Update #29: Fulfillment and the Pros and Cons of Nostalgia and Realism

[Krios]

Thanks for update on fulfilment site. Will this mean when the fulfilment page goes live, the donations will close? It has been some time since the kickstarter ended. Should be more than enough time for anyone wanting to get on board, to get on board. Also will be kickstarter site be updated anymore? Or should I just come here for updates?

[Gyges]

Werent there supposed to be an update today? Or was that a bi-weekly thing?

[rjshae]

Werent there supposed to be an update today? Or was that a bi-weekly thing?

Per the original message:

Our next design update will be in two weeks and will focus on lore and story elements. Thanks for reading!

Anything else, we get when we get.

[Ieo]

Our next design update will be in two weeks and will focus on lore and story elements. Thanks for reading!

Anything else, we get when we get.

 

Hmm. I'm torn. Lore is interesting and will color the directions that a story might go. But I don't want to be spoiled about the story specifically (I mean, went into the Baldur's Gate series and Planescape Torment completely blind--quite the experience).

 

~siiiiiiiiiigh~ Might have to skip the next update.

 

As for update frequency, I honestly wouldn't mind once a month. I expect the work after this design stage to be rather mundane and extremely technical, something we have no need to know about.... so I'd actually rather they sketch out the basics of their update content releases all the way to 2014, and once a month seems about right for that for the top end of frequency.

[Nomine Vacans]

~siiiiiiiiiigh~ Might have to skip the next update.

I think that the basic lore and concepts is what every character should have some superficial ideas or at least to heard something about it. Therefore there is no point to avoid any lore updates, especialy on early stage like this.

[Cantousent]

Yeah, I tend to think that whatever we see in this particular forum, will be common knowledge. I can definitely see what you're saying, Ieo, especially since I feel the same way, but I think Comedian is right.

[Jorian Drake]

No worries. Josh, Chris, and all the others know how bad spoiling a story can be, I assume the info will be mostly everyday knowledge about the world and its lore, nothing too revealing.

Although I do hope they might go more into detail on the ability to customize character/shield, and what there is to know about owning land/castle (if possible even a whole city) in the game, I always loved the possibility to own and upgrade territory like in BG2 or NWN2 and would love to see this option explored more with a more detailed option allowing to train and equip (city/castle) guards with quality gear with your CoA/banner on it. Plus construct some additional buildings for yourself or NPC housing.

Edited November 9, 2012 by Jorian Drake

[Ieo]

~siiiiiiiiiigh~ Might have to skip the next update.

I think that the basic lore and concepts is what every character should have some superficial ideas or at least to heard something about it. Therefore there is no point to avoid any lore updates, especialy on early stage like this.

Yeah, I tend to think that whatever we see in this particular forum, will be common knowledge. I can definitely see what you're saying, Ieo, especially since I feel the same way, but I think Comedian is right.

 

Oh, I have no problem with lore per se (I did know a bit of the lore for Baldur's Gate at least), but there was mention of "story elements." So I'm just hemming and hawing about that, however nebulous the term might be for the purposes of an update...

[Dawn_]

I wonder when we will see Chris tied up to a chair with only food and water forced to play Arcanum for 24 hours.

 

That's the update i am the most impatient to see.

 

 

I imagine this as Chris on a sunday; someone ring at his door; he open; then 3 guys with mask kidnap him and take him in a car.

He then get wake up tied up on a chair in an old basement with Tim picking up the bag he had over his head playing a remake of the joker to him (with make up and all "So, you've never played Arcanum?!").

Edited November 9, 2012 by Dawn_

[Jorian Drake]

I wonder when we will see Chris tied up to a chair with only food and water forced to play Arcanum for 24 hours.

 

That's the update i am the most impatient to see.

Actually:

 

I demand a youtube video playthrough series about him playing Arcanum from start till end with some comments, I am damn sure many only gave money for the project to see him play it to begin with XD

 

Without such a proof there won't be evidence he ever got forced to play it from start until end.

[Thumister]

For me; I guess it depends on what you're trying to achieve. I probably most enjoyed the armor system in Mythus where you had "body areas" (chest, armor, head, legs, etc.) and you attached armor to those (curiass, greaves, helmet, etc.). Rather than 1 armor score for a player, you had an armor score for each area that was a total for all the armor on that body area. That was kind of a pain for humans to keep track of on a character record sheet, but something that a computer keeps track of very easily. I don't really feel like the goal needs to be to exactly recreate the feeling of D&D, which frankly had kind of a limiting armor system as you point out. Of course, if that actually *is* the goal, then I'm fine with that too. :D

[Cantousent]

I'm not judging, only noting, that I don't understand why folks care about one of the dev team playing arcanum or whatnot. I guess I can understand wanting someone to play the game because of the examples, both good and bad, that it can provide, but I don't understand why it seems *so* important to some folks. Probably most of you are just joking around about it.

 

I think the game I'd like most folks to have played would be the gold box SSI games, but I don't think someone who didn't play computer games back in the day would understand.

[Ramnexus]

Looking at this issue from a different perspective, there is a lesson from the field of modern military science that occurs to me. It goes something like this in order of priority for the soldier:

 

1 don't be there (be aware where the enemy is looking and avoid them)

2 don't be seen by the enemy (use camouflage & concealment)

3 don't be hit by the enemy (take cover - manouvre)

4 don't let the round penetrate (body armor)

5 don't let the round kill (highest protection to most vital spots)

 

Ok so this goes beyond a discussion of armor protection (which is really point 4) but perhaps some of the relative benefits of different armor are that they aid in points 1, 2, 3 and 5. So the rough ranger with the weather-worn hide may score low on point 4, but he scores a lot higher on 2 and 3 than his mate in field plate.

 

[Hoku]

As a general thing, connecting the characteristics and/or properties of something, such as an armor, to something else, such as a culture, a school of magic or a creature, does have the benefit of further defining the thing which is referred to, which can give both starting points from which to add lore, or ways to give the player a sense of the relevant lore without actually letting it take up "too much" space in the game, and so is in my opinion often the best way to go, based on constructive function and efficiency.

 

Meaning that if a high-class chainmail is made out of "Valyrian Steel", one immediately imagines "Valyria" as a country of skilled blacksmiths, which means that they're a strong and straightforward people, not minding to get their hands dirty, who know how to appreciate skill and craftsmanship.

If "Valyria" is a place to which you can never arrive, one will then have gotten a rather detailed image of the people and culture without you having to write a single line about it, while, if you *are* able to ge there, it gives you the opportunity to chock the player by, for example, completely crushing his image upon arrival.

Etc.

[Cykoth]

On to the Armor topic.....I think some science background might help with reasons to wear different types of armor. I'm assuming that there will be various types of elemental damage in the game. Fire, Ice, Electrical, Poison, Acid that sort of thing. I think persons in heavy plate armor would be at a severe disadvantage to the conductivity of metal.

 

I like this approach, it makes each armor type feel unique.

 

Something similar has already been seen in Arcanum and Fallout. For example, Arcanum's plate armors caused the wearer to suffer more damage from electrical attacks while Fallout's metal and Tesla armors were better at deflecting laser beams than most other armor types.

Scientifically that's backwards. The better conductivity of metal armor would cause electrical attacks to channel around the wearer and into the ground.

 

http://jockohomo.tum...h-voltage-tesla

 

Heat and cold would be a problem though; they should just go right through to the inner padding.

I submit that it is not scientifically backwards, unless you assume that by wearing plate armor you are essentially wearing a perfect Faraday cage which would in fact ground electrical attacks leaving the wearer perfectly intact. But the ability to be perfectly grounded I would suggest is extremely remote, and that in fact you would be cooked like a lobster wearing plate.

[Cykoth]

I'm not judging, only noting, that I don't understand why folks care about one of the dev team playing arcanum or whatnot. I guess I can understand wanting someone to play the game because of the examples, both good and bad, that it can provide, but I don't understand why it seems *so* important to some folks. Probably most of you are just joking around about it.

 

I think the game I'd like most folks to have played would be the gold box SSI games, but I don't think someone who didn't play computer games back in the day would understand.

Ah the goldboxes! I miss those....they were a huge improvement graphically and tactically over The Bards Tale and Eye of the Beholder.

[loufoque]

This has probably been said before, but the obvious way to make armor more unique is to have different types of damage, and make different armor protect differently against certain types of damage.

This way, you might have to switch armor depending on what enemy type you're most likely to fight.

 

It can be different types of non-magic damage (slashing, piercing, bludgeoning, ranged, thrown), magic damage (elemental) or situational (backstab and other trickery) all combined together.

 

This would also allow to make different weapon types really useful.

[loufoque]

You might want to consider ranged/thrown as piercing to simplify things.

You could also add a few replaceable gem slots on the armor for added protection against magic or other effects. They could be replaced according to the user's needs for more situational customization.

[Cantousent]

they were a huge improvement graphically and tactically over The Bards Tale and Eye of the Beholder.

That's true, but I sometimes miss those old games also. I especially remember enjoying the Eye of the Beholder. I should see if there's a GoG version I can play.

 

I can see ranged/thrown in two different ways. I think Firearms maybe should be a category in its own right since, although it is piercing, it's effects are greater than a starndard piercing projectile like an arrow or spear and have effects different in kind.

[mcmercy]

Hi!

 

Maybe you should consider the thing that each type of armor has special abilities beside the simple idea of protection. You told about the issue that a plate mail gives you a penalty on dexterity, this sounds realistic. Think about designing armor for special purpose. For example a hide or fur armour could give you a bonus on frost resistance so this would be your best choice when fighting in snowy areas or against a frost dragon, prefered by vikings or barbarians from the north. A plate mail could give resistance to electric magic but prevent you from swimming, we see the witch hunters on the plains with that. Leather gives you a bonus when sneaking while metal armour makes some noise. So the player might have different armours for different situations or even better choose different companions for a given quest. I think companions should be unique, in the first way it sound great when every character can wear every armour but it makes them ordinary. I think a knight should look like a knight and a wizard like a wizard and not vice versa. And a wizard in plate mail is just a paladin isn't he?

[mcmercy]

I submit that it is not scientifically backwards, unless you assume that by wearing plate armor you are essentially wearing a perfect Faraday cage which would in fact ground electrical attacks leaving the wearer perfectly intact. But the ability to be perfectly grounded I would suggest is extremely remote, and that in fact you would be cooked like a lobster wearing plate.

 

I think you are wrong. Electricity is going the easist way so it never would go through the body when it can go over the metallic surface. As long you are not wearing gumboots you are perfectly safe in plate mail. Look at him

[Cantousent]

That's all well and good, but a lot of folks will instinctively scratch they're heads and call foul. That they're wrong doesn't matter. That they will assume the game is completely idiotic does. So, there are two things to do, as I suggested above. Find a reasonable in-game way to educate the player or bow to overwhelming popular assumption. If the folks who come to these forums think they represent even the majority of just the backers, let alone the desired consumer population after shipping, they're crazy. There has to be a fine line, to be sure, if the mass of consumers are convinced of a fact, then you aren't very wise simply to ignore it. Just saying metalic armor is better against electricity will probably strike a sizeable number of players as stupid, so at least have some explanation in the game.

[Tsarist]

I read the first few pages of this thread - sorry for not piling through all 17 pages, but thought I would still make my point, which may not have been made amongst the very good responses here.

 

On the subject of armour:

 

Rather than necessarily sticking to a particular type of armour, it would be good if players had to consider the situation with which they are faced and for armour choice to be an important contributor to their success or failure. The same soldier may find themselves part of a tight phalanx with heavy armour and shields one day, and using guerilla tactics with light armour in a wood the next day.

 

For example, if you know you're going to have to fight through several miles of goblin tunnels to fetch a relatively mundane item, or as a shortcut to going around the mountain, then you would probably dress light, be flexible and move swiftly. If you knew you would be confronting a band of pikemen with covering archery fire from long distance, you would want to be heavily protected.

 

Ideally you would visit the armourer and swap out and back as appropriate for a reasonable fee. The problem with previous RPGs is that you could never do this for a reasonable fee - in those games you would have carried all the spare armour you needed, or you would store it in a random chest (knowing it would be there when you returned, which itself was sometimes unrealistic).

 

I think making the trade-off between damage resistance (from armour) and mobility should be very important.

 

I do think durability of armour and weapons is an important aspect of 'realism' in considering a character's inventory, but the feature must be considered in light of the gameplay - I think the less hardcore players of the game would get pretty irate with weapons constantly breaking in the middle of battle.

 

Hopefully a useful contribution.

[Rødskjegg]

Hi all, first poster here ^^ (pardon my poor English skills)

 

 

Just wanted to comment on the whole "heavy armour and mobility" thingy.

Proper plate armour would not restrict movement at all, and would be much heavier than maille.

If armour was as restrictive as Hollywood likes to claim, it would be useless. A slow moving target would be easy to grapple into submission.

 

 

 

This clip demonstrates what I mean.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xm11yAXeegg

 

 

Also, would be awesome to see some proper harness fighting, instead of the good old sword swinging (which would be pretty useless against plate armour)

 

There are six videoes in total, and I recommend watching them all ^^

 

Edited November 25, 2012 by Rødskjegg

[Branimir]

I think you should get rid of the ++ system altogether. It is fatuous, I never understood that. If it is magically imbued, just list the magical benefit of + to armor or damage under the weapon/armor's statistics/magic abilities. And to make a larger variety like you were saying, there already is a solution, Blizzard Entertainment did over a decade ago with Diablo, and it's based on realism.

If you find a weapon or armor, its base statistics (damage, armor, etc) are randomly generated from a range depending on the type/grade of the equipment. So the exact same piece of equipment doesn't always have the exact same statistics. In reality, if I was a blacksmith, and my cousin who's 10 years older is a blacksmith, and we both made the same kind of broadsword with the same kind of metal, they are not likely to be the exact same quality. And if some guy on the other side of the planet makes a broadsword, it could easily be like a completely different weapon compared to the one I made even if it's made from the same kind of metal.

You've got to stop trying to make it like D&D and focus on making it good and realistic. D&D came out decades before I was born. When a car company makes a new model of car, they don't base it on the first car ever made, they use the technologies present today to make the best car they can. In your case, that means don't try to make it like D&D, take inspiration from new technologies that are available to you, open your minds and be more creative, to make it as good as possible.

Would you buy a Model-T today? Or even a new design of car, claiming to be unique, based on the body, engine, et cetera of the model T. I wouldn't, I wouldn't find it appealing at all. But my great great grandpa, if he was alive today, might like it because of the nostalgia. Nostalgia doesn't make a product better, it's an illusion, a reminder of good memories not new good memories. Why go for something less good because it's nostalgic when you can make something greater and form new good memories for your customers to be nostalgic about in the future?

The names and tiers that you mentioned in your example are a good start to a unique armor system. You could add more variety, and more tiers, and implement my suggestion of having exact stats and magic abilities of a specific piece of equipment be generated randomly on drop (or build), like Blizzard does in Diablo. I would very much prefer that kind of system.