Shevek

I hope they include something like this. It is small touch but an impactful one. It also shouldnt take that much time. We are talking small sketches not full color paintings. Also, item sketches would certainly mesh well with the storybook interactions already included in the game.

I disagree with your definition. It is too narrow. This is a dungeon crawler. One of the big draws is a "mega dungeon." Most of its innovations over the ie games relate to combat. We can split hairs all night but it makes no difference. This is a dungeon hack. A dungeon hack with dialogue, story and npc interaction, perhaps, but a dungeon hack all the same. Hell, Sawyer himself is gleefully proud of the amount of "murder" (his own words, stated in assorted vids) that the player can take part in. If you make a game about running around and murdering monsters, you should reward xp to the player for murdering said monsters. If you murder more efficiently than others, then you should be able to farm xp if you so desire. Still, I honestly do not care that much. My party will still murder "no-xp" monsters albeit a bit less happily.

The funny thing is that in a game like this, where all stats are good for all classes, rolling might actually work well.

I think combat heavy games should reward combat. This is a dungeon crawler at its heart, after all. Still, I can live with it.

I somehow doubt that skill dabblers will be (or even SHOULD be) a viable option in a party based game with very few skills.

I tend to agree with Ragg. Skill systems like those in DnD Next or SW Saga which let you pick proficient skills at creation tend to seem better to me for a party/class based game. Edit: I would let the player pick a skill to be proficient in from a list of available class skills and then let choose one additional proficiency from the entire pool of skills based on the background they choose. Skills should increase with character level and get a bonus if the character is proficient in the skill, has an appropriate skill bonus talent and/or has a stat high enough to give a stat bonus to the skill.

Chances are that if you decide to switch skills mid game, you have gimped your character. One thing Sawyer seems to be against is character development systems that lead to gimped characters (hence their approach to stats). It would be best to lock this down early to fit within the design of the rest of the system.

First off, I do not have the beta but I have been seeing many twitch streams and the like. I have a suggestion concerning skills. Looking at the skill system, it seems a bit too antiquated. Every level, players just dump points on their "focus skills". If they metagame, they look at a guide and find out how much is "enough" to min max their characters. Why have the player dump points every level rather than pick their focus from the get-go? I think this game could learn a bit from DnD Next. In that system, players can simply choose what skills they are proficient with at creation (limited by class) and then get more proficiencies based on the background they choose (allowing them access to skills outside their class). This makes stat bonuses more impactful and makes the system, I think, more intuitive. Other systems have had systems like the one I mentioned. In particular, I recall playing Star Wars Saga edition some time ago and skills functioned similar to this (there were even variant rules that allowed players to pick backgrounds to expand skill proficiencies). Its been a while since I played Saga, but I remember it working pretty well. Just a thought...

Ya, I ended up making Mazzy a Paladin and Valygar some custom class I made up. I dont think thatll be as big an issue in this game since I dont there are racial restrictions or kits.

My Wild Orlan Death Godlike Barbarian will meet racial intolerance head on with sharpened steel. I dont favor massive mechanical disadvantages (higher prices, refusal of service/lodging/etc) but small factional modifiers and flavor text should do the trick.

1. Also, to inject a small bit of logic, this is a world governed by more than just brawn. There is psionics and all kinds of magic (plus new tech). In such a place, why would some small amount of additional muscle mass give men more say? 2. This is an alien world. In this place, perhaps the physical strength between men and women may not be all that different.

Theres no need to have gender inequality. We all know women got short end of the stick on Earth but PoE doesnt take place on Earth. It is a fantasy representation of a time VAGUELY reminiscient and MILDLY analgous to a period of Earth's past. The small degree of added "suspension of disbelief" isn't worth creating a FANTASY world that is toxic to a huge chunk of the possible gaming population.

The more I think about it... I would be a Barbarian Party would be... Priest - heals Wizard - spells Ranger - tank pet+range Paladin - frontline+buffs Druid - misc I can see myself using the AH in my first playthrough if there is no druid companion. In fact, alot also depends on WHEN a companion becomes available. I can see myself using the AH to get a class in my party sooner rather than later.

I LOVE the idea of the adventure hall but I will be using that as a second/third playthrough thing. On my second+ play throughs of BG1/BG2, I liked making my own custom party, giving them all bios, even messing with the 2das and giving them custom kits, etc. The first time, though, I like to do NPC sidequests, etc.

I can't decide on the second play through party until I play with the classes a bit. For sure, my main character for my first play through will be a Wild Orlan Death Godlike Barbarian wielding a poleaxe though. I just like the idea of a hairy little horned guy running around butchering things. Plus the wierd race should yield some interesting options in converations.

No, pregnant companions are bad. That can never be done well. Leave that crap to Teen Mom or something.

BruceVC: I tend to avoid elements of a game I dislike (like romances that are a better fit in a damn Twilight movie) and I only partake in those elements if they yield mechanical in game bonuses. At that point they become more of a gut wrenching chore than anything. When romance is in a pc game, it turns this... http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0116367/?ref_=ttfc_fc_tt into this... http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1099212/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1 Think about it this way: adding vomit to a sandwich makes it bad. Trying to wipe it off or avoid it....naw...it still leaves the stench. Would you eat a subway sub comfortably if someone puked on half of it? You would not have to partake of the half you dont like, so does the vomit make it worse? OF COURSE IT DOES! Adding crappy things to games makes the games crap. As to how to do relationships in games, I leave you with wise words of MCA... http://www.gameranx.com/features/id/10388/article/an-interview-with-chris-avellone-on-project-eternity/

Please don't do that. Its more than a little rude to ascribe meaning to the statements of others without attempting to engage them to get a better sense of what they are trying to say. Anywho, I can't speak for others, but I love the fact there are no romances because the ones I have seen in games have been incredibly fake and they turn party discussions into a bad highlight reel of a high fantasy version of the Bachelor. God, that was the absolute WORST part of BG2. Having Aerie whine and cry about her damn wings, Jaheira go on and on about her dead hubbie and Viconia being the hurt outsider.. and having to suffer through all that poorly written mess just to find out it was Biowares poor attempt at bringing a Japanese dating sim to American shores when each of them tried to have a go at my character. That sucked me out of my game experience very very quickly. It turned all my joinable NPCs into datable NPCs. When I am running about, trying to save creation from apocalypse, should the primary means of developing kinship with my party members be a damn dating sim? Its stupid. Its just plain stupid. What shocked me even more was all the damn dating sim mods that came out for BG2. Some sick bastards even made incest mods so you could freaking romance your SISTER. There is no accounting for taste. Those people will probably be able to modify the game files and make their own twisted romances to their heart's delight but, thankfully, Obsidian won't be wasting development time on that adolescent rubbish.

Pro 1. No romances - YAY! 2. Stronghold - What Cain has cooked up here looks awesome. 3. Camping/Resource Management - Awesome, I was hoping for something like this. 4. "Mundane Fantasy" aesthetic - way better than all the anime fantasy outfits in games nowadays 5. Adventure hall - I was thrilled when this was put in Con 1. No xp for battles - Disappointing... This is a combat heavy game right? 2. No multiclassing - M/C was one of the best bits of the old IE games 3. Animations still rumored to be stiff by gaming media 4. Godlike traits overwrite racial traits; I would like Godlike traits to vary a bit by race 5. Weapon balance with DT system they have sounds tricky

Might is a poor stat name if it affects both physical and magical damage. I would recommend something more neutral like "power" or, to channel VTm, "potence." Also, intelligence is too often associated with magical damage so I would call that something else as well - like "reason" or some such.

This sounds like a totally unneccessary mechanic that will do little but frustrate the player. If someone wants to hoard their potions, let them. That is their choice. If you do not wish to hoard potions, then use them. Certainly, the game CAN limit potion overabundance but not like this. The best way to limit players having an overabundance of potions is simply to either... a) limit the influx of consumables b) increase the attractiveness of potion use c) make it mechanically difficult to carry many due to weight or limited inventory slots The above solutions can all be implemented and have been in titles in the past. Your idea, however... The notion of having potions expire is terrible because the player would have an added layer of unwelcome micromanagement. Additionally, this would mean potions couldn't "stack" since each individual potion would need its own expiration timer. Players would need to constantly check the status of their individual potions if they want to make sure not to let their goods go to waste. This all sounds absolutely terrible. The player would be inundated by the tiresome task of having to repeated take inventory before the game robs him of his hard earned goods. And for what? Sorry, this suggestion is lacking.

Awesome solution and I want to thank you for listening to player concerns. I love the idea that crafting is in but the skill is not. I find that no games balance crafting and other skills very well. I am VERY happy durability is out. I am almost certain that would have been the first thing modded out if possible. Might I make a suggestion for using up some player wealth: Whatever a player uses his gold on should feel like WORTHWHILE advancement not ARBITRARY punishment. This is why durabilty fell flat. I should be either furthering the story or increasing my power or prestige when I use my wealth. This could be as easy as spending gold to upgrade stronghold services (forge, etc), for example.

As to what players should spend money on: -Random stronghold costs (upgrades, etc) -Items (as in buying them) -Consumables -Quests (bribes, etc) Also, the player having no problem with cash by the end game is not an entirely bad thing. Its helps the player feel successful. Once the player gets over the money hurdle, he can now feel like a real wheeler and dealer in the gameworld. He has made it. He is rich. This is very much how BG2 did it and it felt good there. At first, you are in this huge city. Stores have these amazing items on sale but you can't afford them. People are promising to aid you in your quest but you do not have enough to enlist their aid. Once you have enough money to move the plot forward, the cash starts pouring in. Suddenly you can afford many of these items and can use your gold to have master smiths create epic items for you. You are filthy stinking rich! The moment this happens the player suddenly feels he has truly become a major fixture in the gameworld. The key is not to let this get out of hand. I can understand having meaningful things for the player to spend his cash on. However, penalizing my warrior for swinging his sword as a way to take away his money just seems wrong.

Concerns about Crafting: -I am a bit concerned by this. In most games that offer crafting, it is pretty much the only way for a player to reach maximal potential. In other words, crafting is typically the only way for a player to get (1) the right items and (2) the right amount of said items. In ToEE, for example, the player was many orders of magnitude more powerful with crafting than without. Why? Because he could build a party AROUND the specific items he could create. That is a massive advantage to the player that chooses to craft over those than don't. I strongly hope this will not be the case in PE. Suggestions: -Make sure that NPC merchants offer all crafting services for a fee. In other words, if you want a mundane item with a specific set of attributes (think ToEE) or a legendary item created from specific dungeon loot (Cespenar), then please make sure than some merchant NPC can do this for the player if he can't craft it himself. In other words, I should be able to get any item I want/need without crafting so long as I have the gold, the items (in the case of special items like the Holy Avenger) and can find someone willing and able to put it all together for me. Also, I should be able to partially mitigate the gold cost to create said items with a Haggle skill or some such. In this way, those that wish to avoid the crafting system can have an experience very similar to the crafting BG2 offered the player (albeit a bit more robust). Concerns about Durability: -Durability is fine so long as it is a minor annoyance. I see that you guys went that way a bit by making it so items dont actually break they just wear down. However, its very unfun to make this a major money sink. The player feels a bit jipped when he gets effectively penalized for doing what he should do with said items. Moreover, players like amassing large amounts of gold they have no plan on using. Its like some hold over from Guantlet or something. We enjoy getting tens of thousands of money units for the simple reason that we want our avatars to be filthy stinking rich. I should be able to meet those ends without feeling forced to take crafting. Suggestions: -Please make the gold cost to fix this stuff relatively small even on the uber items. I don't care if the player has to repair Excalibur or Anduril or something. Having to lay down some silly amount of gold for swinging my sword is no fun. I would offer that durability is fine as a minor micromanaging tool. It can be an effective way to get players to have to carry backups in case they hit a rust monster or are going on a long dungeon crawl. Durability is also a fine way to make the player's visits to town more purposeful but as a gold sink... ugh.. no fun.

I think the nights are dark enough. This is one of those things that may sound good in theory (more realistic, etc), but it would just be silly in practice. Having to spend a few silver just to carry a large stack of torches that periodically go out on you is silly. It would add nothing to the game other than a minor money sink and bother the player with having to switch out spent consumables every 30 minutes. There would be no added challenege, no added tactical or strategic thought, no added gameplay depth or anything else.