Quiconque

You know, a spontaneously sentient mushroom villain would fit with the Blight. Don't forget that the firstborn demonic scion of Rentar-Ihrno and Dorikas is named Lindja.

Hm. In terms of atmosphere, G1 is obviously very different from the rest. I think G4 is as well, with its unusual level of grittiness. Personally, I find the mood and tone in those two games WAY more engaging than the rest... but that doesn't make them archetypal. The other three all have a pretty blank atmosphere. G3 is a bit more directive, which I think makes it most representative; it is not such a far cry from G1 and G4, but neither is it far from the most open-ended G2 and G5. In terms of plot, again G1 is obviously different, while the rest are very similar -- "people are fighting, and you have the option of doing something to change things, although nothing in the canonical ending of this installment will have any real impact." In terms of factions and philosophy... Geneforge has dealt with two major philosophical splits, and we can represent each faction on both continua. I've used broad strokes below so some nuances are lost. 1) How strictly should shaping power be controlled? Eliminate it entirely: Trakovites (4-5) Absolutely controlled: Obeyers (1), Aodare (2), Shapers (3) Somewhat controlled: Awakened (1-2), Zakary (2), Shapers (4), Alwan (5), Astoria (5) Controls are unnecessary: Takers (1-2), Barzites (2), Rebels (3-5) Hard to tell: Trajkov (1), Goettsch (1), Rawal (5), Taygen (5) 2) Should creations be treated differently from humans? Creations have no rights: Barzites (2), Rawal (5), Taygen (5) Humans take precedence over creations: Obeyers (1), Goettsch (1), Zakary (2), Aodare (2), Shapers (3-4), Alwan (5) Respect humans and creations alike: Awakened (1-2), Trajkov (1), Trakovites (4-5), Astoria (5) Creations take precedence over humans / humans may not have rights: Takers (1-2), Rebels (3-5) Of note: the "absolute control" stance was essentially replaced with the "get rid of shaping" stance; together they cover all 5 games. "No controls" is also in every game, while G3 lacks the "somewhat controlled" option. G3 also lacks an "equal respect" option. The others are in every game, except for "no creation rights" which is just in G2 and G5. G2 and G5 thus have the broadest range of sect philosophies. G5 however turns this into Rebels vs. Everyone Else, which is not at all representative. G2 wins. In terms of gameplay, G1 has a different skill point system and creation levelling system, plus it lacks massive numbers of spells and creations. In G2, melee is stronger than in later games (not to mention Parry). G5 has some other mechanical changes, such as the nerfing of Haste, which changes everything. To summarize, with + and - just representing representativeness: G1: -atmosphere, -plot, -gameplay G2: +factions, -gameplay G3: +atmosphere, -factions G4: -atmosphere G5: -gameplay G2's unrepresentative gameplay is relatively minor compared with G3's unrepresentative factions, so I have to go with G2 as most representative. I think that's a fair answer. Edit: Well, I do think G5 is most representative of a latter-day Jeff Vogel game.

the bold predictions seem to have changed dramatically in character. the point of the first two is that they were actually true of every game set in exile/avernum proper.

bold prediction #2: the big baddie is protected by demons

My schedule is nearly the opposite of Jewels': I can do it between 4 and 9 central, and not otherwise if it's during the week.

Now this, I'm actually interested in. Good idea, Eph.

On the other hand, Exile had its own engine abuse opportunities, ranging from locking out enemy damage with armor and bless, to the overpoweredness of Antimagic Field and Simulacrum, to easily obtainable +AP items for 6 PCs combining with incredibly powerful and cheap mass haste spells... using these correctly required more thought than using the best strategies in Avernum. But, the game could still be easy, and there was no difficulty setting to adjust.

Dikiyoba answered your question here, in your original topic. It was moved because it isn't a Geneforge topic... no need to repost it.

To me, it looks more like Diplomacy than Risk, which may fit even better.

an updated version is not a remake.

...

The other one hasn't been abandoned either, but requires a little more effort to get back to, both in terms of the thinking required to break the stalemate (your contributions remain welcome) and the tact (not my strong suite) required to avoid messages like the above. If I've already failed on the last count can we just move this to PM, s'il vous plait?

Sooner. This one wasn't actually abandoned -- I disappeared entirely, first unexpectedly due to an all-consuming love affair, and then as planned for my beyond-all-consuming summer job which, mercifully, has just ended. Expect judgement on this round within a few days... the next round is going to be unexpected and fun.

The Exile editor had an option to revive the Dragons, because they were (practically) the only NPCs whose death was actually retained if you left town and visited (five?) other towns before returning.

This is easily, easily the least enticing and most nauseating forthcoming SW game update I have ever read. Originally Posted By: Randomizer Jeff is ecologically friendly in that he is recycling as much of his older games as possible. So if the map looks like Avernum 4... DIE. The poorly preserved world map in Avernum 4 was one of the things that was so frustrating to players of the first three games. Cavequakes are great and everything, but that map was a blight itself. Quote: Because of the Blight, food is really important so you spend lots of time finding it so you don't want to suffer from starvation effects. Get used to using the portal pylons to go back for more every game day. After a few trips you can collect your rations in 5 minutes. This is just bizarre. Since he abandoned the food counter from Exile, Jeff has ranted about how stupid food meters are. He has gone on at length, over and over again, about how much he hates pointless busywork in games. The food collection process frankly sounds like a definite Negative Play Experience.

Originally Posted By: Thuryl Since skill costs increase as skills go up, that kind of investment probably isn't really worth it. Particularly considering you get somewhat better damage returns from investing in melee, and much better damage returns from investing in magic.

_Things Fall Apart_ remains one of my favourite books: so much artiface, so many layers, yet at the same time so very simple. It's like Barth, but human instead of postmodern.

A few other bows may have higher weapon bonuses, which means that they may do more damage on average when you have very LOW bow skill (Dex + Bows + Sharpshooter). The difference in multipliers was extreme in A4, which is why the comments about it are often extreme. It is notable, but somewhat less extreme in A5.

I thought Yoshiyuki's lists were from Exile 1 and 2.

I disagree somewhat. Unless you assign skill points REALLY poorly, the impact of highly optimized skill point assignment decreases drastically as your level rises and the total skill points you have earned increases. This is due both to the increasing cost of the skills, and the decreasing proportional impact 1 point gives at higher skill levels versus lower skill levels. Traits on the other hand do not provide decreasing benefit at higher levels. Instead their benefit increases, particularly since the efficiency of adding points to those skills manually decreases as stated above. In other words, a melee fighter who assigns skill points with RP in mind rather than optimizing, but has Divinely Touched and Elite Warrior, is going to be an order of magnitude better than a melee fighter who carefully optimizes his skill points, but has Good Constitution and Cursed at Birth.

The difference in ACTUAL damage reduction between a complete set of non-encumbering armor, and a complete set of the strongest encumbering armor, is miniscule. The better armor never hurts, of course, but it is pretty much the least effective way of protecting your characters, and is therefore the least necessary.

Originally Posted By: fractalnavel So what you folks are really seem enmeshed in is an exercise in semantics... _will_ anything be changed, and can this result be impacted by this discussion... I think the general consensus is "no"... Does this discussion still exist if emotionally loaded terms are removed ? Probably not. Welcome to Spiderweb, eh? Let's just replace the boards with the above paragraph in a text file and save everybody a load of bandwidth. OK, time to disappear again.

I would like to reassert an idea from the Shadow Vale discussion. In addition to whatever style of numbers ranking ends up being used, pick 5 or 10 prolific reviewers, write a 2-3 sentence summary of what they like and dislike in scenarios, and list their top 5 or even top 10 favourite scenarios for each one. This allows players to look for somebody who has similar taste in scenarios, and see what that person liked. IMHO, this is the best way to connect new players to scenarios they will enjoy quickly and without hassle. And IMHO, that's easily the best way for CSR to "expand the player base."

The litmus test for being a bug is people knowing it is a bug? Care to get a little more circular, Alo? Moreover, you're saying that if it jumps out at people it's a bug, and if it doesn't it's a design error? That makes no sense whatsoever. Especially considering that you have said the G4 acid damage problem is a bug, but that bug went 100% unnoticed for over a year after release, and probably never would have been found had I not done some really anal damage reduction testing.

Sorry if my reaction was overly strong; I remembered you arguing that the essence boost was intentional in the past. That said, how is it a "bug" if it's a problem in compiled code but a "design error" just because the number in question happens to be in a text file? Geneforge 4 treats ancillary acid damage as magic damage (I think; I forget the exact type) for purposes of resistance. That's definitely a bug. But it's still (presumably) just a wrong number in a line of code somewhere. I would imagine "design error" to describe, say, the boats in Geneforge 3.