Mea Tulpa

M&M 2 -- I forgot about that, heh. So in the "classic" genre just that, Fallout, Realmz, and latter-day Spiderweb games. Realmz has possibly the worst implementation of difficulty ever, joined at the hip with the worst experience-adjustment-for-level system ever.

I think the real answer here is that A5 should just not be played on Torment. I once put down my min-maxing Torment game and tried one on Normal; it was much more fun. I still enjoy all the optimization exercises, mind you, but the game is better on Normal. That's what it's designed for. Enemy HP is a bit less ridiculous (though I do agree it is higher than necessary). It's less of a grind. Most CRPGs do not have difficulty settings. This is particularly true of those in the "classic" genre, which Jeff's games fall into. The games we grew up loving to play did not let us play them on Torment, and they were probably better off for it. If they were easier, that's just as well. When G5 comes out, I'm playing it on Normal. I'll still min-max for Torment, of course, but I won't play it that way. It's just less fun.

The limit on mental magic is extremely high on the higher difficulties, since it relates to enemy level which changes on those difficulties. Compare to battle magic where diminishing returns really make you question the worth of plunking 8 or 10 skill points a pop into it.

Originally Posted By: Nioca 2) The plot consisting almost entirely of filler. It's one thing when a game or a scenario has filler to extend the plot. But A5 consisted entirely of one filler quest after another. Want to proceed? First you have to take care of a scuttler problem. Then you need to fight some bandits. Then you need to fix the sentinels. They have an extremely loose connection to the plot at best, and none whatsoever at worst. And you can't proceed until you finish these little side quests. And you know, it IS possible to have "filler" work well in a game -- if the backstory has enough wrinkles and depth to allow random stuff you do to relate, in some way, to the story. A great example of this is Breath of Fire 2. The entire first third of the game consists of filler quest after filler quest as you attempt to chase down a woman (sound like A5 much?). But all of the quests tie in to the main storyline. A few provide more information, little by little, that eventually puts you on the game's main quest, introducing you to St. Eva and its demons. Others set up events much later in the game. Avernum 2 had this interconnectedness to its story. A4 and A5 don't. "Get past obstacles to find and kill/join Dorikas" and "Get past obstacles to find and kill Rentar as many times as necessary" do not allow for much depth, or many wrinkles.

Because massively boosted damage will make people who build really bad characters have trouble even on lower difficulty settings. Jeff wants even the least intelligent players to be able to finish the game, if not the optional stuff. However, I agree with you in spirit.

227 monsters on -- how many maps was that? 227 nearly identical monsters spread over at least 20 maps of nearly identical looking caves is not a good game. I mean, at least in Tomb of the Taskmaker they had different freakin' icons.

Vlish is absolutely right. Mental magic is the most important to pump. Battle magic is useful but not worth pumping so much, especially considering how inefficient it is compared to a Shaper pumping his skills to make stronger creations.

I strongly agree with Dikiyoba. One of the most important things, to me, is internal consistency. In the game world, does it make sense that these things exist/are happening? The games that I always cite as my favourites get this right even if they get other things wrong. Originally Posted By: Nioca The "needing unique tactics" really just boils down to using a different sword/bow/spell to kill it with. Furthermore, there's nothing even all that "unique" about the creatures in the first place. For the most part, they just do a different kind of damage in a different way. Or they summon something or they use some kind of status attack. Big deal. You hack at them enough, they still go down. I also agree with Nioca, and I think this was very well put. I would like to add, to address SoT's point, that there are games that do this successfully -- mainly because the game mechanics are broader and more robustly interesting. Two games that do this much better are Exile 2 and Exile 3. The game mechanics were a bit less organized and certainly less balanced, but they were more varied and vibrant. Encounters could be new and different even at high levels, and players had a slew of strategies at their disposal. Paper Mario and Final Fantasy Tactics also come to mind as big successes in this regard.

The Nine-Headed Cave Cow frowns upon the supporters of chitrachs and pylons.

Ghaldring -- if your bows have a "2 hit die" meaning a damage range of 1-2 per level of damage, you are using the wrong bows! The good bows have a range of 1-3, just like broadswords. If you use the former, no wonder your damage sucks. You removed the context from the two quotes above, which was very relevant. Saving SP is unnecessary because direct damage is unnecessary. If your team's primary attack is going to be direct damage, you do need to save SP. If it's just one or two mages' strongest attacks, you aren't going to use it in most battles, since it will only increase the total damage output of your team a little bit compared to buffing and using regular attacks for your other members and nephil bow shots from the mages. If your strategy is to use Smite every battle, obviously you need to save SP; and as Alorael mentions if you want to use the strongest spells every battle, even saving SP may prove inadequate.

Ghaldring, that just isn't true. Some monsters have no physical resistance. Most have between 15 and 30% physical resistance. A very small number have more than that. Direct damage capability is useful (and in some cases necessary) for those, but for the 15-30% group weapon attacks are completely usable. They may do less damage than spells, but that's the trade-off for not using SP! And frankly, they are not likely to do less damage than Firebolt, which is really the only spell cheap enough to use constantly.

Edit: I can't read. A flat 50% damage bonus makes more sense I think, but it's possible the bonus is applied in some other way. I mention this mainly because that's how Exile did it. Was it consistently 50% across other enemies / attack powers? Also, does high enough Lethal Blow skill allow you to land lethal blows on targets of a higher level than you are?

I also really hate using charged items. I hate having them exist in the first place, really. I raise my spellcasters' Intelligence high enough to put points in Magery, and usually let it sit there. Singletons aside, I find that's plenty. There aren't that many points where returning to town is not an option, really. The answer there is not just to use energy potions but also to conserve SP. Direct damage spells are out except when absolutely necessary, and SP is used mainly for buffs and healing.

Ghaldring: fair enough about the certain pivotal, tough battles not working that way. However, if the enemies usually move first in random battles, you're missing out on a significant tactical opportunity to get first strikes through clever use of terrain, and what passes for stealth. Edit: Thuryl, it wasn't you, it was Alorael -- my bad.

That doesn't require a pole fighter, though, just a character who closes to melee range. As I recall, you were the one advocating a tank who just uses bows, right?

A4 had 227 chitrachs in the Eastern Gallery alone.

Die, stupid riposting chitrachs. Die! Ghaldring, let me recapitulate my point about flexibility. Obviously, when you are "locked on" to a single, massive HP enemy that does not move away from you, poles will *actually* do more damage. I have asserted this from the beginning... However, this situation occurs in a fairly small percentage of the game's battles. In random battles, you usually lose out on at least one shot at the start of the battle and, depending on how many enemies there are, what their scripts are, which PCs they end up targetting, and other considerations (like body placement to protect weaker characters) you may either miss out on further attacks with a pole, or you may have to start attacking an enemy that wasn't your first choice to take down first, simply because it's in the right location. And some bosses move around erratically, even teleporting; against those bosses poles are about as inefficient as you can get.

I still have not seen the slith bonus HP exceed 4 bonus HP... Bows, unlike in Exile, now all have infinite ammo.

20 Blademaster is the level that grants 100% fatigue reduction, but the curve at which you get it is middle-heavy. I forget the exact results I got, but by the time you get to about 15 Blademaster you'll get the fatigue reduction nearly every round. So you don't need to get to 20 Blademaster. And don't forget that a decent selection of items boost Blademaster by a point or two. Flexibility really is more important than raw damage output, anyway. And the math on bows and poles is not wrong, but unless you do the math poles *will* seem to be doing more damage. It's psychological. Poles will do noticably more damage *when they hit*. You get enough extra chances to hit with bows that in the end the damage difference is negligible. But the little numbers that pop up will still be bigger for poles, of course. Thuryl is right that spells, by and large, are a huge waste of money. Your level 48 calculations are ridiculous, firstly because you won't make it to level 48, and secondly because the vast majority of the game will be spent in the middle levels, between say 16 and 32. And see above about why you don't need 48 levels of EW bonuses. Your "clear case for humans" is bunk. Even if you spurn battle disciplines, which is patently foolish, being human does not boost your other stats, and you end up getting all of 10 more skill points compared to a Nephil over the course of the whole game while missing out on lots of free points in bows/throws/gymnastics. Saving SP, while convenient, is unnecessary, given that you can almost always just go back to town to restore them (or use a cheat-of-convenience-only to do so). For protracted boss fights there are more than enough energy potions to last the game. This was one of the key points of my spurning the spellcaster traits. If you disagree, then obviously the spellcaster traits are for you, but I think it's a pretty solid argument. The calculated damage is probably higher than the actual damage because of resistance, in some form; remember some is indirect. What enemy did you test on? ...now, all of that said, Parry's damage reduction was part of what made me prefer EW for spellcasters; a small part but it was never an overwhelming preference. So I'm not sure where I really stand on this issue now. But, game files that don't use all the opportunities available aren't really going to sway my opinion either.

Thuryl -- are you sure the Anatomy simply adds to the attack bonus against humanoids? We know it increases damage somehow, but that's about it, I think. Also, I thought it worked on missile attacks as well. Thrown Rock is a missile attack used by a monster, I'm assuming. Either that or a leftover from the war trall in G4.

Thuryl reminds me that there is one good excuse to type in all caps: if your name is Zoah.

I would try it as a party first. I always played singletons in Exile, but parties no longer have most of the annoying problems that made singletons so much simpler to play in Exile. Save a singleton run for when you know more about the game mechanics. Also note that Sliths are no longer the automatic best race choice like they were in Exile. That honor tends to go to Nephils these days.

There's nothing evil about all caps, obviously, but it is annoying. The fact is that the vast majority of people who read this forum, and especially the active topics list, do not care about the gold cheat. I don't mean to denigrate the cheat here, but to put it in proper perspective. By the standard you used to make its title so fancy, probably 1 out of 4 or 5 topics here would be in all caps. Drawing undue attention to something is generally considered annoying anywhere, internet or not.

And if you wanted to be really cool, you could even get rid of the caps lock: "New Money Cheat!" It's good netiquitte to not put subjects in all caps without a darn good reason.

The traditional agent builds from previous games (notably DV's glass cannon agent from G3) mostly ignored combat skills anyway, so it would be easy enough to run the new class creationless, like an agent. Right?