death rules

[Ahkan Stormforge]

But it's silly that no matter what, under no circumstances are your companions ever able to have you resurrected. There were plenty of times that I could have had the main PC resurrected on the next round after dying, why is this completely robbed from me?

 

Because spawns of Bhaal who have a very high concentration of Bhaal's essence have their corporeal form disintegrate upon death.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

My statement was referring to a whole host of games, other than BG2, where death of the main PC causes instant game over. I should have made that more clear.

 

But that said, it was never mentioned in the story of either BG games, wasn't even shown in BG2, and basically existed solely in a short sequence in BG1 with no explanation. It was a bad gameplay mechanic.

Edited May 24, 2006 by Ahkan Stormforge

[Atreides]

This reminds me of the Onion piece where the dude keeps getting reloaded to keep dying.

[Llyranor]

It's meaningless with reload.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ironman mode + no possible resurrection

[Volourn]

"It's meaningless with reload."

 

This is absolutely false. No one forces you to reload just because an npc dies.

 

It's meaningless if you make it meaningless.

[StillLife]

Permanent death is meaningless with reload.  Early on people reload when things go wrong.  Later on people cast Ressurect or pay whatever it costs at a  temple if they don't feel like reloading.  Plus there are bodybag items now so it won't be a lot of work picking up tons of stuff, maybe only distributing weight.

 

When permanent death really matters, like when it's so high level that people that matter get Incinerated or chunked past -10 hp you'll almost certainly see people reloading.

 

It's meaningless with reload.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I disagree.

 

1) When you have to keep one person alive at all costs(the PC) who is--if you've played your cards right--usually the most powerful member, it adds an extra level of challenge over just having to keep any old party member alive.

 

On that note, there should be battles difficult enough where you almost have to lose a party member just to get through, defeating the purpose of just trying to reload around it.

 

2) From a story standpoint, having it so all party members are magically okay if one of them survives a tough battle kills immersion. When a party member dies, it should be a big deal, something you want to avoid, otherwise you can fling them around like lambs to the slaughter and any concern for them is greatly diminished. It should be entirely over if your character dies as your connection to the gameworld is severed.

 

It's not meaningless with reload.

 

The only time KOTOR's method would be justified is in a game where you can only save at certain points, otherwise it's far too easy to just breeze through. KOTORs combat model was friggin atrocious with its utter lack of challenge and should not be followed by any other game.

[Cantousent]

I say they create a game where you get one roll for stats, completely random, just like real life. I also propose that each player may only create one character. If that character dies, then the game uninstalls itself and the disk melts in your hard drive. Better yet, how about, if your character dies, a hand pops out of your computer with a big gun and shoots you between your eyes? That way, folks who win the game get ultimate bragging rights.

[Darque]

I say they create a game where you get one roll for stats, completely random, just like real life.  I also propose that each player may only create one character.  If that character dies, then the game uninstalls itself and the disk melts in your hard drive.  Better yet, how about, if your character dies, a hand pops out of your computer with a big gun and shoots you between your eyes?  That way, folks who win the game get ultimate bragging rights.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Volourn]

I'm trying to laugh at your adacity of hyperbole; but I failed the roll on the laugh-a-meter. "

[Dark_Raven]

I say they create a game where you get one roll for stats, completely random, just like real life.  I also propose that each player may only create one character.  If that character dies, then the game uninstalls itself and the disk melts in your hard drive.  Better yet, how about, if your character dies, a hand pops out of your computer with a big gun and shoots you between your eyes?  That way, folks who win the game get ultimate bragging rights.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not amused.

[Cantousent]

I'm trying to laugh at your adacity of hyperbole; but I failed the roll on the laugh-a-meter. "

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Ah, don't be such a sour-puss.

[Volourn]

"Ah, don't be such a sour-puss."

 

Hey, I did *try* to laugh! :D

 

It just wasn't funny enough to do so.

[Llyranor]

<3 Ironman mode

[Volourn]

Ironmad mode would be great if crashes didn't destroy it. LOLOLOLLIPOP

 

Ironman Mode dependent on computers = badness

[Judge Hades]

It's meaningless with reload.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Then don't reload. I only reload if the game forces me to reload, such as in the BG series when the main character dies. Other than that I don't reload. OH NOES MINSC IS CHUNKS! Oh well, lets continue on.

 

People who reload becuase of one small mistake are weak.

 

In the recent bunch of CRPGs there seems to be no real significant penalty for being stupid and letting your characters die. In KotOR 1 and 2 as long as 1 character is still up the other two can be at 1 hit point for the entire game and it wouldn't matter. In NWN you can just respawn and OH NOES a minor experience hit. Like that is a real penalty for being stupid. I am getting sick and tired by developers thinking that I am an idiot and making idiot proofed games.

Edited May 24, 2006 by Judge Hades

[Llyranor]

But you reload.

 

You should restart the game from scratch if the PC dies. Weakling.

[Darque]

People who reload becuase of one small mistake are weak.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

You left yourself wide open with that one

 

But.... I like ya so I'll let it pass this time (w00t)

[Llyranor]

People who reload becuase of one small mistake are weak.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

You left yourself wide open with that one

 

But.... I like ya so I'll let it pass this time (w00t)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

WHAT ARE YOU REFERRING TO???

[Judge Hades]

Llyr, you are just being contrary for being contrary and not adding anything to the conversation. Ignoring you now.

[Dark_Raven]

People who reload becuase of one small mistake are weak.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

You left yourself wide open with that one

 

But.... I like ya so I'll let it pass this time (w00t)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I won't let it pass.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Werewolf

[Darque]

People who reload becuase of one small mistake are weak.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

You left yourself wide open with that one

 

But.... I like ya so I'll let it pass this time (w00t)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I won't let it pass.

 

Werewolf

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

DarkRavowned!

[StillLife]

I say they create a game where you get one roll for stats, completely random, just like real life.  I also propose that each player may only create one character.  If that character dies, then the game uninstalls itself and the disk melts in your hard drive.  Better yet, how about, if your character dies, a hand pops out of your computer with a big gun and shoots you between your eyes?  That way, folks who win the game get ultimate bragging rights.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Hey, now we're talkin'!

 

I know you meant that in jest, but there's a huge difference between challenging and life-threatening.

 

Doesn't anyone remember older games that were acutally tough to beat, and the feeling of satisfaction you'd have from conquering them in addition to completing the story? When did words like challenging and difficult become a dirty word in video games? Games should beat the hell out of you and bring out emotions like frustration and dismay - it makes the reward for overcoming them all the more enjoyable, as well as establishing an artificial affinity for the game and all it contains.

 

It's no wonder RPGs seem so short these days, when you can pretty much sleep through the combat in the bulk of them since developers have grown overly concerned with desiging games that coddle the player.

[Cantousent]

I don't know. I thought Call of Duty on Veteran level was pretty damned hard. Maybe if you've played a few times it's not, but it's damned hard, reload or not.

[Judge Hades]

I won't let it pass.

Werewolf

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Your point? I died. I reloaded. How does this have anything to do with party member deaths since in Bloodlines you don't have a party? Point. Not. Found.

 

If you are going to be contrary for contrary sake then thanks for playing, now go away.

[Llyranor]

Designers still don't properly understand the concept of difficulty levels. Meh.

[Plano Skywalker]

I do like the KOTOR type system but with caveats....each "outer circle" character has at least one "vulnerability zone" in which said character can die.

 

basically, there is even a cutscene for each outer circle character to die if they go to zero health in the vulnerability zone....they tell you certain things in their dying breath that they would have told you later anyway...etc.

 

some characters are "inner circle" characters that are absolutely essential to the main plot....Kreia, for instance, was an inner circle character. such characters cannot die (although, the devs could do it Morrowind style but I would prefer they did not for a linear game).

 

but there really does not need to be more than 1, 2, or 3 at the most, inner circle party members.