Ten commandments for PE to follow

[Malekith]

 

I don't want randomization, I want variety, generally and within groups.

 

Bandits with different stats, skeletons with different sets of armor and weapons, goblins with different skin tones, particular zombies with unique on-hit properties; all this accompanied by a variety of names. Zombie number 35 doesn't have to be named "zombie", this special zombie can be a "zombie lord" or an "ancient zombie" that steals life or whatever other combination to spice things up.

 

Hand placed and designed with an eye for detail, without randomness, but with variety in mind is what I'd like to see.

What you're asking for is a no-brainer and guaranteed to be in the game.

 

1)In 2013, if you're including a race of bipedal, amphibious monsters, they're not all going to be of the variety that wields axes, lacks ranged weapons, casts no spells, attacks mindlessly and has exactly 30 hitpoints. There's bound to be at least the usual shaman and a variety that's even bigger and badder and maybe even a lizard chieftain. That was true in the year 2000 AD, and it's even more true now.

 

2)However, adding randomization to the mix is the only way to ensure that even a veteran player can't contemplate exact strategies without ever even seeing his enemies. No more boring meta-gamey picking of spells at the start of the game knowing "this is the spell I'll use to pwn the monster on level 3, room 2, second coffin from the right in the Temple of Doom".

All randomization within limits of course, but even though I always advocate for the game to be well playable in Ironman mode I could live with the fact that randomization of enemies in a horde had an influence on my party's demise. It's still preferrable over the lack of excitement of knowing every enemy in the game like the back of your hand.

 

Then there are people who think randomization is of the devil and must be cleansed with fire, of course.

1)have you played DA 2?

2) I disagree strongly on randomization. It lessens the first playthroughs, witch are the more important. The "veteran player" who has played the game 10 times, won't play the game the 11th time to be chalenged. It will play it because he loves the gameplay and the atmosphere. Randomization is ok for roguelikes, but i haven't see yet an RPG that became better from it, and many who became worse. Even in IWD 2 the randomization of loot became boring, even if there were hand placed items. Or in BG1 the random spawns in the wildernes areas were repeatable and a chore after a point. In opposition  BG2 or Torment had better "feel", with the hand placed content, even after many playthroughs.The random content  is forgetable, more possible to lead to boredom  and in the end to kill replayabillity in the sake of "chalenge in the 20 playthrough"

[Alexjh]

Though I will also add that in some ways, variety to enemies can be in the situation rather than having constant variation to enemies.  Although a different genre, just finished the Walking Dead this morning, which always managed to keep the suspense high despite the only enemies you ever face being normal humans or zombies.  It's the situations you face them in that provide the challenge.  As I say, different genre with a far lower combat/content ratio than any IE game, but even so, there are certainly things that can be learnt.

 

You could do a game where you only ever face orcs, but might have to at various times, defend against a horde at a bottleneck, sneak around a huge camp, protect people, rescue hostages, provide a distraction, assassinate a specific orc without letting the others know etc.  The trick is to challenge the player in more ways than just brute power charging down a corridor of monsters.

[Valorian]

 

I don't want randomization, I want variety, generally and within groups.

 

Bandits with different stats, skeletons with different sets of armor and weapons, goblins with different skin tones, particular zombies with unique on-hit properties; all this accompanied by a variety of names. Zombie number 35 doesn't have to be named "zombie", this special zombie can be a "zombie lord" or an "ancient zombie" that steals life or whatever other combination to spice things up.

 

Hand placed and designed with an eye for detail, without randomness, but with variety in mind is what I'd like to see.

What you're asking for is a no-brainer and guaranteed to be in the game.

 

In 2013, if you're including a race of bipedal, amphibious monsters, they're not all going to be of the variety that wields axes, lacks ranged weapons, casts no spells, attacks mindlessly and has exactly 30 hitpoints. There's bound to be at least the usual shaman and a variety that's even bigger and badder and maybe even a lizard chieftain. That was true in the year 2000 AD, and it's even more true now.

 

However, adding randomization to the mix is the only way to ensure that even a veteran player can't contemplate exact strategies without ever even seeing his enemies. No more boring meta-gamey picking of spells at the start of the game knowing "this is the spell I'll use to pwn the monster on level 3, room 2, second coffin from the right in the Temple of Doom".

All randomization within limits of course, but even though I always advocate for the game to be well playable in Ironman mode I could live with the fact that randomization of enemies in a horde had an influence on my party's demise. It's still preferrable over the lack of excitement of knowing every enemy in the game like the back of your hand.

 

Then there are people who think randomization is of the devil and must be cleansed with fire, of course.

You missed the point completely and misconstrued what I said (how shocking); I share your vision, worthy of Nostradamus, that members of each race won't be clones... but that wasn't the point.

I was talking about variety in details. From naming, to appearance to stats and passive abilities - for all creatures and encounters, not just bipedal races.

That piece of armor on the skeleton's shoulder didn't fall from the sky; it involved development resources.

 

 

PE is not Diablo, so no, spawns shouldn't be randomized for the sake of "veteran needs more challenge!". Some random encounters when you travel between maps - sure, but general spawns being random - no.

[Malekith]

Sawyer said that a large beastiary is importand and P:E will have it. So there isn't a problem here

[Alexjh]

2) I disagree strongly on randomization. It lessens the first playthroughs, witch are the more important. The "veteran player" who has played the game 10 times, won't play the game the 11th time to be chalenged. It will play it because he loves the gameplay and the atmosphere. Randomization is ok for roguelikes, but i haven't see yet an RPG that became better from it, and many who became worse. Even in IWD 2 the randomization of loot became boring, even if there were hand placed items. Or in BG1 the random spawns in the wildernes areas were repeatable and a chore after a point. In opposition  BG2 or Torment had better "feel", with the hand placed content, even after many playthroughs.The random content  is forgetable, more possible to lead to boredom  and in the end to kill replayabillity in the sake of "chalenge in the 20 playthrough"

 

I'd disagree with the IWD2 thing - I think the trick is that 80% or so of the loot should be hand placed, the remaining 20% randomly placed.  ALL should be hand crafted, and make sure that the random stuff isn't underpowered relative to the hand placed stuff, and include named items with back stories in the treasure tables.

 

I'd actually think what you could do with random encounters is tie them to skills like Storm of Zehir did, allowing you to avoid random encounters if you score is good enough to know they are there and get past them/optionally fight or even lay an ambush for them.  You'd want to award XP for this though to offset the fact you aren't gettign any loot.

[Osvir]

9.

Desire: Morality being a big business.

One Solution: Is it?

 

Mortality.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

@OP I like or am neutral on everything but...

6) Don't allow for player characters to get good at almost everything and to join almost every faction. A game like Skyrim felt very disappointing because of it. Encourage true replayability
 

The problem I have with this is I fear the game may lock the PC out of a faction or quest line for some arbitrary reason. To use Skyrim as a reference, it would be like being locked out of the Dark Brotherhood faction because the PC sided with the Empire in the civil war, because the PC kills the Emperor in the DB quest line. Of course there are occasions to lock the player out of factions(like if it is public knowledge that the PC does things that violate their values), but I believe that it would be better to let the player choose what is right for their PC. So if someone wants to join a group and later assassinate their leader as a task to another, they should be able to if they believe that it fits their PC. 

 

As for the whole ten commandments, I think I may post some tomorrow, I am very sick at the moment and a bit too tired to adequately express the top ten things I would like to see PE do.

[Ieo]

10) Try to keep fedex quests to a minimum. I'd rather have such quests removed and find rare stuff just by exploring the world. Good quests are braided into the dialogues of NPCs and the events of the world

 

 

Just to add a specific comment. I disagree with your #10. The bronze sphere in PS:T was one of the most brilliantly crafted "fedex/fetch" quest (chains) ever.

 

[Sacred_Path]

1)have you played DA 2?

In fact, no (should I be glad y/n)

2) I disagree strongly on randomization. It lessens the first playthroughs, witch are the more important.

How so?

 

Also, I wasn't talking about loot randomization (not major loot anyway), that's a whole different topic.

I was talking about variety in details. From naming, to appearance to stats and passive abilities - for all creatures and encounters, not just bipedal races.

Well, yes. But even that is a staple. In the year 2000, Icewind Dale gave us different kinds of skeletons, a Yeti Chief etc.

[PrimeJunta]

@IndiraLightfoot: You, ma'am, have excellent taste.

 

The only one of your list I'd quibble about is #1, on the TANSTAAFL principle. Open-world games have pitfalls that more linear ones don't, and it's a good deal of work to work around them while keeping the game playable; these workarounds come with their costs as well. Restricting the openness of the world somewhat will make it easier to write in tighter and better structured story. I very much enjoy open worlds with dynamic features and emergent gameplay, but I also very much enjoy tight narratives especially if the storyline branches in meaningful and interesting ways.

 

Both of these can also flop: an open-world game can become a herp derp what do I do now sandbox, and a constrained-world one can become an interactive novel. 

 

Bottom line: I'm cool with either if it's done well. Open-world with emergent story à la Fallout is great. Partly constrained world with branching story à la VtM: Bloodlines is also great. 

 

Other than that quibble, I'll happily sign onto your list.

[IndiraLightfoot]

1:

Desire: A fun system to explore with many different paths.

One Solution: Unlike Skyrim, several designed paths. Start off in Gullykin as a Gnome, and be a Bhaalspawn, or start off at the Temple as a Paladin/Priest, as a Bhaalspawn. Replace "Gorion" with "Gnome Mother" and "Priest Tutor" that is related to Elminster somehow and you've got a wrap. Of course, instances as Chapter 6 in Candlekeep would have to be adjusted to your character "Profession". Just an example on what I think could be a fun system to explore.

 

2.

Desire:​ A rich an intricate economy, strategical.

One Solution: Economy being strict. It is an authentic feeling for a farmer to feel the lust of "Gold" and venture on wild dreams to find treasure. Economy being limited, and a profession is required to gain income. It would be a legit feeling for the Player to run low on food in the first City and is about to starve, but at that point has the option to start pickpocketing people to gain more economy and can survive instead of starving. Thus being lead into the path of the "Thief". Another might arrive at the City and quickly finding the Guard who takes you in, or you fall at the doorstep of the Church in exhaustion, and the Priests or Paladins take you in. Profession+Economy+Faction+Reputation.

 

3.

Desire: Loot being significant beyond "vendor" trash. No vendor trash at all. A resource based equipment growth.

One Solution: Enemies you slay you use for your perusal, upgrade your own armor with the skin from the bear, or with the metal plating that Bandit had on his gloves. Take components to a Blacksmith and you get a discount on any upgrades. Having a profession as a "Monster Hunter" or similar could yield an income at "Tanners" by giving them "Wolf Pelts". A path of the "Merchant" as well, perhaps, you start a trade. Buy leather from the tanner and take it to someone else, and in turn you start a career as a Businessman ("1. Professions").

 

4.

Desire: A fulfilling and intelligent Combat and non-Combat experience.

One Solution: "Do I want to engage in this?" whether I am prepared or not, it should be challenging enough for me to question it and device tactical and strategical plans to defeat it. Combat should be difficult on difficult. Equally important should the non-Combat experience address this question as well. "Can I get past this without fighting?", perhaps there is a patch of dirt that I can dig through on the side of the wall being one way. Another way could be to dazzle the 2 guards by the gate with a sleep spell, and then (if possible) move the bodies and/or switch clothes.

 

5.

Desire: Sending off party members on tasks by themselves, leaving the rest behind. Individual character management.

One Solution: Taking the 2 guards example from above, we have 4 party members, leave 2 party members behind and do the rest of the quest with the 2 that switched clothes (to go undercover). Depends on the objective. [search] for a Scout/Druid/Ranger in your party, leaving your party for a duration to explore the outdoor area ahead of you (disappearing like the dog in Torchlight 2). [burglary] for a Thief, disappearing for a duration of time, looting a small % of the towns gold. Can enter Jail or get "Wanted" status.

 

6.

Desire: A fun [Experience].

One Solution: With a [Profession] tied with [Faction], which grants growth in "Class" path. A Guard (Fighter) would be better at close combat than the Thief (Rogue). [Armor Resources] being an experience to grow in potential protection, and a Rogue, Wizard, Fighter, Ranger you name it can grow equally in protection.

 

7.

Desire: "The Interrupting God", weak mechanics that Obsidian knows are exploitable, [insert God] to stop the Players from exploiting it to remain authentic to the world. If you know it at release and there's no other logical or easier method.

One Solution: Some Player choices in the game could be interrupted. You would be able to Save+Reload as often as you want, but doing it could put you into a "Doctor Who" loop, thrown into a trap made by a God. If you Rest too much and frequently, you could be sent into a Realm of Dreams, trapped by a evil Jon Blund God. Pickpocketing everyone in a town, Ciphers could appear, setting "Heat" in the city. Or a God could come and shake his finger, and if you continue to do it the God Smites you with Lightning (but you could still continue to do it xD).

 

8.

Desire: A rich story

One Solution: Drama. Maturity. Darkness. Creative. Innovative. Mortality. Authentic. Medieval. Gods. Religion. Factions. Good guys. Bad guys. Friendship. Rivalry. Ominous. Intelligent. Fun. Comic. Love. Hate. Mystery. I think there's a lot that can be thrown into a world like P:E.

 

9.

Desire: Morality being a big business.

One Solution: Is it?

 

10.

Desire: P:E should be P:E

One Solution: Obsidian has final word and it's their game. They should fulfill their desires and find their own solutions first and foremost. Looking forward to seeing what its going to be like :D

 Lovely post, Osvir! I agree with most of your points.

Some comments:

2) All that sounds good. However, I hope you don't mean that our pc and party members must have a profession to attain money. Also, I honestly think games where you are sorta made to be logger, trapper or fisherman just diminish the adventerous side to RP. Skyrim, once again: It is nice with a few handimen and artisans scattered in the game that can make stuff, but it seems a bit of waste of game-making resources. It adds a sense of a believable world, but I as a player don't want to be a part of it. I don't want to work in that sense in games. If I feel like mining I go play Minecraft. And regarding economy, I must one of a few who don't like the economy mini-games that sometimes sneak into CRPGs, you know where you control trade or your building town, cities or castle (It was the part I liked least about NWN2, and I love NWN2). I know the stronghold is in, but I want be holding me breath in anticipation for that one. Hope it doesn't rutn out like that pirat island DLC for Kingdoms of Amalur. It felt like chores and fedex quest galore.

3) See my criticism for point 2

5) For some reason that doesn't sound exciting to me. My pc should be the main character and the others I'd like to have around for the party feel of it. I don't want to explore away on me own with them, but that's just me. I mean, I certainly would give it a go if that was so.

7) A player shouldn't be punished for realoading or resting too much. If that is part of the game system, it is perfectly fine to do so. You could always refrain from doing certain things if you feel like it makes the game too easy, but don't have the game punish you for it. Again, Kingdoms of Amalur had a crafting system that made items far more powerful than anything you could find in the game, so I simply didn't use it. Strange punishments from some gods of game morality I think I could live without.

Boy, are you gonna love this gaem, Osvir!    Look at the great writers for this game. This is Obsidian we're talking about here!!

9) I know that you mean "mortality", and yes death needs to be made a bit more important than in it is in lots of CRPGs

10) Great point!

[IndiraLightfoot]

Malekith: As you saw in one of my posts, I mentioned Skyrim in a negative way. I usually do, but I did enjoy the open world as such, it was a mighty feeling.

And hand-placed encounters are the best, OE should do that as much as is possible, but when they do use random encounter tables, as it were, these should be tweaked a bit to give us variety and surprises that go beyond clones. Ive played all IE-games, and I loved BG 1 and 2 to bits, IWD 2 was rather neat. Some great battles and a very nice UI, as well as D&D 3rd ed, which at that time felt like a breath of fresh air. However, the D&D games that I've played the most, both SP and on servers, are NWN 1 and NWN 2. And a large bestiary from Josh sounds wonderful. Weresharks FTW!

 

JFSOCC: Exactly!

 

Dream: Usually, that is a good rule of thumb.

 

PrimeJunta: Thank you!    And the way you put it should have been in my first post. That is where I stand on that matter.

 

Thanks for all the nice replies, guys!

 

Ieo: That was indeed one of my favs too! And sure there are exceptions, but if you play run-of-the-mill CRPGS you are sure to catch fedex quest fever. I wish for a great variety to quests, at the very least

 

Sacred_Path: DAO was so disappointing so I didn't even consider DA2, and later, when I read about it, I was horrified. If I wanna go to the cinema, I go watch a movie

 

KaineParker: I'm a bit oldfashioned that way and a sucker for replaying RPGs. I like it when huge chunks of content are locked away from me (as long as the playthru with my current pc gets a good run for the money). I think that makes sense and certainly encourages people to try diffent routes. In a game like NWN 2, OEI balanced that pretty great. For almost every class or race there was new content to be found and new twists to the story. I'd love to see them expand on that, now that the classes and races ain't that many

 

Alexjh: My sentiment precisely! 

[Osvir]

 

-snip-

Lovely post, Osvir! I agree with most of your points.

Some comments:

2) All that sounds good. However, I hope you don't mean that our pc and party members must have a profession to attain money. Also, I honestly think games where you are sorta made to be logger, trapper or fisherman just diminish the adventerous side to RP. Skyrim, once again: It is nice with a few handimen and artisans scattered in the game that can make stuff, but it seems a bit of waste of game-making resources. It adds a sense of a believable world, but I as a player don't want to be a part of it. I don't want to work in that sense in games. If I feel like mining I go play Minecraft. And regarding economy, I must one of a few who don't like the economy mini-games that sometimes sneak into CRPGs, you know where you control trade or your building town, cities or castle (It was the part I liked least about NWN2, and I love NWN2). I know the stronghold is in, but I want be holding me breath in anticipation for that one. Hope it doesn't rutn out like that pirat island DLC for Kingdoms of Amalur. It felt like chores and fedex quest galore.

3) See my criticism for point 2

5) For some reason that doesn't sound exciting to me. My pc should be the main character and the others I'd like to have around for the party feel of it. I don't want to explore away on me own with them, but that's just me. I mean, I certainly would give it a go if that was so.

7) A player shouldn't be punished for realoading or resting too much. If that is part of the game system, it is perfectly fine to do so. You could always refrain from doing certain things if you feel like it makes the game too easy, but don't have the game punish you for it. Again, Kingdoms of Amalur had a crafting system that made items far more powerful than anything you could find in the game, so I simply didn't use it. Strange punishments from some gods of game morality I think I could live without.

Boy, are you gonna love this gaem, Osvir!    Look at the great writers for this game. This is Obsidian we're talking about here!!

9) I know that you mean "mortality", and yes death needs to be made a bit more important than in it is in lots of CRPGs

10) Great point!

 

2. Not a logger, not a farmer or fisher. But professions that progress the story. Integrate the Classes with the world. Imagine being a Paladin in Baldur's Gate, and pursuing that path as a Paladin and not as the Bhaalspawn. Doing objectives for the Temple, going to Nashkel for the Temple, figuring out the Conspiracy for the Temple etc. etc. or you are a Guard at Friendly Arms Inn, sent out as an Agent or simply a goody-toes messenger/investigator. Heck, maybe you could start off as a messenger and you get thrown into the whole mess and you just want to get out of it.

 

But for the heck of it, let's say you could become a Fisher as a profession. Which results in you finding some weird treasure, or a fish that talks and it tells you of greater treasure as it slips out of your hand and back into the river. It is all about "initiation" into the larger scheme from different angles. Unlike Skyrim is the first thing I write. Make Classes significant beyond Character Creation. A Paladin is a profession, just as a Priest is. A Chanter singing on the streets.

 

In other words; No need to make up professions that has nothing to do with the Classes. All of the "Professions" (Even Paladin) could perhaps be a path that any Class can choose (In other words, a Fighter pursuing the Paladin path, becoming a Fighter/Paladin).

 

3. But Minecraft does it right! You slay an enemy, you get resources, you build stuff.

Minecraft/Terraria = Cut down tree -> Get wood -> Build House

My Desire = Cut down [Creature] -> Get components -> Upgrade armor/tools/items

Non-Lethal = Wouldn't need to do this because "Pickpocket". A Combat Heavy character would slay enemies to get goldcopper+gear, a Thief could simply pick pockets to get goldcopper+gear.

 

The only issue I can think of it right now is: Having 2 characters, 1 Rogue and 1 Fighter, in cities the Rogue picks everyone's pockets, in battle the Fighter fights all the battles. If this is an issue or not though~ but just stating that it could be a "problem".

 

5. That's all good. I just think that, in some situations, splitting your party up into a smaller "squad" might actually be a logical choice. Look at "Mission Impossible", how they deal with their tasks. Look at League of Legends. Party members splitting up to do different tasks, split pushing, roaming, solo pushing.

 

1 top, 1 jungle, 1 mid, 1 adc, 1 sup. Different roles doing different things, and with a game like P:E I can't see how it couldn't be a good thing. Maybe you want to get into that heavily guarded house without getting noticed at all. Would any movie you've seen send all 6 party members forward or would 1 character scout ahead and/or deal with the task him/herself?

 

I didn't say that you wouldn't be able to send forward all 4 characters in the example, but that sending 2 characters forward would be completely a choice that you make. Do you want to sneak in with your 2 disguised guys or do you go headstrong in with all 4 of your guys? Could you even let your 2 disguised ones bring in the 2 other and say "These guys are prisoners".

 

7. It wasn't meant as a punishment, but if Obsidian has exploitable stuff that they don't want and they don't see any other possible method to "fix" it then I say a "God" is ultimately a great method for obstruction. I do not intend "Punishment" for the Player, but punishment for the "Character". Perhaps there is a God of Farming, and going to a farm and taking all the cabbages makes the God angry and sends Tomato Devils after you or whatnot.

 

I guess this "Desire" is more in the ways "Interesting Gods that interfere with the Player" oh right! I'm sure I've read that "Gods interfere" somewhere...... did a quick look around (google~) but couldn't find it.

 

9. How do you make Death most important? I think Economy and Food plays a great part into this. Because it is the poor that starves on the street. Likewise, Combat plays obviously a great part of this and the Player or Main Character should/could shake their boots before engaging in combat. "Putting your life on the line" difficulty, which I think comes naturally at a higher difficulty~

 

I think Mortality might be a big business physically at higher difficulties but at lower difficulties it'll be mostly Lore. Which is why I think P:E would be most awesome at higher difficulties and should be designed for higher difficulties~ (Because Mortality really becomes a big business at higher difficulties). Unless they make Combat matter just as much on Easy+Normal, but that might make the casual player sad.

[Osvir]

This is not a wishlist, this is a list of ten aspects to a new CRPG by my favourite game developer that I want to see fulfilled, and I'm sure they want it too. There is no particular order of importance to the points listed:

 

2) Make the initial character creation process an intricate joy. I love rolling up characters. I don't mind if it takes hours. Adjusting our pc's appearance matters little, but assigning attributes and skills, as well as choosing class and background traits do. They key is plentiful of choices and scales to slide

3) Give me encounters that are challenging, and at times, really tough. This applies regardless of how the encounter is resolved: combat, stealth or diplomacy

4) Update stealth so that it is a valid and interesting way to resolve many situations and encounters in a party-based CRPG. This has almost never been done, so there is room for some effort here

6) Don't allow for player characters to get good at almost everything and to join almost every faction. A game like Skyrim felt very disappointing because of it. Encourage true replayability

7) Surprises, easter eggs, hidden quests, whatever you call it - it should almost as important as all of the main plots and quests. I'm addicted to poking around everywhere and need some wierd rewards for doing so

8 ) Character progress should be interesting every level, so keep the choices and skill branches coming. One drawback of D&D systems is that some levels were just intermediate checkpoints. 3.5 did it best, but it can be even better. As for the possibility of respecing my character, I would sternly say nay

 

What are your ten commandments, I mean, almost demands, that you think need to be achieved? In this topic, the abbreviation "tl-dr" is not allowed

 

Disclaimer: This is no "do this or I'll no longer support PE"-rant. It is just things that I care about and want to see realized.

 

2. More IE-games Character Creation and progression (Attributes/Statistics such as Str/Dex/Con etc. etc.) being static to Attributes. In Baldur's Gate you make your character, let's say with 18/00 Strength because you were rolling for hours. You'd have that 18/00 Strength for most of the game, with some 2-3 Tomes that you can use to upgrade your Strength as well as some stat-boosting items. In-Game items progress your "Statistics" rather than "Leveling Up". I hope that P:E will keep the significance of the Statistics. They define your character, rather than defining their "physical" or "magical" strength (seen in pretty much every other cRPG out there). Stats should define the ability to talk well, to move well, to look good etc. etc. rather than "This is how much damage I do" and I think PS:T touches base best with significant stats. 

 

3. Additionally: Based on Difficulty.

- Easy: Shouldn't be much of a struggle, it should be like flipping pages in a book in my opinion. I don't want to face a challenge on this difficulty, I want it to be a breeze.

- Normal: Standard Combat Challenge. Stuff can be easy, stuff can be hard.

- Hard: Challenging in more than just "Combat" but in other parts of the game as well.

- Hardcore: Challenging, Economic, Food, Unlimited Stash = Limited Stash?, Weight?, Morale?, Mortality, Camp, Combat etc. etc. stuff that makes the game not just difficult but a challenge that challenges the intellect further.

 

4. In my post about "Professions". Why is it only the "Stealth" path versus the "Combat" path? Make being a Scholar interesting, make being a Guard interesting, make being a Thief interesting, because it is in doing those interesting (possibly as professions/way of life-paths?) that you create several different paths. Not just "Do I sneak past this or do I fight past this?" but "Can I read some ancient poetry for the Guards as a Wizard and in turn confusing them? Can I get a business and talk to authorities as a businessman? Was a Cipher ever there?" etc. etc. several approaches, rather than 1 or 2 approaches. A Thief in the Thief Guild could be guided by his fellow "ruffians" to the Stealth path, of course you could choose there and then not to follow the Thief Path and fight your way through it. Likewise, a Guard for the City should be able to "sneak by" as well, similarly the Guard should have an option to "Talk" through it as well and not necessarily have to fight a battle.

 

6+7. For 6, that's exactly what I am talking about with "Professions". Profession = Faction. For 7, [interrupting God] to be both Easter Egg and Lore. I'm sure I read it somewhere that Gods like to play/interfere with people... I know for certain I've read (because I've read it several times on the wiki) that souls will be haunting the main character.

 

8. In Baldur's Gate you hardly had much customization as you leveld up, gear was what made your character mostly strong. Weapon Proficiency making you better with weapons, a proficiency you put out every other level. Unlike "DA:O", Baldur's Gate and the old IE games hardly had much "Skill-Up" screens. Actually, it didn't have it at all. If "Character Level" is more of a "Spiritual Experience", I can see [Professions+Factions] (Mentioned above) being an interesting way to level up. Not only do you dig deeper into the Faction, but you also dig into the Factions teachings. A Fighter becoming a City Guard at "City1" then becoming a Soldier, a Soldier who becomes a Commander or General, and a General who becomes King. "Leveling Up" could be an "Objective" in itself, a desire for the Player. "Ah if I become a Soldier I'll learn more stuff!" rather than the little "Guard" who knows little of the combat techniques that the Soldier does.

 

Level up with the World. That'd be cool imo. Progressing in "Profession" or "Career" makes you better at doing what that Career does, with some limited (like the Weapon Proficiency) upgrades, gaining abilities naturally as you progress in "Career".

 

The numbers not addressed and such I don't really have much of an input on. Great list

[IndiraLightfoot]

2. I agree with you that the ability scores or whatever you like to call them should matter: str, int, wis, dex, con and cha is a classic list. There has been a sad tendency to almost ignore these at the expense of fancy MMO skill trees (that usually involve no choice at all - ypu pick the best out of two, three "choices, and that's that. Horrible! The more choices we get in skills, ability scores and feats/pers or whatever, as well as classes, spells and perhaps prestige classes and stuff like that later on, the merrier. In NWN 2 you could make almost any kind of character. All my buddies playing it had quite different builds. Obviously, part of this was thanks to D&D 3.5, but I want character variety bordering on mind-numbing, something that encourages creativity and fun, and should a few of the "builds" (pretty tragic word) turn out be more powerful than others, then so be it. I often made characters that wer apparently worse off than they needed to be. I made a crossbow guy in MotB, sort of a Van Helsing vampire slayer. It sucked, but it made for quite an exciting playthru

3. I didn't even consider that, but yea, the difficulty settings should be generous in that regard too

4. I see, you miss diplomacy and fun RPG scenarios with speech and such. That is great, but it has already been done very well numerous times, but stealth or retreat/escape mechancis for a party-based CRPG haven't.

6-7) Alright, I didn't get that "profession" meant faction. And gods meddling with us mortals is just great, but if they serve as meta-gamey punishing tools for us reloading or resting too much, I'd give it a miss

8 )  Except for IWD2, BG I & II, as well as Planescape, was using D&D 2nd ed, perhaps the role playing game I've played the most, pen & paper, that is. So, I still loved it in its computer adaptation, but obviously a lot of roleplaying freedom gets lost in translation, and in that sense D&D 3.0 and the much improved 3.5, worked well for CRPGs. D&D 4th ed became some weird MMO-version of Dungeons & Dragons. Some of it is pretty nice, I have played that too, PnP, but the magic wasn't there. But to respond to you here: yes, gear was important in BG and character progression for several classes had wierd hiatuses, and it was very imbalanced. Spell casters, magic-users in particular, got very powerful later on, coz of spells, mostly. What I'm talking about is ensuring that choice and variety progresses for every level you reach.

Edited January 21, 2013 by IndiraLightfoot

[Osvir]

2. Basically letting the player be innovative with his/her Class *nod* I agree completely

For the rest. You addressed.

[Malekith]

 

1)have you played DA 2?

In fact, no (should I be glad y/n)

>2) I disagree strongly on randomization. It lessens the first playthroughs, witch are the more important.

How so?

 

Also, I wasn't talking about loot randomization (not major loot anyway), that's a whole different topic.

I was talking about variety in details. From naming, to appearance to stats and passive abilities - for all creatures and encounters, not just bipedal races.

Well, yes. But even that is a staple. In the year 2000, Icewind Dale gave us different kinds of skeletons, a Yeti Chief etc.

 

You sould be glad.

It lessens because i have yet to see a game where the random parts were as interesting and fitting in the game world as the hand placed ones. I don't know if it can be done or no, but i would prefer Obsidian to stick to what works and don't experiment when on a limited budget

[Darth Trethon]

I am incomplete disagreement with #6....replayability should come strictly from story branching and how the player chooses to advance the plot.....FO:NV and AP were perfect at this. The skills you maxed or how many skills you maxed was irrelevant to replayability. I do NOT replay a game to use a bow over a rifle and vice versa, the gameplay is purely a means to an end and it's only fun when I can do whatever the hell I feel like....this goes ten times for the story and branching. I should have all manner of choices in any given situation both from gameplay and story perspective. If I want to kill a group of enemies with a toothpick and then blame their deaths on another group to create a war that ultimately benefits my overall goals I should be able to do that. In a separate playthrough I can maybe sell them the toothpick for their greatest treasure that leads to a lost catacomb in which untold secrets of wizardry and magic have been hidden but I have to deal with a guardian dragon or something and since I no longer have my toothpick I can then maybe kill the dragon with a blade of grass or something.

[TRX850]

My two cents.

 

11) Wherever possible, don't be afraid to include "Dynamically Generated Content" that tailors to the party with each playthrough.

 

- Ammunition drops (use favourite weapon as a guide to keep archers/throwers restocked during encounters)

- Cursed Weapons (no two playthroughs have the same cursed weapons or cursed weapon locations)

- Villains (Stats and Character Build based on PC and party makeup, and party reputation)

- Kindred Soul (a one-off NPC that provides quests and synergy with the PC)

 

I've used the term "dynamically generated" in some of my posts. This is a summary of those and where I think it would best suit the game.

 

Thankyou, drive through.