issue is not speed but feedback).

You can bind a key for that.

Simply awesome.

Haha, oh man... Actually, you may be confused. The IE games are the ones that tried to shoehorn things like "Rounds," "THAC0," "Attacks Per Round," "Initiative" (as "Speed"), "Vancian Magic," Die Based Damage, etc etc etc into RTwP. PE was designed from the ground up as a RTwP title.

Is there a dislike function on these forums per chance? No, but people have found the whining function and used it liberally.

Frankly, I love Sawyer's design changes. I hope they make many more games that are this forward looking (OR MORE SO). My one concern with PoE when I backed it was that it would be too much on an homage to the old games and that it wouldn't improve upon those antiquated systems. I am happy they had the balls to do this game right. They balanced the stats far better than they were in the IE games. They have a pretty balanced class system (far more balanced than the IE games). They got rid of crappy "rounds." They got rid of Monty Hall itemization. They put in an enchantment system that is loads better than the Cormwell/Cespenar crap. They put in a health/stamina system that makes sense and promotes both strategic and tactical play (and limits rest spam). They have a trait system to add character development after level 1. They made it so the casters are not the only ones who can do crap. They partitioned out the spells and abilities so that all casting classes did not simply pull abilities from 1 of 2 pools. They have an innovative difficulty setting to challenge you how yu want to be challenged. That is just what we have seen. I can't wait to see the two cities, the improved stronghold, the reputation system, the full trait options and all the rest. Some people wish some of these elements were a bit better. However, their inclusion AT ALL makes the game far more deep and involving than the core design of the IE titles. I am happy that now I have a new TRUE crpg to master. Once they make combat feedback better and fix some bugs, this game will be good to go. Frankly, if all I wanted was a slight tweaking of the IE games, I would install the IE games and mod them. I've done that. I want more. Obsidian delivered. Thanks Obsidian. Your game is looking good.

I think alot of folks are wearing a pair of these when thinking back to BG2...

Ya, items in BG2 were way WAY OP. Cormsyr (sp?), Crom Faeyr, Robe of Vecna, Ring of Gaxx, etc... BG2 was fun but way too Monty Hall. They tossed artifacts around like they were candy. Ultimately, the ITEMS mattered more than the few character development choices the player made. That is not a strength. That is a weakness. Folks can call PE items "bland" but I will take "bland" PE items over BG2 style itemization any day.

I agree that ability scores do not need to impact character power more than they already do. However, I do think ability scores may need to be balanced a bit. Perception and Resolve do not seem as attractive as the other four scores. I have high hopes for the trait system as well.

Cabamacadaf: I think he's counting it since they were able to further refine the system (enemies, spells, etc) prior to BG2's development.

This is the single best suggestion on the board at present.

The item system seems mechanically great to me. The PE system has an element of randomness which reduces metagaming and helps successive play throughs feel different. I far prefer this to the IE system where people metagamed item drops (get a paladin for the holy avenger, make sure you have someone to use the crom faeyr, Mazzy is only good if you get a str belt for her - so get that first, Keldorn needs dex gloves or he sucks, etc etc) . I also disliked how In BG2, players would scramble to get certain immunity items to trivialize certain encounters (make sure to get the shield of balduran before you fight the beholders, get immunity to level drain before fighting vamps, etc etc). In other words, its GOOD that they reduced the emphasis on OP item bonuses so that players can focus on what should matter more - character builds and party composition. I do believe that the presentation element could be a bit better. I would like a return to the sketched item images in the description, for example.

Ya, some stats need different names so people aren't so easily confused. "Might" should be something like "Power" or "Potency" "Intellect" should be "Cunning"