Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. Your character building strategy honestly sounds reasonably solid. You might not be fussy about the details but your setup is pretty classic. I wonder if your laissez-faire approach happened to go in less classic directions, in other games? That seems like the most obvious explanation. I'm also not sure which other SW games you mean -- there are a lot, and they vary in what makes them challenging -- but I guess one thing that does potentially make A6 (and A4 and A5) easier is that the character traits are extremely powerful if set up properly. There's no equivalent to those in Geneforge, Avadon, or the Remakes of A1-A3.
  3. I finally finished A6 as a way to tide me over until the new game comes out. Did anyone else find it weirdly easy compared to the rest of the SWS games? I always play the games on normal, but despite that I've never actually finished an Avernum game before now: the end game always turns into a grind where my laissez-fair approach to character building comes back to bite me. But with A6 I almost didn't have to put any effort into character building. They were all custom characters to start: I ran a pole focused sith with elite warrior, a bow focused nephilim with dead eye and nimble fingers, a human priest with pure spirit and a human mage with natural mage. I ran up a skill point surplus in early game and just kept putting off allocating them until I took the time to figure out exactly how I wanted to build my characters until I accidentally finished the game around level 40 with ~100 unused skillpoints in each character. I would throw in some skill points when I needed to access new spells or find new nature caches or unlock new locks every now and then, I pumped strength on my slith just so he could open all the heavy gates, but besides that I pretty much ignored about 25 of my levels. I haven't finished everything: Malanchion still has some quests for me (I'm sure killing him will be a major pain), and my journal atm is still pretty steep. But I stumbled into the final fight by accident, not really sure if it was the final fight 'cause I was still waiting for the game to get hard like the others did.
  4. From Jeff Vogel on Twitter: We could use some volunteers for MACINTOSH testing of our next all-new game, Queen's Wish: The Conqueror. It's a great way to get experience working on an actual game (and we've helped many testers get jobs). Take a look ... Apply here
  5. Yesterday
  6. Yes, I am currently limiting to just the G1-era creations (mostly because I feel the document is already oversized for a player supplement). And I'll admit, the way I currently have them the top-tier creations are . . . not that interesting. Gave Betas and Alphas a 10 ft reach, with Betas having the Sentinel feat, thereby creating a large meat-wall for my party to hide behind.Their damage becomes less important because they can lock down an area. My Drayks are the most damaging creation with four options for attacks (one cone, one line, a ranged attack and a melee attack) (I didn't make Cryo-drayks for lore reasons, but maybe should and de-power the Drayk a bit), with Ur-Glaahks not far behind them. Betas would only be used for their battlefield control, which I think matches with the lore as well. I cannot think of any examples of Battle alphas/betas being shaped for use in anything except large-scale battle and guarding areas. I think I will also allow for humanoid creations to wield weapons, if given any. That may push them up in terms of utility, but also might not. That's a playtest thing and will need to be evaluated as we play. I am also trying very hard with this to prevent having Shaping become so powerful that it completely overshadow other party members. I may have a barbarian or fighter in the party and need to keep them relevant to the game. Rogues and Monks should be able to stay relevant through their mobility and ability to get to the enemy mage/Shaper, Paladins bring defensive options (and Smite) to the table, and Rangers (and I suppose ranged Fighters/Rogues) deal damage from much farther away than I have allowed Creations to function at (only Artilla have an attack with a 60 ft range in my system.) Hmm. I need to cogitate on this a while. Thank you for that perspective, it's a different direction than I was looking from. Yeah, in the GF games Alphabet Brutes were underwhelming. Honestly, for the first 3 games everything except the Vlish was underwhelming, in my opinion. Drayks had a coolness to them, but cost too much, Glaahks were too fragile, and melee damage required SO MANY AP OF WALKING that they often lost turns of damage output, Eyebeasts were Drayks turned to 11, in both coolness and cost, and Drakons were merely balanced between their cost and effectiveness. Again, merely my opinion.
  7. Last week
  8. Thanks for the input everybody. I am going to go ahead and get something started (in fact I already have), so when the game does launch at least some of the basics will be out of the way. Here's what I am doing: I want to use a hosted wiki; I want my effort to go towards finding and organizing information, not on the minutiae of hosting a wiki. My favorite game wiki site is gamepedia; however, it appears that they only allow people directly associated with the game (developers, publishers, etc) to create wikis. My next favorite site is fandom; there are several good wikis there for other video game series, such as Fallout and Borderlands. So I have created a (so far empty) wiki there for Queen's Wish. I have also created wikis for Avernum 5 and Avernum 6, also on FANDOM. I am currently creating some entries in the Avernum 5 wiki, since that's the game I am most recently familiar with, and using them to create templates and layouts, and hopefully some how-tos. Once I have done a couple of pages in each major category, I am going to take those templates and import them into the Avernum 6 wiki. Then I will start Avernum 6, and start filling out that wiki as I play. This should give me an idea of how I want to go about it. Once Queen's Wish is released, I will import whatever I think is useful from the Avernum 6 wiki to the Queen's Wish wiki, at which point I expect to delete the Avernum 5 and 6 wikis. As has been previously mentioned, a fragment of a wiki is worse than no wiki at all. I will start playing Queen's Wish and filling out the wiki as I play. The templates will presumably have to be adjusted somewhat for the new engine, and maybe some new categories added. If basic things like item and ability names can be extracted from the data files as they can with A5/6, I may at least partially automate the process of creating the initial stubs for these things. When I feel like there is some useful information and a basic structure in place that others can follow, I will start a new thread in this forum, linking to the wiki and inviting others to contribute to it. In the beginning, I think the wiki should be limited to "factual" information, i.e. things that don't need to be experimentally derived or debated. This forum is a better place for those conversations than a wiki. As conclusions are drawn about mechanics, and maybe strategy, I will ask for permission to migrate that information to the wiki. If anybody is interested in getting involved in any of that before the very end, I would welcome the collaboration. Otherwise, I'll see you when the game is launched
  9. It also has problems with screen size and scaling the graphics to fit on different sizes. This was the limiting factor when they made a port for Avadon: The Black Fortress to Android pad computers. The team working on it made a limit number of different size versions and only guaranteed that the game would work on those few size screens. There were complaints on how hard it was to click on screen because of resolution problems on some machines.
  10. BBetas if memory serves were like bumped up alphas with nothing extra. I tried to use them in GF4 and they were very disappointing. Same for GF5. Perhaps they have more quick action to make a 2nd attack more often or something but in general they seemed like Alphas with more levels: Melee meat-shields that were not very good or memorable, themselves like very powered up thands but I expected something from a 3rd tier creation. Battle Gamas, that we couldn't make, had that scythe attack that hit everyone around them.
  11. "Clicking" on things with a tiny touchscreen is tricky. It's a lot easier if you're just clicking on squares rather than an isometric figure. Think about the issues that even PC versions of Geneforge had, from time to time, where you thought you were clicking to move somewhere, but instead you clicked on yourself and passed your turn...
  12. Huh... how would an isometric view be detrimental to iPhone development? Scale, I guess? In any case, I'm all for the change, and the new series. My only regret is I hadn't been keeping tabs on Spiderweb so missed the kickstarter entirely. =/
  13. I ran into this part almost a year ago and it was so frustrating I just stopped playing. I know you must power the teleporter but I'd also like to get the loot as well. Is there a diagram or instructions for the current version on how finish this puzzle?
  14. I believe he is currently including only the G1 creations. Also, keep in mind that betas are arguably not mid tier when compared against the default tier 4/5 creatures, because they are the upgraded form of alphas (although most of the time neither are very good in the game itself).
  15. I suspected so. Maybe Jeff will reconsider? One day? Maybe...
  16. They do look pretty good. Can't wait to play it. Post #727.
  17. 240 damage for a single target in a spell with 4 40-ft radius spheres is a lot more than single-target. Working with averages because I am more comfortable with them, it's 140 damage to a lot of people with 70 damage to few people. Usually, you will deal 300-400 damage with this spell to enemies you actually care about (sure, you would cook a lot of 25 hp minimums that are around, but they wouldn't really be a problem anyway) As mentioned, a good rule of a thumb is to assume the battle will go on for 3-4 rounds. Since we're talking several people involved, let's assume 4-5 rounds. So the army should reliably do ~80 damage per round on average to be equal to a meteor swarm spell. That ~80 damage should include miss chances. Assuming 1/3 attacks would miss, we're at ~120 damage on average. However that doesn't take into the equation the "support" these things give. I.e. enemies that attack them instead of the PCs or simply the ability to hide behind them etc. So I would say ... different functionality. An army worth as much as that 9th level spell would probably need ~300 hp between them and deak 70-80 damage on average (so that they would actually deal about 50 damage). So 4 battle betas with ~75 hp each that have two attacks with each attack dealing 1d8+5 damage, would be IMO comparable to meteor swarm. And again: That takes into the equation an army of creations compared to the single most powerful damage spell. Simply put, I don't think Meteor Swarm is a good comparison as it's huge area makes it unyieldy and they offset this with a large damage. Meteor swarm is an army killer. I believe there are more fair spells to compare your army of creations with. But if mid-tier creations like battle Betas are 9th lvl spell, what about Kyshaaks, War tralls, Rotdhizons etc?
  18. I'm operating off the idea that no one leaves the Shaper school until they are already level 7, scale another 8-12 levels for the standard campaign length (at least with my table) and it's on the table. Table differences make this a world of difference. As to the Battle Betas damage, it's not the individual creations I am balancing for, but rather the available army of Creations. Because I've limited party-controlled creations to needing to use both their reaction and the Shapers bonus action to attack, resulting in the entire army attacks at once, I need that nova of damage to be similar to the highest level slot available. Meteor Swarm has a max of 240 damage, and my (rough build, I'm sure a player invested in it could do somewhat better) of the largest army a Shaper can make caps at 246 (assuming no criticals). Granted, Meteor Swarm is an AoE, but it is the max damage for single target as well (oddly, WotC didn't follow their own advice in building it). Meteor Swarm also has one save for half, where this would be between between 6 and 10 individual attacks (some Creations have multi-attack), with the possibility of crits but also likely that some will miss (that's actually my current largest concern: their to-hit rolls may be off). Any individual Creation is worth far less than the spell slot, but the ability to do that damage every round becomes the value. As for Shaper/Agent/Guardian differences, yeah, I broke the Geneforge system there. Agents would be those who didn't take the Lifecrafter feat, or else don't want to learn the spells for the Creations (classes with Spells Known, for instance). Shapers are almost exclusively Wizards, Clerics, and Druids, as they don't need to worry about spell selection. Guardians are the rest. It's not as true to the original lore as yours sounds, but only one member of my table has played the games and he is mature enough to accept that my take on the world isn't identical to Jeff's. Having the three sects at current is mostly my way of justifying having Fighters and Monks in the Shaper school at all. For plot I'm going with an kind of merger of GF2 and GF3 stories, ehh... kind of. Pre-game story will be almost identical to GF2, right up to the Agent taking them for their field work. Tomorrow is the final showdown of the current campaign, then we'll take a short break from DND and probably start this up in a months time, so I've got time to fix any issues.
  19. Two other blessing boxes I can think of are in : - Concealed Tunnel. This one isn’t very easily accessible because of the lasers - Ovdipur
  20. I'm cool with them, the isometric style had the problem of not being able to see behind that "wall" all the time, and maybe secret doors will go back, instead of being more of a "Where's Waldo" sorta search.
  21. Yeap. One of the main reasons I did what I did, was to have a complex, dynamic system. Another reason is... Guardians are better in Shaping than Agents but they suck at magic. Agents are better spellcasters than Shapers but they suck at Shaping. Locking it down by spell level means that a "fighter Shaper" would have to be a good spellcaster. With your system, for the Guardian to be able to have access to battle Beta, the Fighter would have to be able to cast 9th lvl spells... and he could decide to not have a battle beta. Of course, you could limit his "spellcasting" to Shaping spells from a list etc. I am not saying there are no work arounds. In the end as we both agreed, what works best for the group to have fun, works best. Frankly, on my table bringing 12 more NPCs (which means a balanced battle would have a lot more enemies on the other side) requires special rules to deal with this stuff quickly. You may want to look at something like that too because from my experience once Shaping enters the party, the numbers of combatants start to raise very quickly.
  22. The situation with how turret power is calculated is a little murky... cf this topic, which was never really satisfactorily resolved IIRC.
  23. Battle Beta would be a 9th lvl spell? Isn't that insanely advanced? Your world, your rules, but IMO that's in the very end of the spectrum. I have seen very few campaigns that reached beyond 10-11th lvl. My usual campaigns go for 40-50 sessions and reach 10-12th lvl or something. Regardless, even with blocking slots, in my opinion Creations will still not be balanced. Even if you manage to find the razor's edge of making Battle Beta powerful enough to compete with Meteor Swarm (which is tougher than it sounds) for a party of 4 people, it will be an uphill battle for the rest of the creations. And you have to take into account the reduced versatility from losing the slots. However, all these calculations would grow out of sync when the party grows from 4 to 10 PCs and creations as a single extra won't be balanced for a party of that size. I am not saying you shouldn't do it; your table your rules. I just don't think there'll ever be a way to make this balanced.
  24. Turrets are definitely weaker in Avadon 3, but they are still useful even without investing heavily in them. Tinkermages with high dexterity are definitely the way to go around the middle of the game. Double Strike makes them incredibly powerful since they can do high damage and are harder to hit with evasion items. You can almost play the whole game without bringing along the other Hands.
  25. I've read that turrets in Avadon 3 are weaker than in Avadon 2. However, my Inferno Turret seems to be hitting for as much damage (approx 200) as it did in Avadon 2, and I haven't invested anything in intelligence. Were turrets actually nerfed, or is it just that the Tinkermage's other abilities have been given a huge boost (in combination with Double Strike)? Also, does anyone know how to view an enemy's hitpoints? In Avadon 2 you could just right-click on them, but for some reason right-clicking causes you to attack in A3. And stun doesn't appear to work on boss creatures. I remember seeing a tooltip flash by when I was loading a game mentioning something along those lines, but I didn't have time to read it.
  26. I 100% agree. There have been a lot of one person efforts that have been successful, and while real life can and does get in the way, hopefully it will be after a point at which the effort can be considered an success even if it is not complete. I have no idea how many people are active right now, but it seems pretty low as the non-game related forum topics have pretty much disappeared. While there will be a bump up in activity when Queen's Wish comes out I am not sure how many people are watching the boards to sign up to help with something.
  27. From Jeff's Twitter account: "For people wondering why we're switching back to the square tiles view for this game: 1. People have been asking me for it for 20 years and we thought it'd make a fun change. 2. It makes an iPhone port way way easier and I always wanted to make an iPhone game."
  28. I recently watched the trailer for Queen's Wish (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkRdCWmBh2k) and can't help but wonder why Jeff chose this perspective and overall art style. I much preferred the isometric graphics of Avadon and Avernum, rather than the top down style of Queen's Wish. Some of the models and character portraits also look a bit off. Now obviously, story and game mechanics are more important in an indie RPG like this, but I feel like Jeff could really have stepped things up a notch, given that it's a new engine etc. What do you guys think about the graphics overall? If any of you are playing the beta, how does it compare to previous games in other series?
  1. Load more activity
  • Newsletter

    Want to keep up to date with all our latest news and information?

    Sign Up
×
×
  • Create New...