I think at this point we can all agree that roleplaying should always be optional.
Once a thread goes severely off-topic, it is abandoned for a good reason. You don't go around giving it a constant Cure Light Wounds spell with off-topic Prayers.
Arrgghhhh!!!! Though it is exactly what I am doing now
(both hands on the ships wheel getting this thread back on track)
I don't really understand what you mean by armor customization, but it used to be like you collect materials and they give you boosts when you join them into armor.
For change in appearance, there were items - like scientific device which can make you look like zombie, or any other monster (and so undead won't attack you thinking you are one of them) for a limited time, or for until you exit the area.
0
iamtruthseekerMember, Moonstars, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 0Arc User
edited January 2013
Hmm, haven't seen it in quite a while. You mean mechanical or cosmetic? *Sets course back to MMORPG.com's article without further tangential delay.*
I don't really understand what you mean by armor customization, but it used to be like you collect materials and they give you boosts when you join them into armor.
For change in appearance, there were items - like scientific device which can make you look like zombie, or any other monster (and so undead won't attack you thinking you are one of them) for a limited time, or for until you exit the area.
Yep thats it exactly, what you said !!
Hmm, haven't seen it in quite a while. You mean mechanical or cosmetic? *Sets course back to MMORPG.com's article without further tangential delay.*
Im all about the cosmetic, the game will force enough over powered items in my back pack.
It won't be there for launch - devs were asked about this feature for foundry and they say engine does make it possible to have something like that in foundry but they will only do it after launch incase people do demand this feature.
The armors would be more like traditional D&D here - change in armor will change the actual appearance of armor, but you will be able to color your clothes with dyes and stuff. Each armor will have a different model.
One of the things I very much disliked about DDO was their, in my opinion, bad implementation of cosmetically applied armor sets. How their decision was different from their other game Lotro who has a great implementation of cosmetics, probably due to limitations of game engines, but to only apply a cosmetic in a one shot application was not good. Lotro on the other hand has a cosmetic tab on the equipped inventory panel that you could apply a wholly cosmetic piece of armor and once used was bound to your account in most cases but could be sent to your other characters to enjoy again if you so wanted to....on top of that they have cosmetic bank slots that made ease of transfer to other character easier and didn't cost you in game money as apposed to sending it in the mail.
Plus once a cosmetic was applied to your armor you couldn't just buy another cosmetic and overlay or replace the old one but you had to buy a removal kit to then apply the new cosmetic to the armor.
Please take this into consideration when considering how you utilize and implement cosmetics in this game.
Roleplaying and making a quest dialog interesting are two different things. Roleplaying is acting your part in character. Making a quest dialog is a part of making an RPG. People are getting RP and RPG confused here.
RPG is a quest based game
RP is playing a role in a game, acting as your character
Tagging a quest "RPG" is redundant because the game is an RPG. Tagging a quest "RP" makes no sense at all because reading a prewriten dialog is not roleplay.
RP servers are servers with more roleplayers, but the game is RPG on all servers.
Roleplaying and making a quest dialog interesting are two different things. Roleplaying is acting your part in character. Making a quest dialog is a part of making an RPG. People are getting RP and RPG confused here.
RPG is a quest based game
RP is playing a role in a game, acting as your character
Tagging a quest "RPG" is redundant because the game is an RPG. Tagging a quest "RP" makes no sense at all because reading a prewriten dialog is not roleplay.
RP servers are servers with more roleplayers, but the game is RPG on all servers.
Which is why servers heavily into RP and I mean strict RP, were difficult to become part of. Switching dialogue in and out of character needs a colorized text feature so that new or curious players can become involved.
One of the things I very much disliked about DDO was their, in my opinion, bad implementation of cosmetically applied armor sets. How their decision was different from their other game Lotro who has a great implementation of cosmetics, probably due to limitations of game engines, but to only apply a cosmetic in a one shot application was not good. Lotro on the other hand has a cosmetic tab on the equipped inventory panel that you could apply a wholly cosmetic piece of armor and once used was bound to your account in most cases but could be sent to your other characters to enjoy again if you so wanted to....on top of that they have cosmetic bank slots that made ease of transfer to other character easier and didn't cost you in game money as apposed to sending it in the mail.
Plus once a cosmetic was applied to your armor you couldn't just buy another cosmetic and overlay or replace the old one but you had to buy a removal kit to then apply the new cosmetic to the armor.
Please take this into consideration when considering how you utilize and implement cosmetics in this game.
Agreed, but DDO had a very old engine - even Lotro's engine is perhaps older than cryptic's new engine. So I expect their armor to be much better. The videos on gameplay have raised my hopes though.
On the main subject: Cryptic's major strength has always been character appearance customization, going back to their work on CoH/CoV. Even STO had an extremely robust engine for character models, and tons of uniform options before you even get into the C/Z-store upgrades.
How they will handle a sword and sorcery game that is extremely equipment based is going to be new for them, but I do have faith in the end result here. Cryptic has had many failures as a developer, but character customization has never been one of them.
If I had to guess you'll probably have a lot of clothing and dress options for making your character's appearance, and then a show/hide option availible for each item you can wear in your inventory, allowing you to decide whether to display your own costume choice, or the graphics for the equipment your wearing, this is the system STO uses currently.
When it comes to socketing items, that is a fun feature, but really wouldn't fit the D&D vision of magical items, which generally are not customizable by the user.
Now to nerd out: On the spin off topic of role-playing games, the name is misleading. RPGs are the child of war gaming, having sprung from college wargaming clubs. Basically there was a demand for smaller unit engagements in war games, which eventually decreased down to the level of individual soldiers and their relative equipment and how to simulate combat statistically. This evolved away from history into fantasy as people began to wonder "well, if I can simulate Napoleanic Soldiers, can I simulate Tolkien's Orc and run a war-sim if they were to hypothetically fight pre-Meiji era Japanese military. From there it turned into simulations of people controlling individual fantasy characters in combat.
To be honest the first "RPGs" were a couple of uber-nerds all psyched that they could quickly emulate a sword fight or something using dice and by agreeing on numbers representing equipment and training for individual soldiers or troops. That lead to sims giving a weak subtext for having a bunch of characters/troops fight a simplistic fantasy scenario inspired by vintage fantasy.
To some extent if you look at the old "Chainmail" rules (I actually own a set I got at a used book store, cheap) you can see how D&D, and RPGs evolved.
The term "Role-Playing" was intended to differentiate from "War Gaming" not to imply that it was a form of drama. The idea being that your playing a role in the scope of a battle, controlling a single unit, as opposed to controlling a massive number of troops and moving units of minatures around. A big part of the point was also that it's your role (character) that determines what happens, not your individual, real world, capabilities.
Now, needless to say RPGs grew beyond this, the sims, and imaginary enviroments for them became increasingly elaborate and it developed into a sort of free-form storytelling medium. The question of what role-playing entails and the idea of acting out your character being the point is actually quite differant from the initial intent.
I'd argue that the defining trait of a role-playing game, is the stats, as much as many people today hate that point. The idea that your simulating the action and what happens with numbers and mechanics, and the fact that your character can be very differant from who you actually are, since your capabilities by definition are supposed to have nothing to do with what your character is capable of doing. The storytelling aspects, world building, and even dramatic acting skill all improve the experience, but at the core have nothing to do with whether something is an RPG or not. This is how RPGs are differentiated from say an improv group sitting around a table having a discussion in character (perhaps in costumes) for the entertainment of a crowd, or even just for the amusement of the people involved (like some of the things you might see at a Ren Faire).
My definitions come from reading a number of articles on the subject over the years, Dragon Magazine and other RPG periodicals ran bits on the history of RPGs and how they evolved from time to time. As well as pointing out in an academic sense that Professor MAR Barker (inventor of Teukemel/Empire Of the Petal Throne) is probably the real originator, having beat Gygax and Arnenson to the punch so to speak, especially in terms of extended things into a fantasy world. How true that is or not I've never investigated in detail but it comes up in uber-nerd discussion so I figured I'd include that disclaimer here, since I HAVE been implying Gygax and Arnenson deserve the credit for the creation of RPGs, as opposed to just having popularized it. Any way it goes, it's supposed to be pretty bloody close to the point of not mattering.
As an associated point there have been questions over the years as to whether stats like Intelligence and Charisma belong in an RPG anymore at all. The original idea was to allow a player to take on the role of say a genius if they were stupid, or a suave con man if they are not. The way games have evolved though players are themselves expected to play their characters (as opposed to simply declaring social intent and rolling for reaction), and of course solve puzzles and enigmas on their own. Meaning that the dumb as rocks fighter, played by a person who is charismatic or has dramatic abillity, can both be responsible for deciphering riddles and puzzles AND charming the socks off of NPCs, in comparison to the rogue who is supposed to be dashing and charming but is played by someone not so verbally gifted or well liked around the table, or the wizard who is supposed to be the closest thing to omniscient that a mortal can be due to his ungodly intelligence score, but is being played by someone of average or sub-average intelligence (or at least problem solving abillity). The very existance of such attributes which contridict how modern gamers tend to actually play is a sign of the original intent of the rules, and how a lot of things that are played out today, we handled in a fairly abstract sense. Instead of walking in and actually trying to fast talk a guard or something you might just say "I'm going to fast talk the guard" roll Charisma and then the GM might tell you "You throw out a huge patter of BS, and he eventually lets you through in confusion, guessing he's doing the right thing" as opposed to focusing on the actual dialogue... which is kind of anathema to a lot of gamers today.
Such are my thoughts, and what I've learned about RPGs, their history, nature, and the intent of the term. If anyone is interested (just throwing it out there to kill a few minutes since I'm checking these forums more often). Like usual, apologies if that upsets anyone, I know people have strong feelings on a lot of this, and I'm not always the best at articulating things.
Also just for the sake of sort of bragging (lol) they were a bit before my time, but I actually did manage to snag copies of the original pamphlet D&D books (Men & Magic, etc..) along with the original Pamphlet Blackmoor and Greyhawk settings, and two copies of Eldrich Wizardry (one of which is really shredded), not to mention a copy of Chainmail. The bundle cost me like $15 by dumb luck at a used book store. To be honest it's mostly a curiousity and it's amazing how much RPGs evolved since then, going back this far the rules definatly have a lot of "WTF" factor from a modern perspective. Haven't checked them out recently though, I've got them stored in plastic so they won't wear any more.
0
iamtruthseekerMember, Moonstars, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 0Arc User
edited January 2013
*Anther happy moment for the lord of the nerd lore hath spoken truth yet again in glorious wall of text.*
But seriously, yes this is accurate, and caused a lot of how we see RP perception on the PnP side of the game.
Anybody want to think how this will influence the MMO game of Nevrwinter?
Pulling the derailed train back on track with the help of spiderman, NW is a fantasy setting. Devs have already stated that things will be done differently in NW. So no changing forms unless a wizard casts illusion on you. Or something like that.
Also armor would change appearance based on what you wear. There will b cool armor too which would be rare. You can dye the armor with cosmetics, or wear some vanity accessories, but the model and shape will depend on what type of armor it is.
- the first interview
0
zarkaz123Member, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian UsersPosts: 0Arc User
edited January 2013
Meh, I just hope theres plenty of talents / skills in a tree to select from so that there is not really a must go way for a specific role. I mean obviously you would not pick up too many things from a dps section if you want to tank but having limited points to put into many viable things to pick from would be great so that no one tank, dps, cc or healer would be exactly the same. I find comfort in finding my very own build that I think works best for me, no matter what role.
Also armor would change appearance based on what you wear. There will b cool armor too which would be rare. You can dye the armor with cosmetics, or wear some vanity accessories, but the model and shape will depend on what type of armor it is.
- the first interview
O GOD,
i hear GW2 type transmute stone and gem buying troting down the road, the first bad thing ive actually felt so far O DEAR.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
0
ranncoreMember, Moderators, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 2,508
Yes, if they are probably not offering building stats, they better offer us whole lots a powers to choose from!
They've already said that we will be adjusting our own stats when we build characters. I'll try to dig up a link to the relevant interview, but I remember the squez saying something like, "so, if your wizard was the village bully before getting into magic, you might choose to start with a 12 strength instead of an 8."
I am honestly hoping that skills come into play and this isn't just a pure action RPG. DDO had a lot of flaws but the inclusion of things such as search, disarm trap, pick lock ect ect... really gave that game a distinct DnD feel. Why be a rogue if you don't have an arsenal of skills? What good is a cleric that knows nothing of religion? While skills have been largely downsized in 4ed they are still an integral part of the DnD exp. Tying into what our verbose friend was talking about above us, they also are a huge factor in determining how to allocate your stats. A skill based rogue will be eyeing that int score pretty hard despite the desire for more dmg or health from str and con.
0
ranncoreMember, Moderators, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 2,508
I am honestly hoping that skills come into play and this isn't just a pure action RPG.
Although they haven't said much about traps yet, they have said that there is an ingredients gathering system for crafting linked to certain skills, like Arcana and Religion.
Although they haven't said much about traps yet, they have said that there is an ingredients gathering system for crafting linked to certain skills, like Arcana and Religion.
they have confirmed traps publicly, but not locks.
i.e. traos are dere but locks may or maynot be
0
ranncoreMember, Moderators, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 2,508
they have confirmed traps publicly, but not locks.
i.e. traos are dere but locks may or maynot be
They have confirmed traps but I'm not sure they have said anything about a skill based disarm system. I hope that's implied in the confirmation of traps.
I'd also like to see a mini-game of sorts attached to traps and locks, like the Thief or Elder Scrolls games. Traps and locks in DDO were nothing but click and wait... very boring. Too dependent on skill checks and not enough player interaction. Thought it was a shame, too, because I've frequently played clever rogue types in my PnP games and other RPGs.
0
quorforgedMember, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 0Arc User
I'd also like to see a mini-game of sorts attached to traps and locks, like the Thief or Elder Scrolls games. Traps and locks in DDO were nothing but click and wait... very boring. Too dependent on skill checks and not enough player interaction. Thought it was a shame, too, because I've frequently played clever rogue types in my PnP games and other RPGs.
Eh, no thanks on the traps and locks mini-game. It would get old real quick.
I think DDO's approach is fine; just make the animation faster.
0
ranncoreMember, Moderators, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 2,508
edited January 2013
It's just that it felt like I wasn't doing anything, it was all automated from my character sheet. Player interaction is a good thing and it definitely fits the theme of the game so far, where the player is in control of everything his character does.
Different strokes for different folks tho I guess. Maybe "mini-game" wasn't the right choice of words. But picking a lock should be more than just clicking on it. It should be something I do, not something my character does. And my character's skills should affect how well I do it, not do it for me.
0
ranncoreMember, Moderators, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 2,508
edited January 2013
On a related note I'd really, really like to see the character creation screen(s). Even if it's a work in progress - I'd just like to know what they're working with.
It's just that it felt like I wasn't doing anything, it was all automated from my character sheet. Player interaction is a good thing and it definitely fits the theme of the game so far, where the player is in control of everything his character does.
You're still controlling what your character does, even if you just have to click on the trap/lock.
As for more player interaction, it's a good thing if it's fun, and that just hasn't been my experience with lock-picking mini-games in other games. It's OK the first time, but gets annoying by the 50th time in a single-player RPG. In an MMO I may well be playing for years... yeah, sounds awful.
Different strokes for different folks tho I guess. Maybe "mini-game" wasn't the right choice of words. But picking a lock should be more than just clicking on it. It should be something I do, not something my character does. And my character's skills should affect how well I do it, not do it for me.
I'm not sure what could be more than just clicking on it, and not be a "mini-game" of some sort.
I could see having a few specific locks involve solving a puzzle, with significantly different puzzles for different puzzles, but it's not something I'd want for all locks, and certainly not the same puzzle or whatever for all of them.
Obviously, this is all going to boil down to personal opinion, but personally, the Rogue is the class I'm most interested in playing, thanks to the combat abilities I've seen. I'd really hate to be saddled with some lame mini-game that I have to play through to "do my job" whenever I'm grouping.
You're still controlling what your character does, even if you just have to click on the trap/lock.
As for more player interaction, it's a good thing if it's fun, and that just hasn't been my experience with lock-picking mini-games in other games. It's OK the first time, but gets annoying by the 50th time in a single-player RPG. In an MMO I may well be playing for years... yeah, sounds awful.
...
I understand bit it would be great if you can opt to play minigame.
Play minigame -> get XP for solving trap.
No play minigame -> No get XP but trap solved none-the-less.
0
ranncoreMember, Moderators, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 2,508
edited January 2013
I think the developers are taking the game in a direction that rewards players for playing skillfully. I just don't see any skill involved in a point-click-win system for disarming traps that's sole determining factor is a passive skill check.
Can a lock-picking mini-game get old after a while? Sure. But so can the little game control wizards play by toggling enemies around. We can only hope that the Rogue's abilities are as much fun to be engaged in as the other classes. And are as demanding on the player to be successful.
0
quorforgedMember, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 0Arc User
I think the developers are taking the game in a direction that rewards players for playing skillfully. I just don't see any skill involved in a point-click-win system for disarming traps that's sole determining factor is a passive skill check.
The only indication is that the developers are taking the game in a direction that rewards players for playing skillfully in action-based combat. Lock-picking mini-games are not part of that same "direction".
There doesn't have to be "player skill" embedded into absolutely everything our characters do. "Testing skill" isn't always a good thing, if that test doesn't make for a fun game. And my position is that lock-pick minigames have not been much fun, and I think are unlikely to be fun.
Do we also need mining mini-games and flower-picking mini-games for the collectibles they've said we'll have? I certainly hope not. I'd much rather have DDO's "run by and tap a button and pick up immediately" if we're going to have collectibles nodes at all.
Is just pressing "W" to move forward a "press-button-win system for movement" that lacks any skill, and we should instead have a test of player skill for it?
Do not equate not wanting lock-picking minigames with not wanting mechanics that reward players for playing skillfully. I absolutely want that. But I want fun mechanics that reward players for playing skillfully, and I'd much rather they be part of the core gameplay experience, not a tacked on mini-game.
Can a lock-picking mini-game get old after a while? Sure. But so can the little game control wizards play by toggling enemies around. We can only hope that the Rogue's abilities are as much fun to be engaged in as the other classes. And are as demanding on the player to be successful.
Control Wizard's abilities are part of the main gameplay (action combat). They are not part of some separate mini-game.
And I certainly do hope that all of the Rogue's abilities are as much fun as the other classes. If that includes having to play silly little mini-games to use them, I doubt that will be the case.
Comments
If there had never been a COH there would never have been a CO. :cool:
Once a thread goes severely off-topic, it is abandoned for a good reason. You don't go around giving it a constant Cure Light Wounds spell with off-topic Prayers.
Arrgghhhh!!!! Though it is exactly what I am doing now
How cool would that be???
(both hands on the ships wheel getting this thread back on track)
I don't really understand what you mean by armor customization, but it used to be like you collect materials and they give you boosts when you join them into armor.
For change in appearance, there were items - like scientific device which can make you look like zombie, or any other monster (and so undead won't attack you thinking you are one of them) for a limited time, or for until you exit the area.
Yep thats it exactly, what you said !!
Im all about the cosmetic, the game will force enough over powered items in my back pack.
The armors would be more like traditional D&D here - change in armor will change the actual appearance of armor, but you will be able to color your clothes with dyes and stuff. Each armor will have a different model.
Plus once a cosmetic was applied to your armor you couldn't just buy another cosmetic and overlay or replace the old one but you had to buy a removal kit to then apply the new cosmetic to the armor.
Please take this into consideration when considering how you utilize and implement cosmetics in this game.
RPG is a quest based game
RP is playing a role in a game, acting as your character
Tagging a quest "RPG" is redundant because the game is an RPG. Tagging a quest "RP" makes no sense at all because reading a prewriten dialog is not roleplay.
RP servers are servers with more roleplayers, but the game is RPG on all servers.
Which is why servers heavily into RP and I mean strict RP, were difficult to become part of. Switching dialogue in and out of character needs a colorized text feature so that new or curious players can become involved.
Wow, this is so off topic already..:)
https://soundcloud.com/nathankilgore/i-wanna-see-you2
Otter ~~~~ on Beholder
Agreed, but DDO had a very old engine - even Lotro's engine is perhaps older than cryptic's new engine. So I expect their armor to be much better. The videos on gameplay have raised my hopes though.
On the main subject: Cryptic's major strength has always been character appearance customization, going back to their work on CoH/CoV. Even STO had an extremely robust engine for character models, and tons of uniform options before you even get into the C/Z-store upgrades.
How they will handle a sword and sorcery game that is extremely equipment based is going to be new for them, but I do have faith in the end result here. Cryptic has had many failures as a developer, but character customization has never been one of them.
If I had to guess you'll probably have a lot of clothing and dress options for making your character's appearance, and then a show/hide option availible for each item you can wear in your inventory, allowing you to decide whether to display your own costume choice, or the graphics for the equipment your wearing, this is the system STO uses currently.
When it comes to socketing items, that is a fun feature, but really wouldn't fit the D&D vision of magical items, which generally are not customizable by the user.
Now to nerd out: On the spin off topic of role-playing games, the name is misleading. RPGs are the child of war gaming, having sprung from college wargaming clubs. Basically there was a demand for smaller unit engagements in war games, which eventually decreased down to the level of individual soldiers and their relative equipment and how to simulate combat statistically. This evolved away from history into fantasy as people began to wonder "well, if I can simulate Napoleanic Soldiers, can I simulate Tolkien's Orc and run a war-sim if they were to hypothetically fight pre-Meiji era Japanese military. From there it turned into simulations of people controlling individual fantasy characters in combat.
To be honest the first "RPGs" were a couple of uber-nerds all psyched that they could quickly emulate a sword fight or something using dice and by agreeing on numbers representing equipment and training for individual soldiers or troops. That lead to sims giving a weak subtext for having a bunch of characters/troops fight a simplistic fantasy scenario inspired by vintage fantasy.
To some extent if you look at the old "Chainmail" rules (I actually own a set I got at a used book store, cheap) you can see how D&D, and RPGs evolved.
The term "Role-Playing" was intended to differentiate from "War Gaming" not to imply that it was a form of drama. The idea being that your playing a role in the scope of a battle, controlling a single unit, as opposed to controlling a massive number of troops and moving units of minatures around. A big part of the point was also that it's your role (character) that determines what happens, not your individual, real world, capabilities.
Now, needless to say RPGs grew beyond this, the sims, and imaginary enviroments for them became increasingly elaborate and it developed into a sort of free-form storytelling medium. The question of what role-playing entails and the idea of acting out your character being the point is actually quite differant from the initial intent.
I'd argue that the defining trait of a role-playing game, is the stats, as much as many people today hate that point. The idea that your simulating the action and what happens with numbers and mechanics, and the fact that your character can be very differant from who you actually are, since your capabilities by definition are supposed to have nothing to do with what your character is capable of doing. The storytelling aspects, world building, and even dramatic acting skill all improve the experience, but at the core have nothing to do with whether something is an RPG or not. This is how RPGs are differentiated from say an improv group sitting around a table having a discussion in character (perhaps in costumes) for the entertainment of a crowd, or even just for the amusement of the people involved (like some of the things you might see at a Ren Faire).
My definitions come from reading a number of articles on the subject over the years, Dragon Magazine and other RPG periodicals ran bits on the history of RPGs and how they evolved from time to time. As well as pointing out in an academic sense that Professor MAR Barker (inventor of Teukemel/Empire Of the Petal Throne) is probably the real originator, having beat Gygax and Arnenson to the punch so to speak, especially in terms of extended things into a fantasy world. How true that is or not I've never investigated in detail but it comes up in uber-nerd discussion so I figured I'd include that disclaimer here, since I HAVE been implying Gygax and Arnenson deserve the credit for the creation of RPGs, as opposed to just having popularized it. Any way it goes, it's supposed to be pretty bloody close to the point of not mattering.
As an associated point there have been questions over the years as to whether stats like Intelligence and Charisma belong in an RPG anymore at all. The original idea was to allow a player to take on the role of say a genius if they were stupid, or a suave con man if they are not. The way games have evolved though players are themselves expected to play their characters (as opposed to simply declaring social intent and rolling for reaction), and of course solve puzzles and enigmas on their own. Meaning that the dumb as rocks fighter, played by a person who is charismatic or has dramatic abillity, can both be responsible for deciphering riddles and puzzles AND charming the socks off of NPCs, in comparison to the rogue who is supposed to be dashing and charming but is played by someone not so verbally gifted or well liked around the table, or the wizard who is supposed to be the closest thing to omniscient that a mortal can be due to his ungodly intelligence score, but is being played by someone of average or sub-average intelligence (or at least problem solving abillity). The very existance of such attributes which contridict how modern gamers tend to actually play is a sign of the original intent of the rules, and how a lot of things that are played out today, we handled in a fairly abstract sense. Instead of walking in and actually trying to fast talk a guard or something you might just say "I'm going to fast talk the guard" roll Charisma and then the GM might tell you "You throw out a huge patter of BS, and he eventually lets you through in confusion, guessing he's doing the right thing" as opposed to focusing on the actual dialogue... which is kind of anathema to a lot of gamers today.
Such are my thoughts, and what I've learned about RPGs, their history, nature, and the intent of the term. If anyone is interested (just throwing it out there to kill a few minutes since I'm checking these forums more often). Like usual, apologies if that upsets anyone, I know people have strong feelings on a lot of this, and I'm not always the best at articulating things.
Also just for the sake of sort of bragging (lol) they were a bit before my time, but I actually did manage to snag copies of the original pamphlet D&D books (Men & Magic, etc..) along with the original Pamphlet Blackmoor and Greyhawk settings, and two copies of Eldrich Wizardry (one of which is really shredded), not to mention a copy of Chainmail. The bundle cost me like $15 by dumb luck at a used book store. To be honest it's mostly a curiousity and it's amazing how much RPGs evolved since then, going back this far the rules definatly have a lot of "WTF" factor from a modern perspective. Haven't checked them out recently though, I've got them stored in plastic so they won't wear any more.
But seriously, yes this is accurate, and caused a lot of how we see RP perception on the PnP side of the game.
Anybody want to think how this will influence the MMO game of Nevrwinter?
Also armor would change appearance based on what you wear. There will b cool armor too which would be rare. You can dye the armor with cosmetics, or wear some vanity accessories, but the model and shape will depend on what type of armor it is.
- the first interview
O GOD,
i hear GW2 type transmute stone and gem buying troting down the road, the first bad thing ive actually felt so far O DEAR.
They've already said that we will be adjusting our own stats when we build characters. I'll try to dig up a link to the relevant interview, but I remember the squez saying something like, "so, if your wizard was the village bully before getting into magic, you might choose to start with a 12 strength instead of an 8."
Although they haven't said much about traps yet, they have said that there is an ingredients gathering system for crafting linked to certain skills, like Arcana and Religion.
they have confirmed traps publicly, but not locks.
i.e. traos are dere but locks may or maynot be
They have confirmed traps but I'm not sure they have said anything about a skill based disarm system. I hope that's implied in the confirmation of traps.
I'd also like to see a mini-game of sorts attached to traps and locks, like the Thief or Elder Scrolls games. Traps and locks in DDO were nothing but click and wait... very boring. Too dependent on skill checks and not enough player interaction. Thought it was a shame, too, because I've frequently played clever rogue types in my PnP games and other RPGs.
Eh, no thanks on the traps and locks mini-game. It would get old real quick.
I think DDO's approach is fine; just make the animation faster.
Different strokes for different folks tho I guess. Maybe "mini-game" wasn't the right choice of words. But picking a lock should be more than just clicking on it. It should be something I do, not something my character does. And my character's skills should affect how well I do it, not do it for me.
I would take that as confirmation. But with too much traffic, it is difficult to find the source.
You're still controlling what your character does, even if you just have to click on the trap/lock.
As for more player interaction, it's a good thing if it's fun, and that just hasn't been my experience with lock-picking mini-games in other games. It's OK the first time, but gets annoying by the 50th time in a single-player RPG. In an MMO I may well be playing for years... yeah, sounds awful.
I'm not sure what could be more than just clicking on it, and not be a "mini-game" of some sort.
I could see having a few specific locks involve solving a puzzle, with significantly different puzzles for different puzzles, but it's not something I'd want for all locks, and certainly not the same puzzle or whatever for all of them.
Obviously, this is all going to boil down to personal opinion, but personally, the Rogue is the class I'm most interested in playing, thanks to the combat abilities I've seen. I'd really hate to be saddled with some lame mini-game that I have to play through to "do my job" whenever I'm grouping.
Play minigame -> get XP for solving trap.
No play minigame -> No get XP but trap solved none-the-less.
Can a lock-picking mini-game get old after a while? Sure. But so can the little game control wizards play by toggling enemies around. We can only hope that the Rogue's abilities are as much fun to be engaged in as the other classes. And are as demanding on the player to be successful.
The only indication is that the developers are taking the game in a direction that rewards players for playing skillfully in action-based combat. Lock-picking mini-games are not part of that same "direction".
There doesn't have to be "player skill" embedded into absolutely everything our characters do. "Testing skill" isn't always a good thing, if that test doesn't make for a fun game. And my position is that lock-pick minigames have not been much fun, and I think are unlikely to be fun.
Do we also need mining mini-games and flower-picking mini-games for the collectibles they've said we'll have? I certainly hope not. I'd much rather have DDO's "run by and tap a button and pick up immediately" if we're going to have collectibles nodes at all.
Is just pressing "W" to move forward a "press-button-win system for movement" that lacks any skill, and we should instead have a test of player skill for it?
Do not equate not wanting lock-picking minigames with not wanting mechanics that reward players for playing skillfully. I absolutely want that. But I want fun mechanics that reward players for playing skillfully, and I'd much rather they be part of the core gameplay experience, not a tacked on mini-game.
Control Wizard's abilities are part of the main gameplay (action combat). They are not part of some separate mini-game.
And I certainly do hope that all of the Rogue's abilities are as much fun as the other classes. If that includes having to play silly little mini-games to use them, I doubt that will be the case.