I actually don't want to see the 2.6m goal's content

[KennethTopp]

I would not mind having at least two PCs and then have Obsidan created companions for the rest.

[Merin]

I could really do without the 2.0, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5 goals... and I could do without elves and rogues as well. But, you know, I can accept that the entire game isn't designed precisely towards my own personal interests, tastes and idiosyncrasies.

an rpg without rogues...?

 

>confirmed as a button mashing DudeBro.

 

Today I've been subjected to quite a bit of people who don't know me at all making wild assumptions about what I know, like, etc.

 

And it's growing quite tiresome.

 

I dislike rogues for several reasons:

 

1 - I don't like stealing. Even pretend stealing. Even inside of a fantasy game. Don't enjoy it. Don't play GTA style games because of it. I don't like being the bad guy, and rogue (or, it's original name from earlier D&D, Thief) just isn't the kind of person I want to pretend to be.

2 - I don't like stealth in games. With the rare exceptions of Alpha Protocol and Arkham Asylum, stealth usually equals slow moving boredom to me. As I already find travel my characters across maps in real time tedious, slowing their movement even more due to stealth mechanics in most games bore the heck out of me.

3 - Back-stabbing, assassins, "anti-heroes".... everything the rogue represents (save, perhaps, the swashbuckler and the bard... which I'd argue share similarities with a thief but aren't the same thing) is anathema to me.

 

Yes, I like playing the good guy, helping people, saving the day. Favorite class is Paladin.

 

It has nothing to do with "button mashing" - I dislike rogues before there were buttons to mash, really (does the Pong controller count?)

[Amentep]

I would not mind having at least two PCs and then have Obsidan created companions for the rest.

 

I created a second PC via the import method in a BG game with the (out of game) context that the PC had gotten married prior to leaving Candlekeep and both husband and wife tried to escape with Gorion.

[KennethTopp]

I would not mind having at least two PCs and then have Obsidan created companions for the rest.

 

I created a second PC via the import method in a BG game with the (out of game) context that the PC had gotten married prior to leaving Candlekeep and both husband and wife tried to escape with Gorion.

yeah that makes it fun. I would make one about brothers or something I dunno. just figured it could be a fun option to have.

[Gyor]

I'll probably do a mixture of the two, plot driven NPCs and PCish NPCs. After all no one says you can't make you party a mix of the two and experiment.

[AlphaShard]

One of the reasons we wanted to add the Adventurer's Hall was to allow people to experience all of the various class mechanics if they want to without requiring a companion per class. We put a lot of time into developing our companions and we would rather not link their number directly to the number of classes.

 

Quality over Quantity!

 

This, "an option exists so I have no choice but to use it, despite alternatives within the game that give me exactly what I want" mentality boggles me endlessly.

The flesh is weak?

 

More like weak Mind if they can't simply ignore an optional feature.

Edited October 8, 2012 by AlphaShard

[AlphaShard]

Sorry double post

Edited October 8, 2012 by AlphaShard

[NerdBoner]

Favorite class is Paladin.

[Ausir]

Favorite class is Paladin.

 

I guess killing is not as wrong as stealing, then?

[LadyCrimson]

I dislike rogues for several reasons:

 

1 - I don't like stealing. Even pretend stealing. Even inside of a fantasy game. Don't enjoy it. Don't play GTA style games because of it. I don't like being the bad guy, and rogue (or, it's original name from earlier D&D, Thief) just isn't the kind of person I want to pretend to be.

2 - I don't like stealth in games. With the rare exceptions of Alpha Protocol and Arkham Asylum, stealth usually equals slow moving boredom to me. As I already find travel my characters across maps in real time tedious, slowing their movement even more due to stealth mechanics in most games bore the heck out of me.

3 - Back-stabbing, assassins, "anti-heroes".... everything the rogue represents (save, perhaps, the swashbuckler and the bard... which I'd argue share similarities with a thief but aren't the same thing) is anathema to me.

I've never been into the rogue/thief class much either. Usually the only reason I have one is because the game is designed with 100's of evil traps that make it extra difficult to not drag a thief along.

Don't care about the stealing aspect much, but not into the backstabbing/stealth type combat in many rpg's. It just doesn't suit my more straightforward playstyle most of the time. Sometimes I like it in more the full 3d games tho, where creeping along using terrain, cover, ducking/hiding, etc. play a much more dynamic role.

[Merin]

And the ignore list grows....

 

(not the people I'm responding to down here)

 

Favorite class is Paladin.

 

I guess killing is not as wrong as stealing, then?

 

Apples. Oranges.

On two levels.

 

I'm not going to get into the "which criminal act is worst" discussion as it's a non-sequitor.

 

The real apples / oranges I will briefly address is -

 

my point was "I don't play this, but I'm not saying it shouldn't be in the game for people who do like doing this" which has nothing to do with "playing this way is WRONG, and you should feel bad" which I didn't say.

 

When trolled as being a "button mashing dudebro" I responded as to why I don't like rogues. I was trolled, I shouldn't have responded, it was wrong of me, and I learned my lesson.

 

In any case - I'm not telling you that you are bad for liking rogues, if that is why you are reacting. Please return the favor and not judge me for liking to play Paladins, cool? Different strokes, different tastes, yada yada. Cool?

 

I've never been into the rogue/thief class much either. Usually the only reason I have one is because the game is designed with 100's of evil traps that make it extra difficult to not drag a thief along.

Don't care about the stealing aspect much, but not into the backstabbing/stealth type combat in many rpg's. It just doesn't suit my more straightforward playstyle most of the time. Sometimes I like it in more the full 3d games tho, where creeping along using terrain, cover, ducking/hiding, etc. play a much more dynamic role.

 

The stealing mechanics in most cRPGs are boring anyway. But I have said in other threads about this that I just ignore traps in most cRPGs. You can usually run through them and heal later (who cares if you got hurt and healed - I pretend it never happened) or spot them and go around them. It's a trope of fantasy games I never used as a DM, never cared about as a player, and do my best to just ignore in cRPGs (traps.)

 

Yeah, I've played one rogue once. Dragon Age: Origins. And loved it - for story/RP reasons. Combat wise, she was basically a light-armored dual-wielding fighter who could disarm traps and pick locks. I never bothered with positioning for backstabs (in real time games I'm just not a fan of flanking and such, unless it's a Total War game and then I'm all about calvary flanks!)

[Jasede]

is OP trolling or what?

It's pretty obvious they are making a narrative-focused game. The Hall is just for the players who like making their party from scratch. The main-game and experience will be playing with 1 PC and the NPCs that you meet throughout the story.

 

The existence of the Hall will change nothing. It'll only add more options to people that want them. There's literally nothing wrong with this.

Edited October 8, 2012 by Jasede

[Osvir]

is OP trolling or what?

It's pretty obvious they are making a narrative-focused game. The Hall is just for the players who like making their party from scratch. The main-game and experience will be playing with 1 PC and the NPCs that you meet throughout the story.

 

The existence of the Hall will change nothing. It'll only add more options to people that want them. There's literally nothing wrong with this.

 

Kind of like how Baldur's Gate works. You start the game with 1 character, but in Multiplayer you can start a game creating your entire party yourself (This is what the Adventuring Hall would be, from what I understand).

[Metabot]

Rogues are usually my class of choice. They aren't as boring as warriors or paladins and they're not as ridiculous as mages and sorcerers. The cipher might become my next favorite class.

[ogrezilla]

is OP trolling or what?

It's pretty obvious they are making a narrative-focused game. The Hall is just for the players who like making their party from scratch. The main-game and experience will be playing with 1 PC and the NPCs that you meet throughout the story.

 

The existence of the Hall will change nothing. It'll only add more options to people that want them. There's literally nothing wrong with this.

 

Kind of like how Baldur's Gate works. You start the game with 1 character, but in Multiplayer you can start a game creating your entire party yourself (This is what the Adventuring Hall would be, from what I understand).

the only difference I think -- and I could be wrong -- is that you won't actually start the game with them. I think its a real in game place where you go and recruit new party members that you create right then. The point being, your PC is supposed to be influenced by some "event" at the start of the story so the narrative would be a bit goofy if it just pretended your other characters weren't there as well.

 

Again, I could be wrong. It might just be like starting a game of IWD. But I don't think so.

Edited October 8, 2012 by ogrezilla

[Jaesun]

You do not start the game with them. Once you CAN finally access the Adventurer Hall you then can add them IIRC.

[Merin]

You do not start the game with them. Once you CAN finally access the Adventurer Hall you then can add them IIRC.

 

Pretty much. I don't think they have even hinted at having the option to start the game with your own party, so it's not IWD really. It's like Bard's Tale or such games, without being able to create your party at the start that is, and not starting in the Adventurer's Guild and... okay, bad example.

 

I'm betting there is a narrative beginning, where you are either alone for part of it or start with (or quickly join up with) tutorial character(s), who may or may not be long-term companion(s). Putting the hall later saves weird story oddness like starting BG2 in multi-player and leaving the NPC's in their cages as your party is already full.

[Madzookeeper]

i... kinda understand where you're coming from, but they added that after they've already said very clearly that they're going to be doing deep companions. so i'm not seeing what's the big deal on this.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I love the Adventurers' Hall because it's probably the only way I can indulge my complusive need to use as many wizards as possible. My standard BG and BG2 parties had 5 wizards in them. Since Obsidian probably isn't going to provide us with 4 wizard companions, I'm going to have to make my own.

[Dostro89]

I agree I want a lot of focus on indepth stories for the companions and this feels to me like they are diluting the companions. I'm really not a huge fan of that strech goal and there are other things I'd much rather see.

[Tamerlane]

Can this become our thread for pictures of cats?

 

Please?

[Sistergoldring]

It's not something that I personally wanted or will probably use but heck it was important to quite a few people on the forums and kickstarter comments and seeing I've pretty much had my wishlist ticked already (still waiting on the whips... ), then why not.

[Shevek]

Well, the adventurer's hall is the only reason I increased my pledge amount. I love the thing. If you don't like it, do not use it.

[Director]

I agree that it's not a Stretch Goal that inspired me, but it's clearly aimed at a particular group, (codexians), to try and get a higher backer value from that section of fans.

 

It doesn't seem to be Stretch Goal that lit a fire under the number of backers - but hey, it ain't over yet.

 

Also possible that most of those backers left anyway when spell cooldowns were confirmed.

 

While I'll never use it, I thought it was a pretty elegant solution for the people that did want to use it. Whether it generates a stack of extra funding - who knows?

[Ieo]

Can this become our thread for pictures of cats?

 

Please?

 

 

 

 

OMFG. I thought this was going to be one of those facepalming "There shouldn't be international language translation because I'm not gonna use it," but this is actually worse.

 

OP: "I don't want PE to get to $2.6m stretch because that means Obsidian will remove all the original party companions they had planned."

 

WTF? HOW.... WH....... I MEAN........ HOW DOES A REMOTELY SANE PERSON EVEN COME UP WITH THAT?

 

:blink: