Jump to content

A:EftP - This game sucks so bad...


Recommended Posts

I played the demo for a while. And I'm mad. Just mad. I waited so long to get to play this game and was hoping that it would be more like avernum 1-3 than Avadon. I'm not complaining about the story. Just gameplay.

 

Avernum 5 and 6 were not bad, but disappointing nevertheless. Then Avadon came and it was plain bad. Combat sucked, character development was nonexistend, world was restricted... And now Escape from the pit seems to go even farther. The skill tree for example. 2 skill points per level, and you can't even put them on the same skill. Where is the variety between characters? Why on earth you can't raise first aid to X without getting priest spells or tool use to X?! I mean it is so restricted that why even have skills in the first place?

 

And then there is the difficulty thingy. The game had no difficulty whatsoever, just shitloads of HP for monster. No strategies and character placement. Just whack, whack whack, heal, whack, whack, whack, heal and hour later we have a dead monster. Then there is 5 other monster left in the room.

 

Hopefully Jeff manages to change the course of his games. The last 2 have been so huge disappointments that I don't know if I even want to try the next game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry you had such a negative experience with the game.

 

For what it's worth, these forums have given A:EFTP generally positive reviews. They have been surprisingly positive from the many people who played the previous iterations of the game (Exile and Avernum).

 

Many aspects of gameplay are far more like A1-3 than Avadon: the open, non-linear world; tile-based movement; lack of character classes; even the skill system, while clearly influenced by Avadon, has pretty much the same skill set as A1-3, just organized in a different way. The rules for where you can place skill points are much less restrictve than Avadon's, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can understand the complaint about the skill tree. In the early Exiles/Avernums, you allot a lot of skill points, so there's a lot of variety for first level characters. This is offset by your choices not having much impact later on in the game.

 

Jeff's current design philosophy is to make sure that choices stay relevant throughout the game. I found that, while my characters weren't diverse at all at the beginning of the demo, even by the end of the demo they were pretty customized.

 

But yeah, I prefer the front-loading of choices in games like BoE and BoA, where you'll be making so many different level one parties that you'll want as much diversity as possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with the old system is that while it gave you a lot more flexibility, this flexibility was mostly an illusion in that you really just had numerous ways to unknowingly create poor builds where you would eventually be unable to advance the game because your characters are too weak. The number of good builds really has not changed between the iterations, it's just a lot more difficult to make truly bad choices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Er, huh? I finished the Avernum games without relying on guides and simply put points where I felt like - I was actually role playing too, and not simply min-maxing.

 

Sure, there were difficult situations, but are gamers nowadays so pampered they whine with every papercut? Jeez.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

casual gamers (many/most of jeff's new customers) don't want to search from internet on what they need to invest to unlock this or that skill they need at later part of game or restart game at late point of game due they have made errors earlier and their party is bad, hc players like most who give advices at SW-forums know on what needs to invest and how much to unlock certain skill etc.

 

if makes really bad party I doubt player would reach end of game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Avernum had flashy graphics in this version. That wasnt what did it in to me. What got me annoyed was when all the cool skills were taken out. Assassination? Gone. Anatomy? Gone. Quick Strike from BOA and later, Gone. Quick Action? No extra attack. Those were all the things that were completely roguish in nature. Backstab you say? Thats more an avadon skill than a rogue skill. Assassination was one of the coolest skills in those games because it was so unique. Ive yet to see a game that has had such a unique and cool take on rogues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I also was hoping for the same thing, but the new graphics, the all-new animations, almost looking like Diablo III, you could do 3 major epic quests without the story ending. Who could say "NO" to that? But yea, the world is a bit restricted and unfortunately, smaller compared to AV3, I really love that game...

---------

-Nightwatcher

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Assassination is not really gone, it was just replaced with Lethal Blow, which has a very similar effect and exactly the same theme. What was so cool about Assassination anyway?

 

Gymnastics now does more or less what Quick Strike used to do. It is not exactly the same, but it is probably more useful (in a cost-benefit analysis) than Quick Strike was anyway.

 

Quick Action doesn't give an extra attack, no, but if you want that just dual-wield daggers or short swords -- that's an option that did not used to be available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My perspective:

I must say I really love this remake.

 

My pattern with with previous AV games was always this: "start out, get a few levels, realize that the builds I'm using are crappy, start over, get a few levels again, still die a lot (on normal), change my mind about builds again, start over again, eventually go online for help about where I should put my skill points, read about all the different opinions on every skill and trait, get totally overwhelmed with it all, give up/get distracted by another game."

 

I'd never finished an Avernum game, despite multiple attempts and really liking the idea of them...but I think I'm actually going to finish this one. I'm actually getting to go through and experience all the story!! And despite my party being sub-optimal I'm still able to use a combination of tactics, consumables, and determination to get though the game on Hard.

 

So...I know the old skill system was much loved, but at least for me ditching it and replacing it with something less complex and punishing has made the game much, much more enjoyable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Assassination is not really gone, it was just replaced with Lethal Blow, which has a very similar effect and exactly the same theme. What was so cool about Assassination anyway?

 

Gymnastics now does more or less what Quick Strike used to do. It is not exactly the same, but it is probably more useful (in a cost-benefit analysis) than Quick Strike was anyway.

 

Quick Action doesn't give an extra attack, no, but if you want that just dual-wield daggers or short swords -- that's an option that did not used to be available.

Assassination as a skill was everything that i loved about those games. Playing blades of avernum with that in mind was so much fun. The reason i like it is because it's very unique in that you basically aim for your character to gain so much experience so that you eventually get critical hits on people and eventually (mostly all monsters) that are less talented than your character. Its got to be one of the coolest ideas for a class.

 

Whats even cooler was the classes you can create with the older games with assassination.

 

Use swords, assassination, and rely on bows for a backup archer or marauding type rogue. Put points into resistance, hardiness, assassination for a mage killer rogue. Put a lot of points into anatomy (another favorite skill) for an assassin rogue. The list goes on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My perspective:

I must say I really love this remake.

 

My pattern with with previous AV games was always this: "start out, get a few levels, realize that the builds I'm using are crappy, start over, get a few levels again, still die a lot (on normal), change my mind about builds again, start over again, eventually go online for help about where I should put my skill points, read about all the different opinions on every skill and trait, get totally overwhelmed with it all, give up/get distracted by another game."

 

I'd never finished an Avernum game, despite multiple attempts and really liking the idea of them...but I think I'm actually going to finish this one. I'm actually getting to go through and experience all the story!! And despite my party being sub-optimal I'm still able to use a combination of tactics, consumables, and determination to get though the game on Hard.

 

So...I know the old skill system was much loved, but at least for me ditching it and replacing it with something less complex and punishing has made the game much, much more enjoyable.

Really!?! I'm the exact opposite. I've finished every Spiderweb game I've played. In some cases (as with Exile 1 and 2) more than 10 times each! Of course we share the common bond of changing builds. My favorite build for 4 characters is a warrior tank, an archer thief, a priest and a mage.

*This combination works for me and may not have the same results for you.

 

Post #672 :cool:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And then there is the difficulty thingy. The game had no difficulty whatsoever, just shitloads of HP for monster. No strategies and character placement. Just whack, whack whack, heal, whack, whack, whack, heal and hour later we have a dead monster.
It looks like you wanted a higher level of enemy AI with an increased difficulty level. With the enemies attacking you with a lot more cunning and a higher level of strategic planning.

 

I always play at the default difficulty level and I'm no expert, but I believe increasing/decreasing the difficulty only affects the statistics of play, and nothing else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My perspective:

 

My pattern with with previous AV games was always this: "start out, get a few levels, realize that the builds I'm using are crappy, start over, get a few levels again, still die a lot (on normal), change my mind about builds again, start over again, eventually go online for help about where I should put my skill points, read about all the different opinions on every skill and trait, get totally overwhelmed with it all, give up/get distracted by another game."

You do know older Avernums had a character editor? But for me normal difficulty on Avernum games isn't fun. They are too easy. I started playing A1 after trying this game out and Torment feels so easy to me. I just don't understand how you can allocate your skill points so badly that you die? Or are you trying to create perfectly min/maxed characters on firts try?

 

 

It looks like you wanted a higher level of enemy AI with an increased difficulty level. With the enemies attacking you with a lot more cunning and a higher level of strategic planning.

Better AI could do it, or more monsters per group, or the game would be designed to Torment difficulty and other difficulties would use hp/stats multipliers(divisors). But having read Jeff's blog I know these games are headed completely different direction.

 

 

It's only more simplistic in the sense that it eliminated a few pointlessly bad options.

But what is the point of options if there isn't bad options left?

 

 

I love the game. You need to think about how you plan out your characters from the beginning. The skills are varied and interesting. At times combat is tough at high difficulty but proper strategy can get you through the hardest battles.

I just didn't got the how there is anything to plan. If you want to have parry skill 8, first you must put 8 points to weapons and blademaster. If you want your mage to use less SP when casting spells, you have to first put points 3 different skills below it. With only 2 points/level up, in my opinion there isn't much to plan.

 

Maybe I'll try Exile one of these days...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But what is the point of options if there isn't bad options left?

The point of offering options doesn't have to be to try to trap players into making bad decisions. It can be to allow players to create the kind of characters that they want to play, knowing that they won't be barred from being able to succeed because they built their characters in the "wrong" way. Realising that 10 hours of gameplay went to waste because you've been building your characters in a way that's not viable in the long term, and now you'll either have to cheat or give up, isn't very much fun for most people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That 10 hours wouldn't have been a waste, it would have been a learning experience.
Not everyone plays games in order to learn how to be better at playing games. I'd say that's pretty low down the list of reasons why most people play games, in fact.
And if it wasn't fun, why would one have been playing it? Basically what you are trying to say is that a fun game is such that you win it no matter what you do and the fun comes from winning.
When most people play a game, they expect to be able to finish it eventually even if they play badly. That doesn't necessarily mean that "the fun comes from winning", but people who play (for example) to experience the story will want to be able to play through the entire game in order to do that, and won't necessarily want to learn the ins and outs of the combat system to do so.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some options are always going to be better than other options. Look at all the arguments over archers: those of us who analyze and number-crunch are all convinced that archers are relatively bad in A:EFTP, but some people are devoted to them. And that's fine, because in A:EFTP, choosing a sub-optimal option does not mean you are screwed. Your party may not be as good as someone who min-maxes with 3 adrenaline-rushing AoE-casters and a dual-wielder, but it's still good enough to play through the game on Normal, and maybe even on Hard. If you want options to affect you in a life-or-death way, play on Torment.

 

That is one thing, BTW, that is hugely improved since Avernum 5 and 6. For both A:EFTP and Avadon, "Torment" does not simply mean the monsters have huge amounts of HP and the same stupid strategies. On Torment, now, monsters get extra abilities and often extra attacks, requiring modifications to your tactics -- and yes, you will need to be thoughtful about how you approach some of those battles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

this is the first spiderweb game i played and its far far from sucking. as it is its better then many AAA titles out there, it offers a lot of quality content while to many of the big house games offer lot of glamor, special effects and good graphics all around while giving little else to the player

 

 

and a bit of negative criticism

 

in some situations there were to few dialog lines, when i found out of the mage emissary under Formello more so that the Castle knows about her i was soo curios to find out why the king lets her be, or to offer me some opinion about her and when i got to the king, nothing, not one mention for something that seemed so important to me, or other actions that will effect whole of Avernum that got no line of dialog from the king, like finding the exit or killing the emperor and other examples not only related to the king

 

also it would be nice to see some sort of optional hardcore mode to make full use of all the game has to offer, like needing to actually eat the food one has to stay alive, or drink water or sleep, so many inns and all with no empty rooms, also some extra slides at the end to show how the many choices affected Avernum, short or long future, would have been soo nice(like what happens to Kyas freehold if one decides to help or kill them)

 

A:EFTP is far from perfect but its a game with a soul that offers many good hours of play(took me around 50 to finish my first run of normal)so thank you Spiderweb smile

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I think that it's bad to remove "wrong" or "bad" options from the game,

 

I've always thought the difference between casual and hardcore games was the chance of failure,

 

casual games are like the NYC public school system, you need to put effort into failing to have even the smallest chance at failing

and hardcore games would be like the original avernums, where you could actually mess up and have to start over, hopefully learning from your mistakes

 

by removing bad choices, the game inches toward the casual end of the scale

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is also the first Spiderweb Software game I have played, and in my opinion it definitely does not suck. I have been playing it casually for nearly a month now, taking my time, and just enjoying the experience.

 

I have only really got into RPG's over the last year, having recently finished the 1st Baldur's gate and the 1st Icewind Dale. I am enjoying this game just as much as the above. There are two moments that stand out for me so far...the 1st was encountering Blossthus for the first time and him totally annihilating my party in a couple of moves. Vengeance was sweet once I had levelled up a bit more. I also really enjoyed the friendly spiders section as well...loved the humour.

 

I still have a load more to do and I can see myself spending a good couple more months playing this till the end. The only "criticism" I have is that I found the "hard" difficulty setting too hard for me. I got to level 10 playing on hard and have had to turn down the difficulty. Since changing to "normal" I have found combat to be so much easier and less frustrating. Perhaps I found it difficult as I am new to RPG's, but Icewind Dale was far easier on "hard" than this game.

 

Anyway the game has been a very rewarding experience, and I cannot wait to play Avadon once I finally finish this one. Big thanks to Spiderweb!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I think that it's bad to remove "wrong" or "bad" options from the game,

 

I've always thought the difference between casual and hardcore games was the chance of failure

But you're just renaming the problem. Why is it bad for a game to be casual? I'd also argue that Jeff has been going for middle ground: he's aiming for his games to be hard to lose on casual mode and tough to win on the highest difficulty. For that to work, the curve needs to be such that most fights are easy even with a pretty bad build on casual difficulty and many fights are quite challenging without precise optimization on torment.

 

Older Spiderweb games differed in that you could, if you wanted, put all your points in picking locks, making potions, and intelligence. You could make characters incompetent even on easy difficulties.

 

—Alorael, who guess he doesn't see the value in being forced to start over. If you're a serious gamer and the game doesn't provide insufficient documentation and information (including unexpected shifts in what your party needs to be able to do), you can figure it out on paper and not screw up. If you're not, why shouldn't you be able to enjoy the game anyway?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't played A:EftP, but commenting on rpg's in general, I love a challenge. I always start on the highest difficulty, then do what I like. If it turns out I didn't make my party right, I don't quit and try again, but rather try the best I can to adapt. Does A:EftP make that difficult or something?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only "criticism" I have is that I found the "hard" difficulty setting too hard for me. I got to level 10 playing on hard and have had to turn down the difficulty. Since changing to "normal" I have found combat to be so much easier and less frustrating. Perhaps I found it difficult as I am new to RPG's, but Icewind Dale was far easier on "hard" than this game.
Jeff is trying to get away from his old system where all he did was apply a multiplier to monster stats to change difficulty and have monsters able to do more things to you at harder difficulties. It's no longer make a defensive build because you can't one shot monsters and prepare for a long slog through ridiculous monster health.

 

Welcome to Spiderweb Software. Please leave your sanity at the door. It helps with the endgames. smileold.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only "criticism" I have is that I found the "hard" difficulty setting too hard for me. I got to level 10 playing on hard and have had to turn down the difficulty. Since changing to "normal" I have found combat to be so much easier and less frustrating. Perhaps I found it difficult as I am new to RPG's, but Icewind Dale was far easier on "hard" than this game.
Jeff is trying to get away from his old system where all he did was apply a multiplier to monster stats to change difficulty and have monsters able to do more things to you at harder difficulties. It's no longer make a defensive build because you can't one shot monsters and prepare for a long slog through ridiculous monster health.

 

Welcome to Spiderweb Software. Please leave your sanity at the door. It helps with the endgames. :)

Yeah what you said is very true, and I'm glad that Jeff made it that way. The intelligence of the various foes caught me completely by surprise and it was a humbling experience. Icewind Dale for me was very much combat oriented, and was merely a case of rinse and repeat...buff spells, whack, buff spells, whack. Not once did I feel that the enemy had truly outsmarted me.

 

With Escape from the Pit, even now on normal I am still getting outsmarted on a regular basis...I have just completed the Slith underground fortress after several attempts, but when I finally got it right I felt my tactics were spot on and it was very satisfying. This is what compels me to play the game...the feeling of satisfaction when I know that my tactics are working. Perhaps I will attempt the game on hard again once I have finished the rest of my playthrough on normal. Take my "criticism" as a big positive...the game has been a big learning curve for me and is so much more than just "rush in and slaughter everything". I have learnt that the hard way :-)

 

 

I haven't played A:EftP, but commenting on rpg's in general, I love a challenge. I always start on the highest difficulty, then do what I like. If it turns out I didn't make my party right, I don't quit and try again, but rather try the best I can to adapt. Does A:EftP make that difficult or something?
I think you should get the game and try it on torment. Just thinking of attempting to play it on that difficulty sends shivers down my spine. I personally don't think it is the build of my party...I am happy with all my skills and attributes etc. I think it's the intelligence of the various foes and how they use their own skills against you. For me one wrong move and your facing an uphill battle.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My approach to game difficulty might be very different from many members on these forums. I always play through on Casual the first time to learn and experience the story. If I liked the story line I will replay it on normal and afterwords on hard. I almost never beat it on hard because I've beaten it at least twice before and don't feel like reloading save files all the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My approach to game difficulty might be very different from many members on these forums. I always play through on Casual the first time to learn and experience the story. If I liked the story line I will replay it on normal and afterwords on hard. I almost never beat it on hard because I've beaten it at least twice before and don't feel like reloading save files all the time.
Me too! I mostly play RPGs for the story, so I want to experience that first and foremost. (plus, I just really really suck at RPGs). sometimes I do play on a harder difficulty if a game is too easy. The story does lose it's epicness if you just prance around the Dark lord's fortress, slaying enemies like they were paper mache.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But you're just renaming the problem. Why is it bad for a game to be casual?
it's the difference between, an epic poem(like beowulf) or an epic novel(a song of ice and fire, conan the barbarian, the da vinci code, the lord of the rings trilogy, etc.) and a book that a 4th grader would do a book report on

 

 

I'd also argue that Jeff has been going for middle ground: he's aiming for his games to be hard to lose on casual mode and tough to win on the highest difficulty. For that to work, the curve needs to be such that most fights are easy even with a pretty bad build on casual difficulty and many fights are quite challenging without precise optimization on torment.
i guess... but some of the things that don't change with difficulty show my point

 

 

Older Spiderweb games differed in that you could, if you wanted, put all your points in picking locks, making potions, and intelligence. You could make characters incompetent even on easy difficulties.
games should require you to think and punish you for not, it's just like in oblivion when they complained about level-scaling, if you're too stupid to realise that ignoring combat in a combat focused game that cannot be beaten without it is a bad idea, then it isn't the game developer's fault you need to restart

 

 

—Alorael, who guess he doesn't see the value in being forced to start over. If you're a serious gamer and the game doesn't provide insufficient documentation and information (including unexpected shifts in what your party needs to be able to do), you can figure it out on paper and not screw up. If you're not, why shouldn't you be able to enjoy the game anyway?
I agree that a game needs good documentation, it sucks to have to resort to forums and wiki's because half the info you'll need to play the game isn't there(*looks at mount and blade but moslty minecraft*)

 

you should only be forced to start over, if you make an obvious mistake(like having a full party of mages or picking a class/character build that clashes with your playstyle(which could be picking the archer class in avernum when you hate archery or picking a shaper in geneforge when you want to focus on melee or an agent when you want to summon lots of creations))

 

if you don't make an obvious mistake then you shouldn't have to(nothing like, a dialog choice you made 10 hours ago that seems unimportant screws you over, that'd be unfair)

 

I'd love to add that I love this game(hate the new stat system though) and think it is a great improvement over the awesomeness of A6(although i think A1 is better than A6, but I can't play it because I can't tolerate the horrible graphics, since this is basically a graphic update for a1 with some added avadon poison I love this too.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand that you prefer hardcore games, and I'll accept that it's a valid preference. But how is a chance of failure making the difference between masterpiece and contemptible fluff?

 

I'll agree that being required to think for a game is good, but that's what requiring good tactics is about. Having to make irrevocable decisions about character build without full information isn't thinking, it's guessing. And if you guess wrong, your game is ruined. Or even if you do have enough information, if there are huge negative consequences for not thinking well enough it'll alienate players. We respond much better to positive rewards (you built well and now, after several tries, can complete the area!) than to negative punishments (you built poorly and now you have to start the game over!). Again, I understand you prefer the latter, but recognize that this isn't necessarily true of everyone.

 

A party of all mages is very effective in some games, but unplayable in others. The same goes for a party of all fighters or all priests. Whether the difficulty over the course of the game will scale so that trying to dodge is a viable strategy or hopeless varies from Spiderweb game to Spiderweb game. What Luck does, when it's around, isn't at all clear.

 

—Alorael, whose basic disagreement is where you say "you should only be forced to start over..." He thinks that what you mean is that you want to be forced to start over, or rather that you want other people to be forced to start over because you want to be clever enough not to fall into build pitfalls. Since no one actually wants to have to restart a game, though, it's terrible design unless the designer is catering specifically to a "hardcore" demographic who will put up with that. He doesn't think it's particularly large, and would in fact put money on many of its champions in fact being outraged if they got blindsided by quirks of gameplay and found themselves forced to make a new party some 30 hours into a 40 hour game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

devilkingx, I'd recommend you live and let live instead of trying to judge others' tastes. After all, there are plenty of people in the world who think The Da Vinci Code isn't suitable for anything more sophisticated than a 4th grade book report: you wouldn't want one of them coming up to you and explaining to you why it's a terrible novel and why you're an inferior kind of reader for enjoying it, would you? So lay off on calling people (even hypothetical people) stupid if they don't like to play games the same way you do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sadly I cannot really disagree with the general premise of this conversation. I was disappointed by A:EftP. It was pretty and looked nice, but having bad options available is a valuable thing in a game . . . . as is having doors that close.

I get a great deal of enjoyment from the trial and error process involved in finding a viable party setup. I personally liked being able to muck about with a less than perfect party. I've seen a disturbing trend in some games recently which is to take the choice away from the gamer. A good example of this in non spiderweb terms would be the travesty that is Diablo III. I won't go into explicit details, but most of the elements I loved from the previous games were stripped away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Diablo III and A:EftP both make it much harder to make a totally awful character, and Diablo III makes it trivial to fix the mistake, but both still let you play with a pretty subpar build if you don't make good choices. Then both make the game eminently winnable on the lowest difficulty even if your skill choices are poor, and both make it much, much harder, even impossible, to win on the highest difficulty.

 

—Alorael, who is tempted to make a godawful Avernum party and challenge people to play with it on torment and see what happens. How far do you think you can get with disastrously bad builds?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hehe.

 

You know what?

I think we could learn something from Diablo 3. Diablo 3 lets you experiment with every build imaginable without forcing to grind pointlessly thought the process of leveling up a whole new character for every build you want to try. IMO, this is a real advance in game design.

 

I would love to see the remake of Avernum 2 include an in-game option for *retraining* (I know we've got the character editor already, but I shy away from it cause I don't want to feel like a "cheater").

If fixing a mistake didn't involve starting over/grinding through the whole beginning of the game again then the fear of making a mistake that will haunt you forever would be removed. We'd be free!

 

A in game retraining option would also set us free from any "short term vs. long term" choices in character creation (which basically amount to "suck now or suck later" when you'd rather not do either). Suddenly tons of things that don't work well in the long term become viable early or mid-game strategies which you are free to try out and experiment with.

 

Of course in-game retraining shouldn't be completely free...it should cost something, like money or xp, that you can get by doing a *little* grinding with your *existing party* (instead of hours and hours of starting all over with a brand new party). That way you feel like you had to earn the right to fix your mistakes or try something new, but you aren't doomed to be haunted for all time by most of your character choices.

 

Maybe this idea should have its own thread somewhere. (or already does?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

—Alorael, who is tempted to make a godawful Avernum party and challenge people to play with it on torment and see what happens. How far do you think you can get with disastrously bad builds?
I assume you'd give instructions for future skill placement as well, right? Otherwise this would be a silly, relatively minor penalty. But I dunno, I think this could be prohibitively bad. Imagine the following:

 

All assignable stat points into Intelligence

Skills points go into the following in order:

10 Cave Lore

10 Tool Use alternating with 10 First Aid

5 Luck

32 alternating in Bows, Gymnastics, Pole Weapons, Blademaster, Quick Action, Dual Wielding, Thrown Weapons, Melee Weapons (total of 4 each in the end)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

AEFP has balanced some skills between spell caster and weapon dealing,i love the 2 hand weapons wielding much,but Jeff should make the spear/halberd more effective in the next game

i would love to play 1 sword wielding person/1 spear slith,1 nephil archer,1 mage and 1 priest but there're only 4 character choice so i usually choose a party with 1 spear slith warriror,1 nephil archer thief,1 mage and 1 priest but since this game minus the rebel spirit from the priest i combine a priest and a mage to make 1 sage using both skill

 

frown hope the next game bring back my favorite slith and nephil and my favorite rebel spiril spell too

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This game sucks so bad...

 

It's not the game thats bad, it's you

Unfortunately, when this world existed, people had different choices on what is good and what is bad...

-----------

Your criticisms are actually, very non-sense. It would take some time to adapt to the game, unlike the other SpiderWeb games, you just add skill points. But here, you have to spend all in one earning.

=====

Many others think that this game is awesome, a few others, mostly confused, say it sucked.

-------

-A

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, the sliths and nephils will be back as PCs in the next Avernum. E1/A1 has always had humans only.

 

—Alorael, who will also throw in a response to that retraining like Diablo 3 comment from a month ago. It would be more accurate to describe it as retraining like Avadon, because Avadon had just that: around mid-game, you meet someone who will let you reassign all points. For free. As often as you want. And this was a brilliant idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...