Update #63: Stronghold!

[Failion]

The thing about making your stronghold some spooky halloween necromancer death lair. I don't know you have to ask how smart and powerful are the forces are the game world. Would city states stand idle and let some murdering madman stronghold stand or march their armies to destroy it. Perhaps masquerading and decorating it so it is of high class and standard would better suit a dark lord that is evil. Well it really depends how smart the denizens of the game world and and obsidian wants to do with their game.

[Wombat]

I don't know if stronghold is childish or not but a potentially negative aspect of random events is that they cannot always happen in a good timing. For instance, if you are exploring dungeons or solving quests and finally reach the end boss or talk to a key NPC, and then, "bad" random events happen telling you that your stronghold are under attack. Personally, I don't like the idea and feel pretty forced to do something I don't want to. Something like occasional attacks would definitely distract me from adventuring. Of course, keeping a certain security level could make the damage less disastrous but the cost feels like a tax to avoid unwanted gameplay to me (e.g. Hacking skill in Alpha Protocol). Some people may like to have occasional simulationist accidents but must it be a part of the game? What makes me worry about the stronghold is that it may distract me from the main gameplay of adventuring by the added political and economic management gameplay (Of course, if it's just an option for people into such gameplay, I wouldn't mind).

 

That said, I like the idea of "stronghold" functioning as a hub to enhance the core gameplays of players' liking. For example, as some people mentioned, it can add an interesting layer to resource management. If some bonuses at the base camp wear off gradually by repeating rests, it even could add an interesting factor to resource management (If the party goes deeper in the dungeons, it makes things harder, which can make Endless Paths of Od Nua more challenging.), which can be replaced by the ditched item degradation penalty since some people may complain of penalties but nobody would for bonuses-for the designers, it must be just a matter of balancing.

 

PS Thinking of it now, I was unhappy with being attacked by town thugs when I'm talking to NPCs in Planescape: Torment and BG2 companions began to talk of their personal matters at the worst timing - They were simply annoying and I'd like the combat and dialogues are mutually exclusive. Of course, if the surprise was well calculated one, I wouldn't mind. They are just reminders to me that computers are not the best game masters.

[Nyhilla]

The thing about making your stronghold some spooky halloween necromancer death lair. I don't know you have to ask how smart and powerful are the forces are the game world. Would city states stand idle and let some murdering madman stronghold stand or march their armies to destroy it. Perhaps masquerading and decorating it so it is of high class and standard would better suit a dark lord that is evil. Well it really depends how smart the denizens of the game world and and obsidian wants to do with their game.

 

That's about mechanics ingame, and in the same time the politicals situations of the differents city states.

 

you can yes masquerade your stronghold, that could be a good lorefriendly explanation. But if you're an "evil" (I use the "" from the beginning because this is too simplified as a terme)and not masquerading anything, ok, they won't like you. But, they are not stupid, if you help them defeat the main ennemy, and let's take a general main plot, who's theatening their life and citizens, they won't attack you if they think you can be useful to defeat this ennemy. They'll eventually turn on you after the war is over, or if you're a good diplomat, make truce pact (who will eventually be over in less than some years assurely ^^). But this is all about context, so I'm not complaining or anything, let's see what it will be when we'll really be playing on.

Edited November 2, 2013 by Nyhilla

[Failion]

 

The thing about making your stronghold some spooky halloween necromancer death lair. I don't know you have to ask how smart and powerful are the forces are the game world. Would city states stand idle and let some murdering madman stronghold stand or march their armies to destroy it. Perhaps masquerading and decorating it so it is of high class and standard would better suit a dark lord that is evil. Well it really depends how smart the denizens of the game world and and obsidian wants to do with their game.

 

That's about mechanics ingame, and in the same time the politicals situations of the differents city states.

 

you can yes masquerade your stronghold, that could be a good lorefriendly explanation. But if you're an "evil" (I use the "" from the beginning because this is too simplified as a terme)and not masquerading anything, ok, they won't like you. But, they are not stupid, if you help them defeat the main ennemy, and let's take a general main plot, who's theatening their life and citizens, they won't attack you if they think you can be useful to defeat this ennemy. They'll eventually turn on you after the war is over, or if you're a good diplomat, make truce pact (who will eventually be over in less than some years assurely ^^). But this is all about context, so I'm not complaining or anything, let's see what it will be when we'll really be playing on.

 

Would be interesting seeing something like fallout new vegas reputation system. What you do in your stronghold affects the relationship with factions in the game. The factions elite members may hate you and want to kill you at first depending on what you do in your stronghold. And eventually if you make significant choices in your stronghold and do not be diplomatic they can sway their entire faction to wreck your stronghold.

[Lephys]

Failion makes a good point, though. You just have to make sure you're only allowed to be A bad guy, and not THE bad guy. If you're allowed to be THE bad guy, it just clashes with the rest of the setup. You can't be allowed to become a bigger priority threat than whatever craziness is threatening the world, or it's no longer any semblence of a specific narrative, and is now a stronghold simulator, in which you just kind of do what you want, and the rest of the world exists only to react satisfyingly to your choices (almost like a god sim).

 

There's nothing wrong with a game like that, but it can't be that AND a deliberate narrative.

 

It's just one of those fine lines: at what point do you go from unpleasant-but-effective to seemingly-unstoppable-evil-tyrant-with-God-knows-what-goals-in-mind?

 

I don't care how badly you still want to prevent some huge threat/problem from devastating the entire realm, and how much help you're offering with that; if you walk into someone's house and tear their child in half, then say "Sorry, I just like doing that. Okay, so come help me get rid of this bad guy, alright, 8D?!", they're just going to try and kill you. I can assure you that, at that point, their fear and loathing of you is far more powerful than their cares about the state of the world.

 

Not saying you're suggesting tearing people's children in half, then asking them for favors, specifically. I just want to make a point about levels of evil.

[Nyhilla]

 

 

The thing about making your stronghold some spooky halloween necromancer death lair. I don't know you have to ask how smart and powerful are the forces are the game world. Would city states stand idle and let some murdering madman stronghold stand or march their armies to destroy it. Perhaps masquerading and decorating it so it is of high class and standard would better suit a dark lord that is evil. Well it really depends how smart the denizens of the game world and and obsidian wants to do with their game.

 

That's about mechanics ingame, and in the same time the politicals situations of the differents city states.

 

you can yes masquerade your stronghold, that could be a good lorefriendly explanation. But if you're an "evil" (I use the "" from the beginning because this is too simplified as a terme)and not masquerading anything, ok, they won't like you. But, they are not stupid, if you help them defeat the main ennemy, and let's take a general main plot, who's theatening their life and citizens, they won't attack you if they think you can be useful to defeat this ennemy. They'll eventually turn on you after the war is over, or if you're a good diplomat, make truce pact (who will eventually be over in less than some years assurely ^^). But this is all about context, so I'm not complaining or anything, let's see what it will be when we'll really be playing on.

 

Would be interesting seeing something like fallout new vegas reputation system. What you do in your stronghold affects the relationship with factions in the game. The factions elite members may hate you and want to kill you at first depending on what you do in your stronghold. And eventually if you make significant choices in your stronghold and do not be diplomatic they can sway their entire faction to wreck your stronghold.

 

 

That's part of what I'm trying to share with, so I can only agree with that.

 

Failion makes a good point, though. You just have to make sure you're only allowed to be A bad guy, and not THE bad guy. If you're allowed to be THE bad guy, it just clashes with the rest of the setup. You can't be allowed to become a bigger priority threat than whatever craziness is threatening the world, or it's no longer any semblence of a specific narrative, and is now a stronghold simulator, in which you just kind of do what you want, and the rest of the world exists only to react satisfyingly to your choices (almost like a god sim).

 

There's nothing wrong with a game like that, but it can't be that AND a deliberate narrative.

 

It's just one of those fine lines: at what point do you go from unpleasant-but-effective to seemingly-unstoppable-evil-tyrant-with-God-knows-what-goals-in-mind?

 

I don't care how badly you still want to prevent some huge threat/problem from devastating the entire realm, and how much help you're offering with that; if you walk into someone's house and tear their child in half, then say "Sorry, I just like doing that. Okay, so come help me get rid of this bad guy, alright, 8D?!", they're just going to try and kill you. I can assure you that, at that point, their fear and loathing of you is far more powerful than their cares about the state of the world.

 

Not saying you're suggesting tearing people's children in half, then asking them for favors, specifically. I just want to make a point about levels of evil.

 

 

About tearing childrens in half ... well, I'll see that one day maybe ... Just kidding ! Or am I .. don't know anymore ... my mind is full of nothing right now. Ha !

 

Either way, my last post was part of what you said, about a "reputation" you tie with inhabitants. This was about the paladin order and the "they'll eventually beat the **** out of you if you're growing a threat against them as well as the main vilain".

 

unpleasant-but-effective to seemingly-unstoppable-evil-tyrant-with-God-knows-what-goals-in-mind

 

I'm interested by these type of developments in sotry lines in games in fact. Will you wish to join or not the "villains". One that come in my mind was Might and magic 7 where you could join the Light or the Dark side, angels/wizards or necromancers. I liked it, even if there wasn't a real difference in the end, you got differents quests relative to what side you choose. I'm not saying neither that you must choose a path, but to be able to interact with the overall factions, without being tied to one, or to the good and bad guys.

 

Exemple, you (The neutral), the good, and the bad ( Yeah yea I know, badumtss). You're wandering the world, you met some important peoples, they try to convince you to join them as they see you're growing in power. You get a strnoghold by wathever method you can (That can be difficult to script that I know). Here you are, little lord, seeking yourself a purpose, what will you do ? seek power, glory, you don't give a ****. And you go on I'll let your imagination work for you.

 

This is a possible script for a rpg. And in fact, I think that with the same model as of project eternity use, you could do it. This could open a lot of possibilitys and different way to play a game. If only video game industry wern't so obsessed with basic and fast achieve game that make money (and not money for the employees who'd created the game ...). And do not misunderstand me, I'm not saying that project eternity is one of them. I placed great hope in it, and by now I'm far, really far to be disapointed ^^, I just love to grumble on everything ^^

 

I'm off topic now ... ^^

Edited November 6, 2013 by Nyhilla

[JFSOCC]

I hope the building upgrades like the hedge maze don't just give you a bonus, but the ability to earn bonuses based on related challenges. Like, the hedge maze doesn't just increase your stealth, but you can have three different challenges or quests based on owning the maze, which one character in your party can attempt. completing these challenges gives different, more personal rewards.

 

Otherwise it's just a graphical way of saying "Hedge Maze, +5 stealth" which would be incredibly lame.

[Lephys]

Otherwise it's just a graphical way of saying "Hedge Maze, +5 stealth" which would be incredibly lame.

Well, it's potentially a graphical way of saying "Hedge Maze, +5 stealth when you rest.". Which is assumed to be more than just sleeping, and you're supposed to have a few hours of free time for your peeps to go setup and complete their own challenges in the hedge maze.

 

Of course, I still agree with you that it would be pretty awesome to have some active use for the hedge maze, rather than passively abstract everything. Ideally, that is.

[metalwar5]

 

Muahahahaha!, nice photo. SSI Stronghold, Fantastic and frustating game!!. Sigh!!! My Kingdom for the old days!

 

 

 

 

By Tim Cain, Senior Code Wizard and Systems Designer

 

 

[Failion]

I can see faction diplomacy in being a evil lord be interesting in making the player question his nature. To not get factions in the game wreck your stronghold you have to become good friends with the corrupt evil elite in said factions. And this may involve participating in homosexual sex orgy, slavery or whatever. How much are you willing to sink in the rabbit hole of being evil so you can be a thieving, murdering ass.

[Tamerlane]

What the actual ****ing ****?

[sirchet]

Personally I've never understood how someone can enjoy portraying an evil character, but then again I've also never understood how someone can enjoy the taste of black olives.

 

I guess it just boils down to taste .... funny thing how taste works, aye?

[Lephys]

Personally I've never understood how someone can enjoy portraying an evil character...

Alignment-ist!!!

 

...but then again I've also never understood how someone can enjoy the taste of black olives.

RACIST!!!

 

 

(I jest...FYI)

 

I also, personally, can never really find it in me to be evil, not even virtually. I mean, human flaws -- selfishness, revenge, etc., I get that. But, "I'm going to kill your family, who did nothing at all to me, just to make YOU suffer! MUAHAHAHA!" and the like? I don't get it either. Not wanting to BE that... again, even virtually.

 

I don't think people who want to play virtual evil characters are bad or something. But, I just plain don't comprehend what makes that so enjoyable.

[Malekith]

I also, personally, can never really find it in me to be evil, not even virtually. I mean, human flaws -- selfishness, revenge, etc., I get that. But, "I'm going to kill your family, who did nothing at all to me, just to make YOU suffer! MUAHAHAHA!" and the like? I don't get it either. Not wanting to BE that... again, even virtually.

That's not evil, that's lunatic. Evil is something along the lines of Tywin Lannister. Slaver and drug broker is rational, human sacrifices not so much if you do them for the lulz. If you have to gain something from it (harvesting children souls in order to make animats for example) is another matter. I hope PE gives me such choices.(the rational ones, not murder/rape/maim for sport) One of the highlights of PS:T and MotB was the fact that you could be a complete monster, but it never felt cheap "for the evulz".

Edited November 20, 2013 by Malekith

[Lephys]

That, I understand. Wanting to run torture pits in a giant Necromancer dungeon, I kinda don't get.

 

Personally, though, I wouldn't even want to be Tywin Lannister. I'm glad characters like him exist, but I don't want to control them.

[Malekith]

That, I understand. Wanting to run torture pits in a giant Necromancer dungeon, I kinda don't get.

 

Personally, though, I wouldn't even want to be Tywin Lannister. I'm glad characters like him exist, but I don't want to control them.

I the opposite. I never play a "good person" until 3 playthrough, and even then they develope a mean side unconsiously.

[Lephys]

I the opposite. I never play a "good person" until 3 playthrough, and even then they develope a mean side unconsiously.

Therein lies the beauty of human variance.

[sirchet]

Maybe it's just from my personal experience as a soldier, having seen the results of evil deeds and the almost impossible to fix consequences they inflict on people from an up close and personal view, that just leaves a very bad taste in my mouth when I see things done solely to hurt others physically, or emotionally.

 

And yes, I do understand this is just a game that we "make believe" we are someone else far away in a fantasy world.

 

But tell me, how far away and how much fantasy resides in our own minds and follows us through our every day actions?

 

More than a few mass murderers have said they fantasized about killing and hurting people long before they had the courage to actually do it.

[Nidhögg!]

Well, I would like to remind you that we are talking about a game, a cluster of pixels.

I don't think playing an evil character will lead anyone to do the same kind of things in real life...

I mean, when I first played Baldur's Gate, I was around 8 years old, and I always picked up a lawful good paladin, and saved the widow and the orphan, it was enjoyable when I was a child... Nowadays it just feels boring.

So I decided to play an evil character, and I discovered a whole world of fun. What makes me enjoying that way of playing is simply to be coherent with my alignment, if I choose to be evil, I'll play that way and be a murderer or a slaver. And that does not make me a psychopath, it's a game, a G-A-M-E, nothing compared to my personal life and it'll never be.

And, by the way, I don't have fun by killing without reason (even if that reason is sometimes insignificant ).

[Stun]

That, and evil is such a broad term in RPGs. I'd imagine many people who swear they don't commit evil acts, actually *do*, they just don't realize it. Selfishness is considered evil, for example. Thus if you ever killed Drizzt in BG1 to get his shiny Scimitars, then you are playing evil. And in BG2, if you refuse to give the silver sword blade back to the Githyanki when they ask you to... then you're playing Evil.

 

etc.

[Lephys]

Then we're all evil, because no one is never selfish. Case closed, I guess. Doesn't matter if you slaughter an entire nation, or don't share gum with a friend. Evil is evil. No point in distinguishing the two. *dusts off hands*

 

[/sarcasm]

[SophosTheWise]

Today I was just going through the old updates and I totally forgot, that before the stronhold there was a player house stretch goal. So, does the stronghold eliminate the earlier stretchgoal, or do we get them both? I mean sure, the stronghold is more epic, bigger and has more uses, but one argument for a player house would be that I maybe simply want to lay back in a house with an herb garden instead of throning on my stronghold...

[Lephys]

Today I was just going through the old updates and I totally forgot, that before the stronhold there was a player house stretch goal. So, does the stronghold eliminate the earlier stretchgoal, or do we get them both? I mean sure, the stronghold is more epic, bigger and has more uses, but one argument for a player house would be that I maybe simply want to lay back in a house with an herb garden instead of throning on my stronghold...

 

 

Your player house is located within the boundaries of the stronghold, but it is its own building with its own upgrades/benefits.

[sirchet]

Then we're all evil, because no one is never selfish. Case closed, I guess. Doesn't matter if you slaughter an entire nation, or don't share gum with a friend. Evil is evil. No point in distinguishing the two. *dusts off hands*

 

[/sarcasm]

Believe it or not we are all entitled to our own opinions and I am willing to discuss the differences between them in hopes of understanding another's point of view, hence my statement of "I don't understand", but please let's keep it civil.

[Lephys]

I realize that text is easier to read as hostile (as it is mostly tone-ambiguous), but I don't think sarcasm is inherently uncivil. The sarcasm was merely a tool to emphasize the point that I don't think anyone's confused about the blatant difference between technically not-good things, and deliberately evil acts.

 

Selfishness isn't good, but I don't know if I'd say it's evil. I mean, if simply not-sharing something you could've shared (refraining from a good deed) is evil, then, by the same token, not-harming someone you could've harmed (refraining from an evil deed) would be good. "Look at all the good I'm doing! I haven't killed or harmed a single person this whole year!" Selfishness can lead to evil, but I think something beyond merely not wanting to give up something is required for downright evil to be born.

Edited November 22, 2013 by Lephys