Jump to content

Kreador

Member
  • Posts

    434
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Kreador

  1. I'm pretty sure that the cost from the trainer is only based on how many times you've learned about a given spell from trainers, not the actual level in the spell you're learning. So, if you start with level 1 in a spell, you can get to level three by either buying training twice (at a cost of x+2x) or buying training once and reading the book for the spell (at a cost of x).

     

    And, of course, there is that way to get all three levels in the basic spells (can't remember if it's just priest, or if there's one for priest and one for mage) for no cost--once you can survive to get there.

  2. Rat Nest is in the Formello sewers behind a hidden door. The button to open the secret passage is right near where you come down the ladder, but you may want to put on a light to help you see it.

     

    Brigand Extortion, once you've killed them you have to go back to the

    Farming Supplies seller in the fort and tell him.

     

    Stolen Necklace is a big quest and you probably haven't finished it. You have to invade the Nephil Fort west of Formello.

  3. Yes, but there's a balance in gameplay between elements that increase immersion depth and elements that increase general annoyance factor. Basilisk Games (Eschalon Book I and Book II), I think, does a good job balancing encumbrance with fun, so there are times you have to decide what to carry and what to leave behind, and where you want to spend points on your character, because if your fighter is too stupid, he can't tell the difference between a rock and a potato.

     

    That said, I think Jeff is gaining more players for his games simplifying many of the mechanics than he's losing by loss of depth. I think he's right around the sweet spot in terms of what the turn-based isometric RPG buying crowd wants in a combination of depth of adventure and simplicity of starting up and playing.

  4. From a pure perspective of logic, clearly you can't put a dozen sets of plate armor in a backpack, so we have to leap to the conclusion that they have some other means of carrying all the stuff they pick up. Or we just ignore it because the reality is a lot more boring, and we play fantasy games to avoid dealing with all those pesky elements of reality like the inability to fireball that guy who cuts you off in traffic.

  5. It has been noted that DW is by far the most powerful form of fighter. Lots of us would like to see more balance. For me, the one thing about DW that is strangest is that either both strikes hit or both strikes miss, whereas on would think they should be two separate rolls, so the possibility of no hits, one hit right, one hit left, or both hits.

     

    However, historically speaking in individual close combat, two weapons was more effective than weapon and shield or pole weapon. The latter two were more useful in military maneuvers of large groups (phalanx), where the front line shields could be held close together to keep out the enemy while pole weapons reached from behind and short swords stabbed out up close. Break up the phalanx, however (as when the Roman legions headed into what is modern Scotland and found boulders and flaming logs rolling down the hills at them, followed by big, naked, blue-painted guys with swords bigger than your average centurion), and the advantages fade quickly.

  6. I'm coming from completely outside this discussion, and I'm not about to read back through 9 pages of conversation to catch up completely, but I'll toss in my few pfennig. Back in the days when I did a lot of tabletop gaming, I came to the funny conclusion that I couldn't play "optimized" characters. When I tried, I'd usually get them and most of my companions killed. When I played a more generalist character, not gimped so much but certainly not optimal, it made me more tactical and made me work better with the rest of the team.

     

    I think a big part of the point of role playing games is to get people to learn to work together. Players who are solely out for themselves rapidly find that they're playing by themselves. The backstabber may be helpful overall, but the other players would rapidly get tired of dealing with him and he'd find himself in a fight with no backup. The gimpy character would usually find that he'll get help from the rest of the group to improve the character to a useful level, or the character would die off and the player would create a new, less gimpy one if he wanted to continue.

  7. You're never going to please everyone with either system, but more hardcore players are willing to play with unconsciousness, even while they gripe about it, than more casual players are willing to play with expensive resurrection and having to pick up and haul a dead ally's loot and so on. Jeff is looking for the largest player pool possible while staying within the old school, isometric turn based RPG realm.

×
×
  • Create New...