Shevek

This would lead to uneven quality and tone.

Au contraire. Charts and data without a proper design is just wasted effort. Maybe, so put up charts and data that you design properly. Give people the numbers and the rationale and then have them debate. This thread is too filled with conjecture and people talking about stuff in ways that are not wholly tangible. I say, put a system, explain how item enchantment, armor types, damage reduction, damage deflection, damage types and/or damage avoidance works in said system and why you think it should work that way. Then, ask others to critique that design and offer superior alternatives and so on.

I was perusing the Shadowrun Returns forums and found this.. http://www.shadowrun...ind-love-in-srr Man, whats next? Must every cRPG be a dating game too? Why are so many gamers intent on finding digital love on the cRPG battlefield? Personally, I blame Bioware (as others do on this thread). They have ruined so much. Now a bunch of PC gamers feel that if they can't woo and have sex with a bunch of their party members, then it's not full on ROLEPLAYING. Its like they saw a porno version of Lord of the Rings and now they think if Frodo doesn't bang 20 whores on the way to Mordor then its not true Tolkien. My god, just go play Persona and leave the real RPGs alone. These are meant to be games where you go off on an adventure with a party of adventurers. Instead, people want a porno where you can have sex with all of them and/or feel like a great big pimp because you are so good at wooing your ideal mate. The roleplay focus here is NOT meant to be sexual or even sensual. The focus is the adventure. Anything that takes the focus off that (like some dimwit wingless Wing Elf telling you she is preggo in the middle of fight with a dragon) is a BAD thing. (As a side note, how many recruited Aerie just so Korgan could get rid of her?) Please, stop trying to get the devs to waste development time on dialogues meant to make you feel like you are good with the ladies. They can pander to your ego by making you feel like a great warrior or possibly even a good party leader. However, as soon as the game turns to focus to making you feel like a good ladies man, developmennt resouces are spent on something that turns the focus AWAY from the adventure what this game should be about. A quick Google Search turned thisup. You romance folks can just go play that and stop trying to ruin every indie cRPG that gets made.

Guys, put up some charts and numbers. All this high level design is useless without numbers.

I'm sorry, if you can add a gun to a knight, I am sure you can add guns or granados to an Asian monk too (didn't the Chinese use blackpowder before Europe?). The whole flaggelant thing in this thread isn't about flexibility it is the proposition that a european style monk would be more unique or immersive or other such nonsense. In the end, the argument is poorly constructed and based on semantics and opinion.

Why arent we talking about knights being repetitious or Conan like barbarians beiing repetitious? This is all way too subjective. The idea that asian kung fu monks are played out is silly. All the classes in this game have existed in other games very VERY often.

Ok, so, you want a chance to go through links in a suit of chainmail and hit the vitals? Most systems have this already... it is called scoring a critical hit. You could just make it so critical hits are not subject to DR from armor but that is not strictly necessary. Also, I would be careful with damage types. That can be hell to balance and get right. GURPS did ok but they ony have like 2 damage types and their effectiveness depends on whether or not the armor is flexible.

If it takes you 3 minutes to analyze a d20 armor system, it isn't the system's fault.

Right armor for the right occaision sounds like a good thing to me...

You can always have a mixed system. In other words, damage reduction AND damage deflection AND dex bonus (agility, essentially) on top. When this conversation started, I messed around with the concept and came up with a few versions of this:

I am gonna bet exactly as long as they say. Their rep is riding on this and they want to turn this into a franchise. It is in their best interest to have this go off without a hitch.

no problem with it so long as it fits game, character, etc. Some of the jRPGs have dealt with this idea - Namco's TALES OF GRACES f for example; more or less with 4 main characters Asbel, Sophie, Cheria and Hubert all as kids where they have an adventure (that goes wrong) and then later as adults who end up coming together to deal with some further issues that tie into that original ill-fated adventure. Great...jRPGs... next thing you know folks will demanding that we be able to make heros that look like effiminant teenage girlish boys (with bare midriffs and low cut pants) with blue/pink/yellow spikey hair and carry swordguns. They can have a romance in game with their childhood friend. You will have to deal with an evil imperialistic power. In the end, the government of said power will be ruled by an evil church or a cabal of rich jerks or both. You will travel about till you get a boat and finally an AIRSHIP! You will use the airship to go to a large flyng castle where you will rescue your childhood friend/hopefully future wife from the big bad evil guy with long hair. He will kill her but your righteous rage will fuel our powerful revenge in righting all wrongs before you awake and realize it was all a dream... or was it? Ya... I love where this thread is going.... Obsidian... ignore these people. Romances are a very bad idea. Most of the relationship ideas have been abyssmal.

This poll is poorly crafted. The decisions are skewed as the ratio are positive responses out number the negative ones. Also, the negative response is made to sound "dumb." It should have been two questions. Question 1: Should there be penalties for leaving behind party members? Yes/No Question 2: If penalties are included, what should they be? Choices I wish people would stop making push polls and then use them as evidence that others support their points. As for my choice: I voted no penalties. This kinda stuff sounds good in theory and would be great fun in PnP with a DM directing traffic but it blows in a cRPG. Case in point: ToEE. In ToEE, they had joinable NPCs take a share of the loot. First thing people did was mod that out or reduce it significantly. Why? It was both implemented poorly and it rubbed most folks the wrong way. I want to just play my game, pick up who I want to pick up and ditch who I want to ditch without the fear of paying alimony like I am 80 year old billionaire who just got divorced from some 20 year old gold digger.

I think its great they included it. In my first playthrough, I will use it sparingly (maybe for one or two character slots). In successive high difficulty mode playthroughs, I will use it much more. Personally, I hope I can choose a portrait/soundset/bio/color scheme for AH characters like you could when making characters in an IWD game or multiplayer BG2 game. These characters will obviously not have party banters or dialogue (its hilarious some folks in this thread expect player-made character to have that stuff, LOL!) but it would be nice if we could customize them a bit.

I do not believe your reading of his statement takes into account the context in which it was answered, the phrasing he used or past statements/products by Obsidian.

He said they were an "easy target" and other relationships were more interesting. Sawyer has stated they should be extremely well implemented or not done at all. These are not neutral statements. These guys don't want angsty teen conceptions of love in their game.

I hope combat styles are a bit more balanced than previous games. Aesthetically, I perfer my fighters to be either sword and board or finesse fighters that run around with a one handed weapon and nothing in the offhand. These tend to be very crappy ways to play in the IE games despite being historically successful ways to fight.

Seeing as how the devs have pretty much shut down any and all possibility of sappy Bioware BG2-style romances, why is this thread still going? The chances of there being any romance at all is slim to none considering comments by Avellone, Sawyer, etc. What should be done is the thread should be renamed and repurposed. This should not be the "Relationship/Romance" thread. Instead, title it "Interparty Relationships." The devs are rightly persuing nuanced party RELATIONSHIPS. A greater emphasis has been suggested to rivalries, revenge, friendship and the like.

If the devs are smart, they won't get into the quicksand that is party romances. It screws over the whole game. Here is an interesting quote by Mister Chris Avellone: http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2012-10-19-project-eternity-how-chris-avellone-blew-by-4-million-on-kickstarter You tell em, Chris. Leave the romances in the teen novels and the japanese dating sims.

Its hip and cool to cry for low magic worlds where the Earth splits open at the mere glimpse of your +1 dagger but deep down we all love the Monty Hall beauty of BG2 and the IWD games.

They probably want the next update to be fairly substantive (videos, etc). They probably should fiddle a bit with the Project Eternity site as well (a lore section, a gameplay section, etc etc).

A super encounter for a group of low to mid level adventurers would not be very good design. They can throw Galactus at us in the xpack. I am pretty sure in part 1 we'll be fighting wyverns and maybe a couple giants.

Ya, the japanese love making games where you have a bunch of horny teenagers fighting monsters. Some of these games are critically acclaimed too. I am sure some folks would be better served by checking some of those games out.

So, lemme get this straight... you are saying the only way to build a meaningful romantic bond is to go on quests to kill monsters together?

Honestly, the easiest way to have romances in these games without having the pitfalls of having 1/2 of party joinable npcs wanting to get in your pants is not to have party romances. Instead, avoid the entire thing and allow various nonparty npcs to be romancable. Perhaps depending on race or other character creation options, the player can select to ALREADY be involved with a certain nonjoinable npc (what if you were ALREADY married and had a family when you started?) - if they can work it into the story, that might be alright. You could have "romances" range from base and torrid to deep and fulfilling. You could even have more than one and have all the Jerry Springer drama you want result from it. All of this can occur OUTSIDE the party where the player must actively choose to go off and persue it. This gives romance folks all the options they want while not turning the game into a Danielle Steele novel for the rest of us who would perfer not to have our party turned into a bunch of hormone driven high school kids.