Necris Omega

I really wish I could say why Blades of Avernum never took off like Blades of Exile seemed to. Unlike the sequel to Neverwinter Nights, my all time favorite "module" based game, I didn't think Blades of Avernum wasn't bad or unworthy at all. Still, from all sources I've heard, it flopped with enough force to yield a "NEVER AGAIN!!!" from Jeff's end. Then again, I also remember him saying something to that effect about having to re-re-RE-do the Tower of Magi... and then Avernum 4 happened, so... who knows, maybe someday?

1. What is your age? (Be approximate, if you'd like) Twenty Eight. 2. What part of the world do you live in? In which part of the world were you born? What countries have you lived in? Upper Midwest of the USA to all. 3. What is your native language? In what languages are you proficient? English, and nothing more. I'm as linguistically interesting belly button lint. 4. Describe your ancestry. Irish, British, French, and German. Fun to think how poodle eatingly insane with hatred my ancestors would have been for one another... 5. Describe your gender identity and sexual orientation. Straight male. 6. Do you have any religious or spiritual beliefs? If so, describe them. In what religious tradition(s) were you raised, if any? Always been a Christian, have yet to find cause or reason to stray from that path. 7. What is your relationship status? Do you have any children? Sad and depressing. 8. Describe your social class. Have you always been in this class? I'm the classiest guy I know! *Belch* 9. Have you ever served in the military? If so, what division? Not a chance in hell. 10. What is your occupation (or former occupation)? What is your highest level of education (and your degree, if applicable)? I'm a Software Engineer by trade, with a Bachelors in Computer Science. I minored in art.

Eh, freedom felt painfully restricted, or rather, moot in the second trilogy simply because of the lack of an overworld. Call me old fashioned, but that was the biggest weakness of the 4-6. An overworld provides a level of abstraction that allows a world to take on infinitely more space than any developer could ever hope to detail. Even the biggest games sans such abstractions feel tiny compared to the likes of the original Avernum for this reason. Sure, I love Skyrim as much as the next person, but it's still a mere county compared to what I imagine the nation of Avernum to be.

Eh, the argument isn't the end of a government, rather the end of a system of government. When you reset the fundamental mode and form of your government, going from a loosely united confederation to a more centralized federal government, it's still the end of that previous form. As to pre-constitutional rebellion - I'm only aware of a conflict regarding back pay to soldiers being demanded in advance, and nothing specific to "Save the confederacy" in terms of armed conflict.

Hrm. Not sure if that's a good thing or not. Probably just nostalgic change aversion talking, but the general openness of Avernum/Exile was one of its charms, especially vs. much of today's blithe hand holding hallway adventures. Then again, having played through the games umteen times in two separate generations, it's also very easy for me to forget how utterly mindbogglingly huge and confusing the originals could be for a new Avernite. Eh... so long as the rest of the spirit is there, I shouldn't begrudge a few more directional nudges. Come to think of it, the whole Portal Quest in Exile/Avernum 2 always felt like it needed a lot more solid underlining to put it on par with the other major plotlines.

Perhaps the Articles of Confederation? Though I'm sure the debate of that being a full on system vs. specific format of a system has merit, their dissolution led to a more effective and stronger US government and did so without the usual bloody upheavals common to major government overhauls throughout history.

Eh... I can't agree with this as each successive remake has fewer and fewer engine refinement to trip over. Sure, doubtless Jeff will add more stuff each time, but in terms of the raw fundamentals, it should get quicker and easier each time, not slower. When Jeff had to do A1:EftP, it was a new(ish) beast on a new engine. A2:CS is a new(ish) beast on an engine that's been used already. Makes a big difference.

Communism? I'm pretty absolute on this one - it does not, will not, and can never work. Marx was an idealistic dreamer who was unfortunately completely divorced from the realities of human nature. Sorry Karl, but for every man who wants to produce, there's a legion who'd be happy sitting naked in a beanbag chair eating cheetos. Republics are... alright, but even in the best of today's there's still room for improvement. Not that that's a bad thing mind you - no one wants to think their society has peaked. Direct Democracy? ... Well, it's very good at giving everyone an equal say, but I fear it just plain runs into too many practical problems to really work, especially when you start talking national scale. Imagine 1 Billion Indians or Chinese voting on every single government measure. Sure, technology can make this much less impossible, but it's still such a tall order that I have to be skeptical. Monarchy? Eh... that's just an extremely mature tribal hereditary dictatorship with some theocratic overtones. Blech. Dictatorship? ... Has this system of government ever gone or ended well? Anarchist Society? Again, I've too much faith in the capacity of human nature to devolve into tribal barbarism in the absence of systems to counteract this tendency. Theocracy? While I consider myself to be fairly religious, I find Theocracy abhorrent. A person's relationship to God should be between them and God, not because of some Government Edict. Federation? As an American, my own national history throws water on this one. Perhaps they've worked better elsewhere when better organized and empowered, however. Fascist State? While I generally see Government as a force to counteract the evils inherent in mankind, this only seems to exacerbate them. Technocracy? I WILL NEVER BOW TO YOU ROBOTIC FIEN-- oh, wait. That's not what that means. Ultimately this begs, as was asked, the question of determinacy, which starts impinging on other forms of government. If we the people decide who is the most fit to rule, well we're back in Democracy town, for instance.

Oh, like 99% of fans of the Genre I've done Dragon Age. Honestly? I find it to be horrendously overrated. The story is cliche', and the combat is painful and clunky. [Ogre] I"MMA GONNA PUNCH YOU!!!!! [Me] *Moves to other side of screen... other side of map... * [Ogre] RAAAAAAAAAAAA----!!! [Me] *Leaves region, leaves timezone, leaves country.* [Ogre]AAAAAAAAAAA--! [Me] *Makes sandwich, takes nap, goes to the store, takes shower.* [Ogre]---ARGH!!! [Me] OW!!! WTF! In any case, it really doesn't have the same level of custom content as the other games I listed so I didn't include it.

Ultimately my favorite type of game is an RPG with massive player created custom content options. Your Elder Scrolls, your Neverwinter Nights, and your Spiderweb Blades of _______ games. Wish I could find something more recent - Skyrim's aging fast, Neverwinter Night's is Ancient (and its sequel a crime against gaming), and Blades of Avernum never took off like its predecessor, sadly...

Good to know, but it's still a valid point - they really ought to update their front page.

I'd need a lot more information about said aliens and their nature and plans for me personally. Okay, so they've interplanetary space travel... so? What am I to them then? What are their goals, their aspirations, their purpose in randomly plucking a lowly earthling out from the infinity of space? Am I a zoo exhibit? A pet? A conversation piece? Are we talking Borg/Zerg/Species-styled assimilation? And what of their culture? What really defines "advanced" culture, and by whose standards? Libertarian? Socialist? Theocrist? This isn't like technology - there's no one unified, perfect answer by our understanding. Just not enough information.

The #1 thing to look for in the screenshots, at least by my estimate, are any Slith or Nephil inventory graphics - they'll be the most dramatic thing likely to be showcased in a screenshot.

Maybe it's just me being reactionary to what I see as a overt meltdown of one of the more classical monsters, but I always had a soft spot for the inhuman/ugly vampires. You're a bloodsucking apex predator/virus utterly divorced from the passage of time and the perception it brings - act like it dangnabit! I'm more a WoD PnP vampire time than a literary vampire type, particularly given where it's gone.

Economically -6.25, Socially a -0.82 Hm, I'm pretty politically isolated here judging by Sylae's graph.

So... you're saying the misuse of "literally" in a figurative manner is because using some metaphors without the declaration of "literally" is because simply using the figurative metaphor on its own reads as stale or cliche? That its contrary use is in some circumstances less a question of a fundamental misunderstanding of the terms and more a desire to avoid trite expression?

Literally has become something of a contronym in its use, no?

One more thing is that in the age where swords were more than glorified jewelry, even a minor cut was grossly at risk for infection. Even if a glancing slash doesn't immediately incapacitate an opponent, you've still opened their veins to the hell of an ongoing battle in an age where leaches were seen as valid medicine. That and a lunging thrust requires a lot more commitment than a slashing swing, which is a defensive liability.

Well the sword had long since become the symbol of nobility, from viking chieftains to the cultures that followed, not to mention it even has religious overtones. Biblically speaking, the very first weapons man ever sees are swords. As for axes, well, again, like the spear, it has more than just wartime connotations. Even more so, in fact, as the axe is arguably a tool to a greater degree of use and long before it's a weapon. A person could make much greater use than of an axe than a warrior would over an entire career and never slay anything more dangerous than a sycamore tree. As for the mace... it really doesn't have the vast array of really any of the other weapons mentioned. It's not a tool, so it has no use outside of killing, even moreso than the sword, and never mind the axe. It relies on pure brute strength, so the romance of the sword is gone. It offers nothing in terms of reach over practically anything. Really, the mace is good for transferring force through heavily armored enemies, but other than that it doesn't have much to offer in terms of raw killing potential vs. almost any other weapon. It's a refined club, pretty much, and while it has its place and uses, there are a plethora of reasons why nearly any other weapon invokes more awe or saw greater use.

The sword is just an elegant idea that works - if it didn't it never would have taken off and come to dominate cultures around the world. The Roman Gladius to Romanian Kilij, Bronze Age Sickle Sword to Tarentino's love of the Katana, swords are an almost universal concept save for cultures that never really had the technology to fully realize them. The spear is... well, a cheap weapon, but that's really all it has to offer. Sure, it might have reach, but it was ultimately eclipsed by the pike, halberd, and other such weapons in that role. While the idea is sound, the basic spear just doesn't have enough to offer in the face of all melee history. Even when you're talking the same technology, however, a sword is just more dangerous. It offers more ways of inflicting harm, and requires less room to fully realize its potential. It may require more upkeep, and is far, far more difficult to create, but it does have greater durability, especially with later materials. Plus, there's the inescapable air of prestige. Spears started out as hunting tools, and for a very long time that's what they were. More than that, many spears were specifically designed as projectiles, divorcing attachment to them in a literal sense. You'd throw your spears, then pull out your swords. As mentioned before, the cost means that you don't make a sword unless you really, really mean it. Generally speaking, a sword is specifically limited to the art of war, or at least combat against other likeminded people. That's why, even if modern technology has put it in strictly a ceremonial and symbolic role, it retains that image. But, the people who all picked up swords in the time when they were technologically relevant were no fools - their lives were depending on it. If the spear was the end all, be all combat weapon, the sword would never have come to be. But, as that isn't the case, the sword came to be, and even came to eclipse the spear in a storied sense, as well as combat.

Perhaps, but it's a lot less counterintuitive than what the Aztecs did with it. An arrow that's liable ot be good for one shot may as well have a tip as breakable as it is sharp, but actually using a sword made out of glass (though many would call the Maquahuitl a bladed club of sorts) is another story. Though... it's hard to overstate how insanely, insanely sharp obsidian can be. Some surgeons prefer it to traditional surgical steel because it makes surgical steel look dull. Hm. Perhaps the Obsidian Spear should be my next art subject...

Well I suppose in defense of glass it -has- been used as legitimate melee weapons by certain cultures, more specifically volcanic class/obsidian, but it's still reinforced by other materials in such cases.

Well to be fair the Onyx Scepter was indeed a non-martial item, but that doesn't account for the Jade Halberd. That and a Halberd just doesn't really scream "ceremony" to me, so... yeah. That said, the head is made out of jade IS part of the explicit canon, though, as described in Avernum - "We cannot yet reliably make magical weapons. That's why we want these so badly. There was an undead-slaying spear and a halberd with a blade of jade. And, more importantly, there was the pike 'Giantslayer,' and greatest of all, the sword 'Demonslayer'." But really, it's hardly the first or even the most glaring "misappropriation" of materials in a magical context. I think for me that would probably be the whole "glass" bit from the Elderscrolls Series. Me, personally, I always really loved jade anyways, so I tend to overlook the fact.

I start a thread about my art and it still derails into nazis. Glad to see the internet is still working.