madrigan

Originally Posted By: Nikki. And sure, being able to whizz from one-side of the screen to the other with one click, that's cool, true, but I think I could live without it. I actually enjoy walking through some Avernite towns, like Fort Emergence. I don't disagree with this part. Sometimes I like to stroll around, but I can do that with the A4/5 interface. But when I want to just get across the screen, the click and watch method is much better. Moving with the mouse in the older games, in A2 for example, was annoying to me because I had to wait for the little arrow to be pointing where I wanted. I think the mouse was necessary if I wanted to move diagonally though. Anyway, saving one click per action is a lot of clicks per game.

Maybe I'm missing a chromosome, but of all the anti-A4/5 criticisms that I see on this forum, the one I really cannot understand is about the mouse movement. In the new system, you point to where you want to go and the party goes there. If you want to open a door, you click on it. If you want to talk to someone, you click on them. If you want to attack something, you click on it. It's simple and automated. Everything takes fewer steps than it did with the keyboard controls. How could it possibly be better to use the keyboard to move one space at a time, over and over and over, than to just click on one spot? How could it be better to have to go into conversation mode, and then choose the person to talk to, than to just click on the person? Seriously, I just can't bridge this. Graphics, indoors/outdoors, training, the dialogue system, all of this I understand even though I think A4/5 are vastly better than the older games in every one of these facets. But this thing with the mouse and the keyboard, I don't comprehend. It seems impossible for anyone to prefer the old system. Would someone elaborate on how the keyboard movement is better than the mouse, in any way?

Originally Posted By: Yelbis Eceer Nalyd You weren't forced into combat mode, you could just walk past or fight outside of combat mode. This was probably added so that people wouldn't see an enemy while auto-moving(You, know with the mouse) and get the crap beat out of them because they couldn't stop. I did notice that, that I could fight without going into combat mode. I'm not sure if it changed anything about the fights. It's true that it would be nice to be able to sneak past more monsters. It would be another tactical option. But if that's going to be in the game I'd like a stealth skill.

Originally Posted By: Rent-an-Ihrno @Vrek: Most things you bring up have already been discussed countless times, and will most probably never be changed back. However, I've never come up with the idea of simply making combat optional again the way it was in A1-3... why the heck didn't I? Omg, It's so obvious. That really bugged me in A4+5 - or, more fittingly, i MEGALOATHED it. How about that, Jeff? Huh? Huh?? Oh, come on, give us a treat will ya! Yeah, I find the first three games almost unplayable. The graphics are tiny and I can't tell some of the creature types apart. There's no pathfinding. Training is uncessarily difficult. I don't like the inside/outside thing -- I like remaining at the same scale throughout. I don't like worrying about food. If Jeff returned to the old engine I wouldn't buy A6. And this is what I've said every time this has come up, so anyway. The only thing I don't like in the new games is the initiative system in A5, where you can't cast and then move. In what way was combat optional in the earlier games? I don't remember that from my attempts at A1-3.

If you have the quest, and you are on top of that rise with the bones strewn around and water on three sides, then it should appear. You have to fight the slimes for a while first though. There is probably a minimum number of rounds of slimefighting that you have to get through before the monster appears. Maybe it resets if you retreat.

Originally Posted By: Evnissyen You mean that red version of some type of Robin Hood hat that I think I remember from A4? The Farsight Cap.

Originally Posted By: Chroniss Spell line specializations and more spells. I'm talking about stuff like a Fire Mage, or an Ice Mage. As Hobson mentioned, a Summoner Mage. Each specialization limits your use of other magic, but unlocks unique spells specific to your choice. Of course you would need a lot of new spells for this, but it would make spell casters much more unique, instead of just...buy all the best spells and keep upgrading them. Oh yes and no more Geneforge style stuff, at least zoom it out a little its like A5 came from a console or something. OMG, please do not zoom it out. It is fine as it is. On the older Avernums I feel like I need a monocle or something to see what is going on. I would like specialist mages too, but I think it's unlikely that Jeff will make such a big change in this game. On the other hand, perhaps he could adapt the battle discipline system to allow some degree of magical specialization.

Originally Posted By: Ale193 if the Drakons win everyone dies, if the Shapers win, less people will die. therefore, the shapers while not necessarily good, are the ones who should win. I'm late to this thread, and to the game, having only played G4. With that out of the way, I'm surprised by this position, which is taken very often on this forum. I understand the logic, but the Shapers are repressive dictators. They should not win. The Drakons are maniacs. They should not win. Isn't there some possibility that the human/non-drakon part of the Rebellion would win? I hope that the final chapter will include a happy ending among the possibilities. I don't know what the point of an RPG is if you can't get a happy ending.

Originally Posted By: Randomizer Dorikas being in charge and crushing Avernum once and for all. That would suck! Personally, I'd like to play Avernites in A6. I would have liked to play Avernites in A5, also, but then it would have been a different game and stuff. Of course I play the Empire soldiers exactly the same way I play Avernite adventurers. It seems to me that in the earlier games, the line between soldiers and adventurers is pretty fine. In A2 and A4, your characters start out as soldiers but act as adventurers. Evnissyen: Totally. I would love a big GIFTS-centered sub-plot. Maybe a GIFTS could join your party! GIFTS PCs! Brrrzzzap!

We could look at it this way: What loose ends are left for Jeff to tie up in this last game? Lost Bahssikava is one. If the game begins with Dorikas as emperor, that's a pretty big loose end right there. What else? The impending famine. The relationship between Avernite and Vahnatai. The future of the Nephilim and their traditional culture. The location of various artifacts, like the Orb of Thralni and Demonslayer. The fate of the GIFTS! And probably a bunch of things I forgot. Also, let's remember that the new game could be set fifty or a hundred years after A5.

I like happy endings. The Vahnatai and the Slith can have a war if they want, as long as all is right with the world when the game ends. I would also like to see the Nephil come to some sort of rest. They're pretty bad off everywhere. Maybe the PCs will discover Lost Mrrrrrr or something, which will be the ancient Nephil homeland.

I don't know how to estimate those chances, but I hope that this last chapter includes all the areas that were in the first five games. Possibly I'd feel differently if I had to design, code, and sell the thing, but I would like to to visit/revisit all those places. I'm hoping for a game even more epic and huge than the previous Avernums. I agree that it would be enjoyable to see that loose end tied up.

This will never happen unless someone on this forum hits the billion dollar lottery, but just for fun, how would you want this movie to go? Would you want a retelling of one or some of the stories from the games? Which one? Or would you rather have a new story in the Avernum setting? Who would play who? Any director you think could pull it off the best? It seems to me that this could be a huge epic on the scale of The Lord of the Rings movies, or a writer could pick one of the more obscure subplots and use Avernum as a backdrop for something more psychological. The idea of an entire nation of thought criminals trapped in caves is just full of dramatic possibility.

Unfortunately, I'm in Formello now and I've become emotionally invested in my characters which have basically every bad positive trait. Oh well. It's more RPGish to stick with the character concept. By the way, everyone was right about the Fort Draco bandits. They are way easier than the Nephil fort. Actually, I think the hardest thing in Fort Draco is figuring out that Anford is one of the statues standing by the water. After I revived my dead guy in the Nephil fort, we were able to remain death-free. It was just the one battle. Does anyone know how the AI chooses targets in A2? They seem to really like hitting my Slith warrior/mechanic. Also, are swords really hard to use in this game? My sword character has 7 in melee weapons but she seems to miss at least half the time.

Originally Posted By: Line to the Wind Sliths don't have durability, except for a bit of fire resistance. —Alorael, Are you sure that Sliths don't have better natural armor than the other species? They sure seem tougher. Maybe it's just my expectation.

With all this in mind, I used the editor to revive Hank and told him to be more careful next time. However, having read all these responses, I think I might backtrack out of the fort and kill some more stuff before I try those guys again. I mean, that has got to be the toughest kitchen staff of all time.

Originally Posted By: Ghaldring What's important is knowing which traits are good, and which are bad. Elite Warrior, Natural Mage, Fast on Feet, Nimble Fingers, Strong Will and Toughness are all good 'good' traits, whereas Divinely Touched, Beastmaster and Great Renown suck big time. If you want to take two good traits per character, you might want to ditch your fourth character to make up the XP. I usually only need three characters anyway. This could be part of my problem, though not most of it. I figured Divinely Touched would be a good idea because it's good in A4 and 5. Great Reknown doesn't seem to do very much. What about Well Educated, or whatever it's called? I like the idea of sort of a Rogue Scholar-type character. By the way, does Natural Mage work for Clerics in A2? There's no Pure Spirit.

Originally Posted By: Ghaldring madigran: Quote: 1) Epic, intricate plot, *sobs* You should try playing Planescape: Torment. The name alone inclines me against playing it. Is there a Planescape: Easy?

I agree that this is a functional party. I always like to have a sword guy, though. Having a pole guy and a sword guy gives you the widest range of weapons to use. Radiant Soulblade, that is all. I nearly always have at least one character from each species. That's just personal role-playing preference, though, since you don't lose many levels by using a Slith or Nephil. It is good to get more levels, though -- you get skill points you can distribute as you want, instead of having only certain skills increase automatically. In the past I've experimented with a Slith mage, because their built in durability helps offset the necessary limitations on Endurance in a mage character. Recently I played a human mage with Natural Mage and Elite Warrior, and this turned out to be pretty cool. The automatic Blademaster increased her encumbrance capacity and meant I could send her into melee against some opponents and save spell points. It also opened up Parry, somehow, with the obvious advantages. I always choose Strong Will for my best warrior to prevent them from killing the rest of the party if charmed. I think the primary hand-to-hand guy and the primary healer are the most important characters in a four-character party. I've never tried it, but I like the idea of putting Fast On Feet on a primary healer.

Avernum 4 was my first SW game. Here is why I love it and why I bought it: 1) Epic, intricate plot, all the more interesting to me since I had no idea who Rentar was. 2) Functional, pleasant graphics not requiring fancy hardware. 3) Extremely open character design. 4) Funny dialogue. 5) Humongous game world. 6) Replayability due to open character design and multitude of hidden maps and items. 7) Exciting, Hollywood-dramatic battles, especially the final confrontation with Dorikas and the assault on Hosharr's fort. Things I don't like about A4: 1) No built-in character editor. 2) OMG CHITRACHS EVERY FIVE FEET WHEN WILL IT END 3) Fighting your way to the final battle with Rentar can be more dramatic and difficult than the actual battle. I think that A4 is a great game, with vastly better interface and graphics compared to the original trilogy. I think A5 is a better designed game, and I like the Battle Disciplines, but it is more linear than A4. A4 is linear, but A5 is sort of obnoxiously linear.

Thanks to all. I did equip myself at the fort, and I found the Wall of Foreshadowing in the northernmost supply room, but I don't think I found the secret room. I think I will start over and use Custom characters like I usually do in A4 and A5. In those newer games I usually have a party of four specialists, but I will try giving everyone Priest and Mage spells in A2. I might have to overcome my urge to follow the Flow of the Game and do some other stuff before the Nephil Fort. By the way I did find the secret entrance. I always take the Richard Marcinko approach when I can.

So I decided to try A1 again, but I just couldn't do it. I got as far as Formello and I couldn't take the little tiny figures and the no quest list anymore. I just felt like I wasn't getting anywhere. The plot was too vague for too long. So, I decided to try A2, which I think is the only one I haven't even started. I like it much more than A1. I was going along ok for a few minutes, and figured out how to rest, and made my way through part of the Nephil fort. One of the things I like best about A4 and 5 is that you have to get beaten really badly to lose a character. As long as you know when to run away, you can revive the party and try again. Whereas in A2, I lost a guy part way through the fort, and not only do I need to spend a bunch of money to get him back, I have to find a healer in a part of the map I haven't explored yet! I am playing on Easy. I tried reloading, shielding everybody and trying the battle again. Same result. I tried going on with the three survivors, but nearly lost another character in the next battle. This is not going to work. Aside from accepting that I suck and just playing A5 again, is there some Original Trilogy Trick that I don't understand? How can you keep all of your cash flow from going to resurrections?

Obviously, the mushrooms contain some sort of mood-enhancing chemical, which is why the Avernites are able to tolerate their environment at all.

Quote: Originally written by Phazer: Keeping all sides balanced. PC as Monitor. Member of a secret Agency so secret it doesn't even know who it is. You for and against all sides, playing off one against another and as long as no side wins or loses, you win. I don't know. It doesn't sound like an apt ending to the saga. I like it as a general game concept, or maybe as a subquest. But I think the standards of heroic fantasy demand that the task be bold and the ending be spectacular, not subtle.

What I'd like out of my War Trall is for it to block incoming missile and magic attacks -- like it would know it can take a ton of damage and would automatically shield the other creations with its body. This could make a War Trall / Wingbolt combination very effective. Just for coolness factor, it would be cooler if instead of hurling rocks, the Trall bowled them along the ground. Maybe the attack could have a greater chance to stun to stimulate the enemy being knocked off their feet. Also, since it is very strong and already has a bag with apparently limitless volume, I'd like it to carry some of my gear.