Mount, pets and other creatures

[Grinsevent]

Hi, I went to the before may post without finding a subject about mount... But i'm pretty sure it already has been discuss in depth. What I'm asking is more something "for the eyes" and something in the gameplay.

 

As we will get magnificient "quests", without animations (I forgot the right name and am not a native English speaker), some reward could be "pet" creatures or mounts. Why else would we climb a mountain and steal a Griphin eggs ? 

 

That's great, and maybe some "training" thing may be done, and now, we do have a griphin/Dragon/Snake/Bear (without the eggs) / strange creature which is well disposed to help us. 

 

Then, I think it would be awesome to make them a lair in our Stronghold, adding defensive bonus and visuals.

 

Furthermore, I would love to be able to play a "true" knight. And, who know, the druid (or paladin) may be better at it, riding a powerful bear (or his mighty horse, I know, that's less sexy). 

 

Anyway, to summerize :

- Will we be able to keep some beasts ? 

- Are mount a "bad thing" or is it something still in discussion ?

[Gfted1]

Iirc, one of the earlier updates stated something about familiars. I seriously doubt mounts will make it in. 

[Amentep]

- Are mount a "bad thing" or is it something still in discussion ?

I'm not a developer, not do I play one on TV but I think mounts automatically add additional complexity that make them non-trivial to implement.

 

Mounted combat, mounted vs. unmounted, attacks vs rider vs attacks vs mount, etc. all become things that have to be thought about and addressed in some satisfactory way. Then add in, which skills work for mounted combat etc and I think you're adding a large degree of complexity.

[rjshae]

If this turns into a series, I'm hoping that at some point we'll see some mounted opponents. That may be easier to implement than mounts for the PCs--basically they can just be treated as a single creature with an extra set of limbs. Implementing mounts for PCs would require more work and may not make sense unless they have a sandbox setting.

[Nonek]

We ought to have a horse and covered wagon, a black covered wagon with a red stripe along the side. The horse ought to be a large talking black Vaillian stallion, with an unusual mane, a dread fear of Dragons snatching him up from the earth and the resulting flight, and a sense of derision for jesters and such. He will haul around his fellow adventurers, sometimes known as the primary conglomerate.

[Tsuga C]

^ Not familiar with this allusion... 

 

Edit: And I'd very much like to see some additional information on familiars and animal companions some time before the end of 2013.  I never roleplay a druid, ranger, wizard, or sorceror without a F/AC tagging along as they're just soooo potentially entertaining and useful.

 

2nd Edit: Ah, Nonek is alluding to Mr. T.  Got it! 

Edited September 23, 2013 by Tsuga C

[JFSOCC]

thanks tsuga c, it passed me by, but I see it now.

[Fearabbit]

I'd love to have a familiar or a pet of some sorts. As long as it isn't a dog, because every freaking game has a dog companion. (I love dogs, but it's really enough now.)

 

Ideas: A small imp that can talk and likes to crack jokes. A mythical creature that can't talk, but seems to have an agenda. A small flying lizard that perches on your shoulder. A demon monkey. A freaking floating skull that also likes to crack jokes.

Basically I want something that fits a fantasy setting. I don't want a dog, or a falcon, or a badger or a ferret. Never liked about DnD that the familiars are so boring.

 

Oh, and a familiar shouldn't be restricted to certain classes. At least I'm not a fan of that at all. Maybe the more extraordinary ones should be exclusive to wizards, but my rogue should still be able to tame a lizard and use it to distract his enemies.

[oppio82]

It would be great to have a ranger PG that for example can use his abilities to tame his wolf or hawk and send him to attack or even to explore the area without being noticed maybe from the sky!

[JFSOCC]

It would be great to have a ranger PG that for example can use his abilities to tame his wolf or hawk and send him to attack or even to explore the area without being noticed maybe from the sky!

or a cat that could slip through cracks and find different paths into (possibly) hostile areas

or a monkey which can climb some walls, jump from roofs to balconies and find another way in. Open the door from the other side. Perhaps eventually learn to break in to places and steal/carry some items back to the owner.

A dog which can sense motive. (dog warns you that NPC your party is talking with might not be trusted)

asymmetrical abilities which make familiar choices relevant.

Edited September 30, 2013 by JFSOCC

[AGX-17]

Whenever I see "mounts" uttered on a forum I immediately think of WoW type MMOs and rideable magic pandas, pigs, giant dragonflies, sentient clouds, etc. and I find the concept insufferable as it's not a strategy game with a necessity for cavalry units. Aside from accelerating movement over long distances I see no value whatsoever to what are traditionally little more than status symbols to flaunt in the faces of "lesser" players. Horses or some pointlessly modified variation of an equine species acting like the Highwayman in Fallout 2 is about all I can stomach.

Edited September 30, 2013 by AGX-17

[Faerunner]

I keep saying this, but I hope we can interact with our animal companions. Sorry to keep re-using the same example, but I loved how NWN1 let us interact with animal companions. We could pet, feed, play with, scold, or maybe discuss tactics with them (though I don't see how that made any difference). In NWN2, it was reduced to... basically a glorified summoning spell. They weren't that strong, didn't have note-worthy abilities (for example, the panther companion in NWN1 could sneak attack, where the NWN2 panther couldn't), and we couldn't interact with them at all. We could type in a name, but it was just a scroll on a screen.

 

I hope they're a little more interactable and personalized for this game.

[Greydragon]

It would be great to see animal companions/familiars treated as unique skill option in events; they're so often treated as a weak permanent summon (familiars in particular). It would make even replays interesting if you get extra options in situations depending on whether you have a pickpocket ferret or a snake to explore tiny holes (hypothetical). Plus a little inserted dialogue every now and again where it may sense something you don't that gives you a tiny edge, like the smell of gunpowder on the wind or something in the shadows (again dependant on type chosen).

[rjshae]

Here's the description from update #36:

 

Familiar - All wizards can summon and dismiss familiars. Familiars are mobile "totems" for the wizard, providing defensive bonuses to allies near them and inflicting defensive penalties to enemies near them. Players can also access the master's spell list through the familiar, though casting a spell through the familiar still requires the master to physically cast it; it's simply targeted from the familiar. Familiars are weak and fragile. If a familiar is killed, the wizard takes damage and is unable to summon his or her familiar until he or she rests again.

 

In terms of the defensive penalties and bonuses described, perhaps the type is determined by the familiar chosen? I.e. a cat could provide a Reflex bonus/penalty while an owl could modify Pysche.

 

 

Whenever I see "mounts" uttered on a forum I immediately think of WoW type MMOs and rideable magic pandas, pigs, giant dragonflies, sentient clouds, etc. and I find the concept insufferable as it's not a strategy game with a necessity for cavalry units. Aside from accelerating movement over long distances I see no value whatsoever to what are traditionally little more than status symbols to flaunt in the faces of "lesser" players. Horses or some pointlessly modified variation of an equine species acting like the Highwayman in Fallout 2 is about all I can stomach.

 

It's unfortunate that gamer biases get formed in this manner, when this is actually a completely different type of game. The lack of mounts for non-party members in the IE/NWN games was a misrepresentation of the medieval culture. I'm fine with party members not needing mounts, but they should definitely be available to road patrols and enemy forces.

Edited October 1, 2013 by rjshae

[jamoecw]

gauls used chariots to get around the battlefield and didn't fight from them, saxons rode horses and dismounted to fight, though most cultures that used horses in war rode them into battle.  most games do mounts wrong in combat, while it is weird to not have cavalry, but i'd rather have them absent than done wrong.  that being said i don't see why they can't be eye candy for inns and garrisons and such.

[LadyCrimson]

Still want a cat familiar!

 

...I have yet to like mounts in this type of graphic perspective games. They never feel right, tend to be awkward to use etc. And the only game where I liked actual mounted combat was Mount and Blade. I have nothing against mounts, I just don't think they work well, mechanically, outside of specific viewpoints/graphic GUI perspectives. Yet.

[Rsinthis]

If mounts were to be incorporated, I am a strong believer that they should only be granted end game (lets imagine highest level is 24, you can acquire it at 22)

[Darkodin]

mounted combat would be pretty awesome but I think it's beyond the scope of PE for a first run. Hopefuly we will see it later in the series. If everything goes as planned that is.

[Lekian]

Hope Pets and Familiars are well implemented and we get a variety to choose from.

 

Cannot see mounts and its mechanics fitting into PE.

[Juneau]

Mounts - No, it's an entirely new level of design and implementation that they didn't count for (afaik).

Pets - Possibly, we gotta have something to populate the keep and camp site and where ever else we may own/stay frequently.

[rjshae]

I could see an abstracted mount system being beneficial for an overland map. A fully mounted party should be able to flee most encounters, or to fight on more favorable ground. Likewise, a mounted foe against an unmounted fleeing party should be able to maneuver them into an unfavorable tactical position, or an ambush. The party should be able to park their mounts at a location in order to advance on foot, thereby reducing their detection radius. The location of their mounts could then represent their camp.

[Tsuga C]

One hopes for more than a smidge of interaction with the familiars/animal companions (FACs). They're bonded with a specific character, so it'd be gratifying if they wanted to socialize (play, hunt, inquire, etc.) from time to time.

[JFSOCC]

One hopes for more than a smidge of interaction with the familiars/animal companions (FACs). They're bonded with a specific character, so it'd be gratifying if they wanted to socialize (play, hunt, inquire, etc.) from time to time.

If they exist in P:E, they should not only be around when they're relevant, or rather, they should be just as relevant as any companion npc.

[Lephys]

 

One hopes for more than a smidge of interaction with the familiars/animal companions (FACs). They're bonded with a specific character, so it'd be gratifying if they wanted to socialize (play, hunt, inquire, etc.) from time to time.

If they exist in P:E, they should not only be around when they're relevant, or rather, they should be just as relevant as any companion npc.

 

Yes! I was going to say... they should basically be just as much a part of character development as anyone else in the game, rather than just an arbitrary representation of that entity's behavior. "Look, it wants food and wants to play sometimes! But it doesn't really have anything to do with anything at all in the story."

[neo6874]

Mounts -> maybe.  It really depends on what other things are in store ... I mean, if "travel time" ends up mattering (say, because you're trying to beat the winter closing off the mountain pass), then mounts would be nice - even if they're just hirelings that are nothing but eye-candy and the game date merely advances 6 days instead of 9 while you get over the pass.

 

Familiars -> absolutely being able to interact with them is awesome.  Even better if the AI leaves them alone (until you do something with them -- e.g. attack) ... so instead of the night watchman at (Necromancer's Castle) seeing you and immediately fighting and waking up 37 more guards, you can send your cat familiar close enough to cast a sleep spell on him (then waltz in the front door ... ).