Jump to content

Recommended Posts

You know the old [Diplomacy]/[bluff] and [success]/[Failure] and the like mechanics. Expert mode could disable those.

There is something to note though - without an engaging story and EXTRA EXPRESSIVE characters(you know, body language, the look in their eye, tone of voice, etc), this would not work, because that textual info basically takes over the role of the sensory cues you'd otherwise have.

 

So yea, it's a nice idea, but you need to have something that provides the information that you take out to players in a different way.

 

Otherwise - YAY!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you guessed that Trial of Iron is like Temple of Elemental Evil's Ironman Mode, you guessed right. When you start a Trial of Iron game, you have one save game that persists for the entire campaign... or until you die. And if you die, your save game is deleted. Enjoy!

So autosave after every combat turn, entering new locations and or some interactions? Also Save and Load options will be replaced with 'Save and Quit'?

 

 

"Can I enable multiple challenge modes at once?" Yep, you sure can. They have to be selected at the beginning of the game, but if you want to play with two or all three at the same time, you can certainly can do so. If you're not quite sure you want all of the elements that come along with a given mode, this funding level will also cover implementing the ability to enable and disable the individual sub-features

Just to make sure, those modes will come on top of the more traditional difficulty setting(easy/normal/hard) or their replacement? Edited by Mor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Modes are separate from difficulty. They're challenge modes/flavour modes.

 

You could play "Easy & Expert Mode" and "Hardest with no modes" - for example. Path of the Damned however might be a difficulty setting as it enables all creatures in encounters and scales their level (the only mode that has level scaling).

 

Trial of Iron will probably just save at the normal auto-save points, it's just like any other game except you only have one save slot (instead of potentially unlimited) and if you die in the game it gets deleted. The game may have auto-save settings in the options though. The IE games saved on exiting master areas and on exiting specific child areas in the game (mostly main plot stuff) and storyline save points.

 

You could probably back up your Trial of Iron mode to circumvent the save deletion ... but then what's the point ?

Edited by Sensuki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will spells in this game be as powerful / godlike as spells were in end game BG2?

 

I loved my near invincible time stopping, contingency spamming nuking all mobs mages and sorcerers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of the IE games I played on normal. When it came to other games such as Oblivion and Skyrim I found I had to push them to the difficult level, add mods that eliminated the over done hand holding in Oblivion. I spent hours playing those games and enjoyed them but they do not hold a handle to the IE games. The IE games had story, combat, non-combat, depth, challenge and were just plain fun to play. I still confused about this hardcore vs non-combat issue. The developers are giving us options as to what we want to play so where is the argument?

 

We will be able to choose the way we want to play. So what is the problem?

To this day I still play IE games on normal difficulty too and they are still highly challenging. All new RPGs I need to set to maximum difficulty and they are usually less challenging.

 

One game thats solid hardcore atm is Avernum on the highest difficulty. So much reloading needed to beat the battles.

Edited by Mungri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Along with these modes, we also want to introduce the Godlike races. These folks have been described previously as being similar to the humanoid "planetouched" in D&D: aasimar, tieflings, and genasi. That is a good high-level description of them, but they are viewed differently by various factions, faiths, and cultures in the world of Project Eternity. Godlike were "blessed" before birth by one or more of the meddling deities of this world. Though their appearances vary, they are unmistakeably otherworldly when anyone gets a clear look at them. Sometimes, the reaction they get is overwhelmingly positive. Many times, the reaction is overwhelmingly not. For better or worse, the physical "gifts" that mark them as Godlike always come with supernatural blessings (and curses) of their own.

 

The vulnerabilities that are illustrated in the character portraits and captured in the tension of some of the music that has been in games in the past have been part of the satisfaction of the gaming experience. The team work that balances some characters strengths and others shortcomings is another example of the appeal.

 

The word god should be used with respect. Being culturally central, it evokes a both a sense of bliss and also for some pain. Please consider something along the lines of 'Deitem' or 'Alchemic'. This could be over thinking, but from a practical standpoint the error could alienate potential players like the child of a devote christian of some sort.

 

What is cool about this class is the grounding in the traditional sense of elements. Elements are in a constant source of turmoil. So how can a soul live outside of these cycles?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The word god should be used with respect. Being culturally central, it evokes a both a sense of bliss and also for some pain. Please consider something along the lines of 'Deitem' or 'Alchemic'. This could be over thinking, but from a practical standpoint the error could alienate potential players like the child of a devote christian of some sort.

While this is understandable, to a degree, and it would be most unfortunate for the game to alienate someone who otherwise wanted to play it, it's honestly a bit irrational to associate blatant fiction with some kind of realistic God substitute. The game is in no way A) laying claim to the heavens with false deities, or B) expecting any degree of recognition or worship from the player for these false deities.

 

It's very similar to the people who won't let their kids read Harry Potter, because magic is evil. Magic may be, but imagination is perfectly legitimate, and imagining a pretend world in which pretend magic pretend exists could only be, at worst, pretend evil.

 

Granted, people are free to believe what they will.

  • Like 1

Should we not start with some Ipelagos, or at least some Greater Ipelagos, before tackling a named Arch Ipelago? 6_u

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It's very similar to the people who won't let their kids read Harry Potter, because magic is evil. Magic may be, but imagination is perfectly legitimate, and imagining a pretend world in which pretend magic pretend exists could only be, at worst, pretend evil.

 

Granted, people are free to believe what they will.

 

 

"Catholic Guilt" is weird -- you're (apparently) just as much a sinner for thinking something as doing it ... but then again, I'm not exactly a shining example of being a "pious" person... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The word god should be used with respect. Being culturally central, it evokes a both a sense of bliss and also for some pain. Please consider something along the lines of 'Deitem' or 'Alchemic'. This could be over thinking, but from a practical standpoint the error could alienate potential players like the child of a devote christian of some sort.

While this is understandable, to a degree, and it would be most unfortunate for the game to alienate someone who otherwise wanted to play it, it's honestly a bit irrational to associate blatant fiction with some kind of realistic God substitute. The game is in no way A) laying claim to the heavens with false deities, or B) expecting any degree of recognition or worship from the player for these false deities...

...

 

Granted, people are free to believe what they will.

The integrity of the fantasy is important. Suspending disbelief in any entertainment is part of being effected by it. This prospective is another reason to be more creative with the title because for some God is very real.

 

The other reason I object to the word "godlike" is that it is unspecific. With the fictional examination of the role that race plays it is important to recognize that anyone who uses race as a way to identify, is doing it to latch on to a personal sence of controle. So go all the way with it. "Godlike" offers space for that character to be like other things that divine creation designs in. Where as generalization terms protect individuals from inconvenient details that inspire things like emotional involvement. As a gamer I want to control. As a trusting disbeliever, I want to see how what the character actually is, fits into a mould and transcends it through context. It's an adventure.

I hope this is being received as helpful rather than abrasive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Catholic Guilt" is weird -- you're (apparently) just as much a sinner for thinking something as doing it ... but then again, I'm not exactly a shining example of being a "pious" person...
 
Even with that in mind, it's not the same thing. Imagining the act of adultery with someone is seen as just as bad as the actual act itself, in what you're describing. But, how can the act of being a fictional Wizard with telekinesis be just as bad as non-existent actual telekinetic wizardry? The magic being talked about in Biblical text is generally the "I'm affiliated with Satan and/or at the very least being blasphemous by claiming to have powers beyond a mortal, and therefore challenging the one true God, himself."
 

The other reason I object to the word "godlike" is that it is unspecific. With the fictional examination of the role that race plays it is important to recognize that anyone who uses race as a way to identify, is doing it to latch on to a personal sence of controle. So go all the way with it. "Godlike" offers space for that character to be like other things that divine creation designs in. Where as generalization terms protect individuals from inconvenient details that inspire things like emotional involvement. As a gamer I want to control. As a trusting disbeliever, I want to see how what the character actually is, fits into a mould and transcends it through context. It's an adventure.
I hope this is being received as helpful rather than abrasive.
 
I don't think it's abrasive at all. And I understand what you're getting at, methinks. But, I'm just not sure the term is being used quite in the way you're getting at. You're looking it from the context of our real-life society, etc., when really, it's just a piece of lore within the game world. The game world has gods, in its reality, and these "godlike" are either actually influenced/affected in some manner, directly, by a god of the game's reality, or at the very least are seen to be, by the people of the world. Thus, they are referred to as "godlike," much like people who live in/near the mountains might be called "mountainfolk." People associate things with traits, and in a world of much more tangible gods, gods would be much more of an associative thing.
 
Heck, even in reality, we name things after gods. "This military endeavor involves striking ferociously and swiftly from high in the air. Codename: Thor." The only difference is that we know them as mythological, whereas, in the P:E world, they are not.
 
Also, just for what it's worth, the godlike are a sub-race, and not an actual race. Almost like... albino humans. Many people are albino, but there is not a race of albino people. They're just people, from various different races/ethnicities, who happen to possess a common trait/set of traits. Again, the only difference being that, in the game, the godlike set of traits is "divine" in nature, rather than purely biological/physiological in nature.
 
It's not that it's impossible or pointless to analyze how this type of thing in a game affects us and our real-life cultures and beliefs (as real-life players of that game). There's nothing at all wrong with that. It's just that I don't think it's directly clashing with any of it. As a work of fiction, it isn't designed to directly challenge reality. The lore of the game exists completely within its own reality bubble, absolutely separate from our own. We just peek into it, with the knowledge that it is not reality. If it has us thinking about aspects of reality, then more power to it.
 
Basically, if we avoided any game design decisions that were along the lines of why you're suggesting "godlike" might be problematic, we pretty much wouldn't ever make any video games, ever. Or books... or most any works of fiction, for that matter.

Should we not start with some Ipelagos, or at least some Greater Ipelagos, before tackling a named Arch Ipelago? 6_u

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The other reason I object to the word "godlike" is that it is unspecific. With the fictional examination of the role that race plays it is important to recognize that anyone who uses race as a way to identify, is doing it to latch on to a personal sence of controle. So go all the way with it. "Godlike" offers space for that character to be like other things that divine creation designs in. Where as generalization terms protect individuals from inconvenient details that inspire things like emotional involvement. As a gamer I want to control. As a trusting disbeliever, I want to see how what the character actually is, fits into a mould and transcends it through context. It's an adventure.

I hope this is being received as helpful rather than abrasive.

I don't think it's abrasive at all. And I understand what you're getting at, methinks. But, I'm just not sure the term is being used quite in the way you're getting at. You're looking it from the context of our real-life society, etc., when really, it's just a piece of lore within the game world. The game world has gods, in its reality, and these "godlike" are either actually influenced/affected in some manner, directly, by a god of the game's reality, or at the very least are seen to be, by the people of the world. Thus, they are referred to as "godlike," much like people who live in/near the mountains might be called "mountainfolk." People associate things with traits, and in a world of much more tangible gods, gods would be much more of an associative thing.

 

Heck, even in reality, we name things after gods. "This military endeavor involves striking ferociously and swiftly from high in the air. Codename: Thor." The only difference is that we know them as mythological, whereas, in the P:E world, they are not.

 

Also, just for what it's worth, the godlike are a sub-race, and not an actual race. Almost like... albino humans. Many people are albino, but there is not a race of albino people. They're just people, from various different races/ethnicities, who happen to possess a common trait/set of traits. Again, the only difference being that, in the game, the godlike set of traits is "divine" in nature, rather than purely biological/physiological in nature.

 

It's not that it's impossible or pointless to analyze how this type of thing in a game affects us and our real-life cultures and beliefs (as real-life players of that game). There's nothing at all wrong with that. It's just that I don't think it's directly clashing with any of it. As a work of fiction, it isn't designed to directly challenge reality. The lore of the game exists completely within its own reality bubble, absolutely separate from our own. We just peek into it, with the knowledge that it is not reality. If it has us thinking about aspects of reality, then more power to it.

 

Basically, if we avoided any game design decisions that were along the lines of why you're suggesting "godlike" might be problematic, we pretty much wouldn't ever make any video games, ever. Or books... or most any works of fiction, for that matter.

There is no way your going to change the sub-class title this far into the process is there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Erm... Well, I mean, I can't change it. I'm just a forum-goer. But, if I had to guess? No, Obsidian probably isn't going to change the "godlike" name to something else at this stage in development. 8\


Should we not start with some Ipelagos, or at least some Greater Ipelagos, before tackling a named Arch Ipelago? 6_u

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, 'godlike' is just a bit bland when next to Orlan or Aumaua.  It doesn't seem to come from the cultures of PE (though, granted, they're not a race but a subset of all races).
I'd like it if different cultures referred to the godlike with different nicknames like "The Blessed" or "The Cursed Ones" (depending on perspective) or simply "Others" as if mentioning their true name would be blasphemous (and then have a 'true name' in the local language e.g. Glanfathan or whatever the language is called).

 

 

(As for changing it at this stage - if they've not printed the manuals or done the voice-acting, then wouldn't it just be a 'find and replace' ?

 

Yours Technically Obliviously,

SW)

Edited by Silent Winter
  • Like 2

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

*Casts Nature's Terror* :aiee: , *Casts Firebug* :fdevil: , *Casts Rot-Skulls* :skull: , *Casts Garden of Life* :luck: *Spirit-shifts to cat form* :cat:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, 'godlike' is just a bit bland when next to Orlan or Aumaua.  It doesn't seem to come from the cultures of PE (though, granted, they're not a race but a subset of all races).

I'd like it if different cultures referred to the godlike with different nicknames like "The Blessed" or "The Cursed Ones" (depending on perspective) or simply "Others" as if mentioning their true name would be blasphemous (and then have a 'true name' in the local language e.g. Glanfathan or whatever the language is called).

 

I would bet money that such a thing will occur. I think "godlike" is just the "Common Tongue," generic label for them. Kind of like "outsider" for someone just blatantly not from around there. The most basic thing you'd refer to them as would be "outsider," but then you might have any number of specific titles/labels for them, depending on their particular traits, place of origin, culture, your culture, etc.

 

"Godlike" just serves to denote their distinction from the rest of the populous who possess no obvious god-associated traits whatsoever. Then, even amongst a single culture, there'll probably be various specific names for even various godlike with their different traits/associations.

 

It's sort of like the class "Fighter." I don't think everyone's going to run around saying "you there! Fighter! I need you to do some fighting, Fighter!". It's a word that can be used, but they'll probably use more specific words, depending on the specifics of that particular Fighter and their affiliation with him/culture: They might call him soldier, or warrior, or something specific to their own language, etc.

 

Don't get me wrong... I see how "godlike" seems a bit unspecific/real-life Englishy in the midst of so many other very specific words that are still employed in the game's common glossary. But, I'm going to give it the benefit of the doubt, until I have reason to do otherwise. It seems to serve its classification purpose just fine, and, like I said, I'm betting we'll see a lot more specific terms and titles (and cultural lore) surrounding the godlike themselves.


Should we not start with some Ipelagos, or at least some Greater Ipelagos, before tackling a named Arch Ipelago? 6_u

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"Catholic Guilt" is weird -- you're (apparently) just as much a sinner for thinking something as doing it ... but then again, I'm not exactly a shining example of being a "pious" person...
 
Even with that in mind, it's not the same thing. Imagining the act of adultery with someone is seen as just as bad as the actual act itself, in what you're describing. But, how can the act of being a fictional Wizard with telekinesis be just as bad as non-existent actual telekinetic wizardry? The magic being talked about in Biblical text is generally the "I'm affiliated with Satan and/or at the very least being blasphemous by claiming to have powers beyond a mortal, and therefore challenging the one true God, himself."

 

You know that, I know that ... those guys over there think the Earth was literally created in 6 days, and is literally 6,000 years old (or thereabouts) ... and whatever else the book says that's obviously just a narrative device used to explain things that couldn't be explained any other way at the time.

 

Don't get me wrong -- the teachings and the message are important ... but you still have to recognize that a lot of things are explained as best as they could with what was known at the time... 

 

 

It's like the bit where the townsfolk dressed up the girl as a witch in Quest for the Holy Grail --> "if she weighs as much as a duck ... then she's made of wood ... and she'll float on water ... so SHE'S A WITCH!"

Edited by neo6874

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You know that, I know that ... those guys over there think the Earth was literally created in 6 days, and is literally 6,000 years old (or thereabouts) ... and whatever else the book says that's obviously just a narrative device used to explain things that couldn't be explained any other way at the time.

 

Don't get me wrong -- the teachings and the message are important ... 

 

 Yes, if you catch your neighbor mowing his lawn on a Saturday, it is very important to get everyone to throw rocks at him until he's dead. How else can we maintain a civil society?

 

 Whoops, sorry. /tangent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will the mobs have better AI for tactics in harder difficulties? In one of my favourite games, all that was different in harder modes was the numbers got bigger. If it took 2-3 arrows to kill an orc on the first play-through, it would still take 2-3 arrows to kill that orc on the hardest difficulty, thus the experience was the same.


"I like cooking my family and my pets"

Use commas, don't be a psycho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will the mobs have better AI for tactics in harder difficulties? In one of my favourite games, all that was different in harder modes was the numbers got bigger. If it took 2-3 arrows to kill an orc on the first play-through, it would still take 2-3 arrows to kill that orc on the hardest difficulty, thus the experience was the same.

Same AI, but bigger/tougher mobs

 

http://eternity.gamepedia.com/Mode

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, 'godlike' is just a bit bland when next to Orlan or Aumaua.  It doesn't seem to come from the cultures of PE (though, granted, they're not a race but a subset of all races).

I'd like it if different cultures referred to the godlike with different nicknames like "The Blessed" or "The Cursed Ones" (depending on perspective) or simply "Others" as if mentioning their true name would be blasphemous (and then have a 'true name' in the local language e.g. Glanfathan or whatever the language is called).

 

I totaly second this ... godlike as a name for a race doesn´t sound right to me neither

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I totaly second this ... godlike as a name for a race doesn´t sound right to me neither

Again... it's actually a sub-race, to be fair. It's REALLY more like a trait. Like... being albino. You could call a collection of people who are all albino "Albino people," but they're not really a race of people. They're not a collective culture who share family lineages and geographical habitat, etc.

 

You can have a godlike Orlan, or a godlike Aumaua. They're not brothers. They're pretty drastically different species at that point.

 

I'm not telling you to like the word. Rather, I am encouraging you to evaluate it for what it is, rather than for something it's not. There's not like "The nation of godlike!", and "Man, I really love the architecture of the majestic Godlike people!". Just, for what that's worth.

  • Like 1

Should we not start with some Ipelagos, or at least some Greater Ipelagos, before tackling a named Arch Ipelago? 6_u

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we get the opposite?

 

For example, Mass Effect 3 had "Story Mode," which allowed players to skip through the monotony of random fighting and "strategic play," in order to appreciate the story, world, and characters without having to tredge through the parts they wouldn't enjoy.

 

I see a lot of ideas for making the game harder, and more omghardcore, but is this a tactical combat simulator, or is this a game with a story? It seems like the emphasis is on the wrong part of the game.

 

Completely agree. It's nice that they care and develop all these different aspects, but some of us want more story and hope that all this does not come at the expense of the story development :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm curious to know is the game going to be a beast to balance with all the additional modes? Typically in RPG's the one thing I despise is the redundancy of crappy junk drops, and a narrow loot table. With the addition of several difficulty scales I hope the loot drops are unique enough to warrant extended play throughs. I tried Heart of Fury Mode back in the day, but it was too hard, but I liked that it was available at least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...