disappointed (torment fan perspective)

[Loranc]

Hurr durr barbarians! Oh I'm so happy now. All stretch goals and talk has only been boring talks about ye standard worn out old d&d **** except some brief talk about souls, which would be interesting if it was explained some more and how it will effect the game. Now I didn't expect it to be as unique as torment but "teasing" us with "classic dungeon exploration" makes me want to cry. Let alone that every stretch goal seems uninspired as it seems content to just give more **** that doesn't mean anything.

 

Now, I'm not saying the game will be **** or anything. It's impossible to tell. But the hinted at focus from all the information that has come out does not paint a pretty picture. All I really want is just a good RPG with a very good story / world. Not a "build a class and whack an ass" kind of game.

 

In the end though, the game could still become good. Just because it has stereotypical rpg stuff doesn't mean it can't have an interesting world / content, right? I just wish they'd communicate that somehow instead of talking about more classes, playerhomes, hirelingvilles and boring grind dungeons. I'd just love a "all money will be used to make a better core game" or something.

 

How do you guys feel about this?

 

“A better approach would be to ignore the D&D mechanics and respect what Planescape was trying to do and what the game did,” said Avellone to GI. “And see if you can do what Fallout did when it became the spiritual successor to Wasteland.” He’d still keep the plane travel concept and metaphysical concepts, but says the D&D elements actually “got in the way of the experience.” He continues, “That was stuff that D&D didn’t allow for. It was too restraining in some respects. If we did do a spiritual successor, then I don’t know if we’d use the Planescape licence or attach the mechanics, perhaps something that has a different feel to Torment.”

 

If you're wondering, there's been talk of kickstarting planescape torment 2. That was a statement Avellone gave months back. I wonder what that game would be like and how fast it would be kick started to the top. He's currently helping with Wasteland 2 but once that's over with who know. Seeing as everyone is complaining about wanting another unique game like PST just thought i'd put this out there.

Edited October 10, 2012 by Loranc

[BasaltineBadger]

@Loranc

@cyberarmy

The point is Obsidian just took base classes and implemented them in Eternity, while there is no reason for them to be there. Healing mage doesn't have to be a cleric, we don't need both cleric and druid, archer don't need to have connection with nature and monks are there for no good reason besides being a base class in 3rd edition of dnd. Not inventing some strange new classes doesn't equal copying everything from DnD. I wouldn't complain if they just took basic archetypes everyone use like fighter, mage, thief etc, but the class list is almost identical.

[ogrezilla]

I am not a D&D fan. I am thrilled this game is being designed without the restrictions of D&D. That said, I like the classes. They are classic fantasy classes.

[BasaltineBadger]

I am not a D&D fan. I am thrilled this game is being designed without the restrictions of D&D. That said, I like the classes. They are classic fantasy classes.

 

Monks are not.

[ogrezilla]

I am not a D&D fan. I am thrilled this game is being designed without the restrictions of D&D. That said, I like the classes. They are classic fantasy classes.

 

Monks are not.

they are found in plenty of things outside of D&D.

[limaxophobiacq]

While it's true that I am quite dissapointed that the ambitions for the P:E setting seem to be little more than making a slightly altered Faerûn, obsidian has managed to wrest interesting and 'fantastical' stories out of the actual Faerûn, so they should be able to do the same again with this world.

 

I am also holding out hope that while the setting seems very safe and bog-standard rpg-fantasy from everything we've heard*, this is mostly done to present a familiar basic structure around which they can build new ideas without scaring traditionally-minded people off.

 

*And still some people went berserk over something as tame and trivial as introducing guns! Which I guess proves that catering to my kind and making something completely non-D&D inspired might not have been viable, sad as that makes me.

Edited October 10, 2012 by limaxophobiacq

[Rasmudd]

I am also holding out hope that while the setting seems very safe and bog-standard rpg-fantasy from everything we've heard*, this is mostly done to present a familiar basic structure around which they can build new ideas without scaring traditionally-minded people off.

 

This is what they have hinted at earlier but not really shown yet concretely how they will do, which is the worrying part. But the lore update is soon upon us, so we'll have to see then .

[Cantousent]

The fact is, Obsidian has been hounded into including classes that were original absent in the first place. Paladins and bards? If monks hadn't been included, the hue and cry from monkophiles would have been deafening. Folks want these classes in there and, as Loranc says, what difference does it make what they call them. The idea of hacking on someone with a sword could be called all sorts of things. Why contrive some neat little way to say 'fighter' or 'warrior?' Now, the Chanter class is different. They had to differentiate from the ol' 'bard' class because these Chanter types don't go around singing or playing instruments. They're more epic story tellers and the way their magic works is different also. ...But I'm actually more pleased. The setting isn't so remote and strange to scare off folks, like lima says, and yet, because it's a personal story, it could very well be every bit as twisted and knotty as PS:T. All sort of movies, books, and tv shows are set in our plain ol' mundane real world, and some of those are down-right exotic and edgy. Some of them are even over the edgy. The setting doesn't matter nearly so much as what the devs do with it, and never has.

[Monte Carlo]

This thread has descended into, and forgive my bluntness, a load of bollocks. At least the stuff about classes has.

 

The developers have made it clear that they are talking about classes-as-archetypes. Look at the Ciphers and Chanters before mewling about "it's like WoW classes." FFS.

 

Within these classes I am sure you will be able to do a great deal that bends the classic take on these classes. Until you learn a bit more about that, why not talk about stuff that has some sort of basis in reality? Rather than project your own distorted fanservice POV on it?

[melkathi]

I am not a D&D fan. I am thrilled this game is being designed without the restrictions of D&D. That said, I like the classes. They are classic fantasy classes.

 

Monks are not.

they are found in plenty of things outside of D&D.

 

They are found in plenty of things outside of D&D. They are since 3rd edition also found in D&D. That does not make them classic fantasy though. In western terms classic fantasy would be high fantasy, based on medival Europe, the way Middle Earth is. Martial artists from fortress monasteries are not part of that. If taking "classic fantasy" from the western point of view, then monks are part of it, but as scholars in heavy robes, crouched over ancient manuscripts and squinting under bad candle light.

[ogrezilla]

Cool. I want to falcon punch an elf in the face and monks might let me do that. That's enough for me to like them.

[BasaltineBadger]

This thread has descended into, and forgive my bluntness, a load of bollocks. At least the stuff about classes has.

 

The developers have made it clear that they are talking about classes-as-archetypes. Look at the Ciphers and Chanters before mewling about "it's like WoW classes." FFS.

 

Within these classes I am sure you will be able to do a great deal that bends the classic take on these classes. Until you learn a bit more about that, why not talk about stuff that has some sort of basis in reality? Rather than project your own distorted fanservice POV on it?

 

You seem to completely misunderstand my posts. I never implied that they'll play like wow or that there will be no flexibility. I just stated that they are lifted from DnD. Which by the way is completely unnecessary because the dnd class system (especially in 3rd edition) is deeply flawed. I also stated that it would be better if that saying that hey had to do this because it's the only choice is false as many RPGs (including 4th edition of Dnd) successfully implemented a different system. Rambling about projecting doesn't automatically refute my post and is also unnecessary.

 

EDIT: Cyphers are psions and chanters are the only new class. Meanwhile the rest are the same as in another very flawed system which worries me.

Edited October 10, 2012 by BasaltineBadger

[Bill Gates' Son]

This thread has descended into, and forgive my bluntness, a load of bollocks. At least the stuff about classes has.

 

The developers have made it clear that they are talking about classes-as-archetypes. Look at the Ciphers and Chanters before mewling about "it's like WoW classes." FFS.

 

Both classes were in DnD however (with different names)....

[Rasmudd]

This thread has descended into, and forgive my bluntness, a load of bollocks. At least the stuff about classes has.

 

OP here and I agree. I just want to clarify that this wasn't the point of my thread but rather how the updates didn't really go into the lore that much or that the goals didn't reflect it much either and I felt a need to voice my opinion, you'd be suprised at the people who sometimes are angry and never says anything because they've grown out of their rage pants and thus gives no feedback.

 

With the Ziets goal + lore coming I am happy. Unless the lore part is really sucky that is, but I doubt it .

[limaxophobiacq]

The setting doesn't matter nearly so much as what the devs do with it, and never has.

 

If setting was so irrelevant to the enjoyment of a creative work of fantasy or sci-fi, DnD would never have had another setting beside Greyhawk, and no one would know who Lovecraft was if his work had to live on his execution and not on the draw of his mythos. But DnD had many settings, including Planescape, Spelljammer, and Ravenloft, which provided for characters and stories that never could have worked in Greyhawk/Fearûn.

 

Do you honestly think it wouldn't matter if P:E threw away the cliches western fantasy altogether and set its story in a world inspired by the Dreamtime of aboriginal myth*? Or based itself on Exalted instead of DnD and had us play a game of politics among the soul-hierarchies and world-bodies of the titans who created all that is? 'Exploring' new and wondrous worlds is why I think I'm into fantasy and sci-fi in the first place, and just rehashing the same old stuff pretty much kills that.

 

*Edit: I'm not saying that this would be desirable, just that it would be different.

Edited October 10, 2012 by limaxophobiacq

[Tamerlane]

This thread has descended into, and forgive my bluntness, a load of bollocks. At least the stuff about classes has.

 

The developers have made it clear that they are talking about classes-as-archetypes. Look at the Ciphers and Chanters before mewling about "it's like WoW classes." FFS.

 

Within these classes I am sure you will be able to do a great deal that bends the classic take on these classes. Until you learn a bit more about that, why not talk about stuff that has some sort of basis in reality? Rather than project your own distorted fanservice POV on it?

You're not bad.

 

For a god damn Codexian.

[Elerond]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_alternate_Dungeons_%26_Dragons_classes

 

I don't think that one can really invent any useful classes to fantasy rpg, which don't have similar or nearly similar class in D&D.

 

And if you add rolemaster in that equation, then you really must be very creative to invent something new http://www.rattousai.com/rolemaster/ccprof.html

 

So in my opinion the easiest and best route is to take those common class archetypes that fit in your world. And would like to point out that is just what obsidian has done with PE.

[Cantousent]

The setting doesn't matter nearly so much as what the devs do with it, and never has.

 

If setting was so irrelevant to the enjoyment of a creative work of fantasy or sci-fi, DnD would never have had another setting beside Greyhawk, and no one would know who Lovecraft was if his work had to live on his execution and not on the draw of his mythos. But DnD had many settings, including Planescape, Spelljammer, and Ravenloft, which provided for characters and stories that never could have worked in Greyhawk/Fearûn.

 

Do you honestly think it wouldn't matter if P:E threw away the cliches western fantasy altogether and set its story in a world inspired by the Dreamtime of aboriginal myth? Or based itself on Exalted instead of DnD and had us play a game of politics among the soul-hierarchies and world-bodies of the titans who created all that is? 'Exploring' new and wondrous worlds is why I think I'm into fantasy and sci-fi in the first place, and just rehashing the same old stuff pretty much kills that.

So, you took *all that* out of one sentence? Even if I hadn't said 'as much as,' which remains true no matter what, it would still be a stretch. The fact is, the devs choose the setting they think will best serve their creative needs. A good designer can find something good in any setting, but it does not follow that the setting is entirely meaningless and that's not, in fact, at all what I said. To restate and hopefully clarify: The setting doesn't matter nearly so much as what the devs do with it, and never has. I'm hoping that's clear enough that folks don't put words in my mouth the like the setting is irrelevant to the enjoyment of a creative work of fantasy or sci-fi. However, the fact is, the design team creates (or licenses) the setting and then uses it to create the story. For my part, I wouldn't care if the devs went away from western fantasy traditions and itself in the Dreamtime setting (although I'm not familiar with it) as long as they crafted something good. I'm sure some fans would complain and some might not buy the game. That's fair enough from a marketing perspective, but it's irrelevant from a quality perspective. The design team decided on a western fantasy setting as the best place to set the story.

 

To recap, I never said that the setting is irrelevant, just not as important, by a long shot, as what the devs do with it. I still believe that. I never said setting doesn't matter, although I think a good design team can make something good in any setting. However, I was defending the use of the western fantasy setting because I think it's familiar to most of the fans of the IE games and saying that, although not as exotic as the PS:T setting, still quite open to the same exotic sort of feel.

[BasaltineBadger]

But we currently know almost nothing about the setting. I mean, Fallout would just look like generic post-apo setting if we had the same amount of info about Fallout we have on P:E.

[Stun]

I am not a D&D fan. I am thrilled this game is being designed without the restrictions of D&D. That said, I like the classes. They are classic fantasy classes.

 

Monks are not.

they are found in plenty of things outside of D&D.

 

They are found in plenty of things outside of D&D. They are since 3rd edition also found in D&D.

Hell, Monks have been in D&D since 1st edition.... back when Quivering Palm didn't have a saving throw

Edited October 10, 2012 by Stun

[Merin]

Monks have been in D&D since 1st edition.... back when Quivering Palm didn't have a saving throw

 

Monks and Psionics and Bards are all in the 1st AD&D Appendix A, I believe.

[mieu]

Hurr durr barbarians! Oh I'm so happy now. All stretch goals and talk has only been boring talks about ye standard worn out old d&d **** except some brief talk about souls, which would be interesting if it was explained some more and how it will effect the game. Now I didn't expect it to be as unique as torment but "teasing" us with "classic dungeon exploration" makes me want to cry. Let alone that every stretch goal seems uninspired as it seems content to just give more **** that doesn't mean anything.

 

Now, I'm not saying the game will be **** or anything. It's impossible to tell. But the hinted at focus from all the information that has come out does not paint a pretty picture. All I really want is just a good RPG with a very good story / world. Not a "build a class and whack an ass" kind of game.

 

In the end though, the game could still become good. Just because it has stereotypical rpg stuff doesn't mean it can't have an interesting world / content, right? I just wish they'd communicate that somehow instead of talking about more classes, playerhomes, hirelingvilles and boring grind dungeons. I'd just love a "all money will be used to make a better core game" or something.

 

How do you guys feel about this?

 

If you dont like the idea or content of the game then clear off coz 55k others do! so stop trolling.

[Madzookeeper]

I kinda agree with OP. Leave the stupid accusations of trolling and other such childishness, because this guy really has a valid point here. Their updates about game have been little too technical for me since I really don't care much for actual mechanics as long as story and characters are good and interesting. Extra classes, races, factions, areas, etc. are of course good things and more is usually better at least to some extends, but I'm still left with a question: More of what? We know nearly nothing about the world, but we are promised more of it already. Doesn't make much sense to me and I can't help but feel indifferent.

 

I have already pledged as much as I can and probably more than I should, but I still would like to hear deeper information on the world they are creating before Kickstarter ends cause I think there are more people, who still have money to pledge, wondering these same things.

 

something i can tell you is this: feargus specifically said that more money = more store. it's really that simple. and at the point they are at with this, they are building the world which means they have to get the mechanics sorted out, and the lore for why those mechanics are the way they are. they are literally at the very beginning of this game. they have a story concept, but can't really start fleshing it out yet because they don't have a world to flesh it out in yet. this isn't something they've been working on for months already because if they couldn't get the funding that would have been completely wasted time/effort on their end that could have been going into a new project. you don't focus on the story at the very beginning of pre-production, you focus on getting everything that is going to support the story sorted out.

 

make sense?

[Gatt9]

This thread has descended into, and forgive my bluntness, a load of bollocks. At least the stuff about classes has.

 

The developers have made it clear that they are talking about classes-as-archetypes. Look at the Ciphers and Chanters before mewling about "it's like WoW classes." FFS.

 

Within these classes I am sure you will be able to do a great deal that bends the classic take on these classes. Until you learn a bit more about that, why not talk about stuff that has some sort of basis in reality? Rather than project your own distorted fanservice POV on it?

 

You seem to completely misunderstand my posts. I never implied that they'll play like wow or that there will be no flexibility. I just stated that they are lifted from DnD. Which by the way is completely unnecessary because the dnd class system (especially in 3rd edition) is deeply flawed. I also stated that it would be better if that saying that hey had to do this because it's the only choice is false as many RPGs (including 4th edition of Dnd) successfully implemented a different system. Rambling about projecting doesn't automatically refute my post and is also unnecessary.

 

EDIT: Cyphers are psions and chanters are the only new class. Meanwhile the rest are the same as in another very flawed system which worries me.

 

I'm going to have to go ahead and call this trolling at this point.

 

1. You will not find any classes that haven't been implemented in D&D systems. D&D is so extensive at this point that anything you can think of has had some iteration in D&D through the years. The number of spells and magic items alone are so huge that WOTC released around a dozen books trying to catalogue them all with 2nd edition. Never mind the various classes, kits, prestige classes, etc that've been created in supplements and issues of Dragon.

 

2. 3rd edition D&D is widely regarded as a huge turning point for the property, having evolved the AD&D system to account for new levels of customization.

 

3. 4th edition didn't succeed at anything. Even it's own players will readily admit that it's character/class implementation is deeply flawed, and you can find these admissions on WOTC's and EnWorld's boards quite readily.

 

So basically you threw up a strawman, because it's impossible to find any class that D&D hasn't covered (Especially in the Fantasy area), and then you tried to touch off another edition war by claiming "3rd edition sucks, 4th edition rules". You even contradict yourself by calling Ciphers(Psionics) and Chanters(Bards) new, when all that's demonstrably different right now is the letters in the name.

[kabaliero]

...a Dragon Age 2 this will not be.

 

i liked the redhead tank from DA2, but she didn't like my char

 

and now PE isn't goin' to be a DA2!

 

take that, DA2!

in your face!