*i

Any interest in another chat? Bueller...Bueller...Bueller...Bueller...

I believe he means the beautiful crystals. It's been a while, but I believe there is some Purified Essence is past all of Sharon's tests.

It's been about a month now and the contest deadline is a month closer (go figure), so I think it's time for another chat for next week. Are there any preferences for date/time? I'm considering Saturday, September 30th at the same time as the last one. However, if people would be open to something different, let me know.

Yes, that is correct. He's on a three day rotation one of which is nowhere at all.

All right, I think the discussion on Tullegolar has gone on long enough. Let's get back to the substantial issues of the thread.

Tullegolar: Your arrogance really annoys us. Cut it out please. As far as who does the most research, it's hard to say because you have to define "research". Most of the engineering and drug development research/design goes on at corporations. Most of the "fundamental science" goes on at universities. Most of the national security stuff goes on at laboratories or contractors. Here's an interesting question. If the government pays a corporation to develop say missile X, is that a government research project or a corporate one? Basically, the question is not as simple as you are acting. Realize that it all depends on the definition which may vary based on the beholder.

It is possible that after a certain amount of time, the slimes get him if that quest is not completed. I seem to vaguely recall this from E3, but I cannot be sure.

Quote: I don't think the US does a particularly large share of addressing humanitarian crises, though I could be wrong about this. But I'm pretty sure the US Navy is a little overpowered for the job of keeping down piracy. The US does a lot more than some are led to believe and a lot less in some cases. Historically, the US has taken a decent share of the role. It could, and perhaps should, do more. Actually look at the piracy statistics. After the Cold War, the Soviet Union and the US cut their navies substantially such that piracy is now a serious concern. It was not this way 20 years ago. Strong navies are vital to keeping pirates at bay as history shows. Without the US Navy, piracy would be even worse. Quote: The United States is a military superpower, but like most nation states it pursues its own interests as perceived by its government of the day. It doesn't tend to spend its taxpayers' billions or its servicemen's lives on causes that do not serve its interests, however noble they might be. People often point this out as though it were damning, but I don't see too many other countries lining up to die for noble causes either. That is true, but keep in mind global security is a US interest so it tends to get involved in a lot of things for this reason. Again, the US should probably do more. Quote: I think that eventually humanity will get a global police force, but the United States' military is not it. In my opinion it should neither be praised for being what it isn't, nor blamed for not being so. That's why I put quotes around it such that it shouldn't be taken literally. It's not a police force or military force globally in the traditional sense. To be fair, the US does tend historically to make up much of UN and NATO forces.

Quote: Why is the U.S. the only country that can have nuclear weapons? The way I see it if they have them everybody should. Its none of their business if Korea has nuclear weapons. Is it the worlds business? Yes. But the US getting all pissed because somebody else has certain weapons is stupid. If all things were equal, you would have a valid point. The US and the old Soviet Union made a lot of effort at maintaining world security. Now, we could argue specific policies were incorrect all day, but that's not the point. Who else patrols the oceans with large navies to keep piracy down? Who else makes provides manpower to help defeat aggressive acts and address humanitarian crises? Who else goes to extreme measures to root out terrorist groups around the world? Who else invests a large amount of its resources ensuring dangerous materials (such as nuclear warheads) do not end up in the hands of those who would actually use them? Who else defends their own materials and ensures they don't accidentally goes off to the same degree? There are many countries who do part of this, but, by and large, the US carries the brunt of the "world police" duties. A lot of countries like that we do these things, but don't actually like it when we do them. Call it somewhat schizoid, but politics need not be logically consistent. Is the US perfect? Of course not. Should the US have done things differently? No one would argue. But like it or not, the US plays a dominant role in maintaining world security and the world would be a lot worse off without it. So why should the US even have nuclear weapons? Well, if we look at how war has evolved since WWII, they've become much smaller in scale because the costs of a large scale war are too high. Such wars become, in essence, unwinnable. Both sides may lose, but the agressor cannot win. This takes out all motivation for large scale conventional warfare. The problem is that nuclear weapons do not preclude "unconventional war" like the terrorist threats we face today. The problem is with asymmetry. Use of nuclear weapons on disperate groups is impractical especially when there is no sponsor state. However, their use upon a nationstate such as the US would be a major benefit to them since their goals are to strike fear and cause death. The risk means terrorists or those without territories should not have them. Since they, in effect, have no instant retalliatory consequences of using them. But what about other nation states like North Korea or Iran? Well, the problem is that they do not partake in global security responsibilities. In fact, they have actively encouraged disorder and disobeyed treaties. Because of this, there is no motivation to covertly give such a weapon to a terrorist entity for asymmetrical war purposes. In effect, they have not demonstrated a commitment to global security and would gain by giving such a weapon to a terroist group. So it's easy to argue for egalitarianism with nuclear weapons. However, in practice these things cannot work because the costs to globabl security are prohibitively high.

In addition to which game, could you add some details. Is it just certain items that you cannot sell? Or are there items that one moment you can sell and the next you cannot? In certain games, merchants only buy certain pieces of equipment. For instance, some weapons and armor sellers only buy weapons and armor. Before we can help, we need a very specific and thought out description of the problem.

Nothing other than going insane, doing a few more encounters than you'd otherwise have to, and having a different ending.

Quote: Chevyn? He seemed like the kind of ruler that would fall easy prey to some kind of evil puppeteer. Linda perhaps? She is still alive somewhere out there, isn't she? Chevyn was conveniently deleted from the Avernum universe by Jeff. Linda died in the Tower of Magi disaster that she caused. As for Dorikas, I'm with Drakey. I can't speak for everyone else, but Dorikas as a main villain was pretty weak. Partly because we know little about him, hopefully he will be more developed as time goes on. The concept of the Darkside Loyalists is a much more interesting one.

Quote: As for a dastardly scheme to destroy all good in the world... wrong. That's not what I saw. Well gee, I'd hope so considering I was obviously being overly general and facetious here. What I said was plainly a tirade against the overuse of vengance as a motivator.

The other thing is the overuse of revenge as a motivator in Jeff's games. I think that contributes the Rentar's blandness...I've been wronged so I'll come up with some dastardly scheme to destroy all that is good in the world, ho hum. Commander Groul in Nephil's Gambit for Blades of Exile comes to mind as a decent villain. He had more than trivial motives and decent methods. Stalker is not too bad either. Sovereign, although we never actually see/meet him, is pretty cool in Alcritas' arc because we get to see and hear all the bad things he does to the characters in the game. Never meeting Sovereign and not knowing his identity fueled his personna in a lot of ways. Come to think of it, Sovereign and Rentar have a bit in common, had she been more like Sovereign then it would have been a lot better.

Quote: Even I can summon undead, that's not the point. The monster plagues were in no way like hordes of minions as you say. Hordes of minions would be like what the Darkside Loyalists have. They have a bandit fort here, another there, three more over yonder. Rentar, on the other hand, gave us the much needed variety. The Filth Factory is a personal favorite. It was neat in A3, it was old in A4. I'm not the only one who had the whole plot thing figured out quite early on. Ironically, I e-mailed Jeff during beta testing upon reaching the Eastern Gallery telling him what was going to happen. After this he pretty much admitted that plot was not why he was making this game. How did I know this? Well, let's just say I've been in the Blades designing community for a long time. The exact same plot was the tool of many failed scenario designers. Efforts I have seen were comical. Seeing the newbish plot replayed in an actual Avernum game was wrenching. The Darkside Loyalists could be a really good villain for exactly the opposite of the reason you state. They are generally few in number so their tactics have to be shadowy. This would make a very convincing and unique villain for A5. I think the problem with Rentar, going back to her, is not the absolute depth of character, it's what we really get to see of it. Her interactions with the party are fairly minimal. Her interactions with other characters (aside from Erika I suppose) are non-existent. That's the main problem, in terms of character interaction in the story she's passive. She may make monster machines, set predictable traps, and run away when you encounter her, but she does little in terms of storyline. Quote: Of course, Avernum 4 was not meant to have a big twist plot. You are correct when you say that. Why then do you insist on judging the game by that very factor? I don't expect a game to have a huge plot twist, but it would be nice if I couldn't predict most of everything about 1/5 through the game. The Darkside Loyalists were good in this respect, I couldn't predict them nearly as well. Things in a story should flow logically, but sometimes the player has to be presented with new, previously unknown, information and events that changes the situation. A3 does this quite well. As for A4, had Rentar started as the enemy, events happen, and you end up fighting for a common cause again due to some major series of events, A4 would have been cool.

The other thing that made the game so shallow was the predictability. From Motrax's Lair, we knew the monsters were going to made by Rentar. It didn't take much to guess that she'd be a Crystal Soul (I figured this out right away just because it's a predictable step) and that we would get to kill her in some epic battle. Making monster plagues is an element to her character, except that it goes with most other villains in lots of games in the guise of minions. Creating hordes of monsters are hardly unique; in fact, it's quite predictable (summoning undead, etc). Basically, monster plagues (or equivalently hordes of minions) are a cop out, an excuse giving the party something else to do rather than having Rentar do anything herself. In my book, the monster plague overreliance made her a worse villain. As for the "trap", it felt too contrived for me to care. Anytime we have to resort to "stupid party tricks" (here walk right into this obvious trap for no other reason than to collect the plot coupon) it's a major turn off. It didn't help Rentar's character, it lowered my opinion of the game's plot. A4 was a good hackfest game, as it was intended to be. Jeff himself said this.

Rentar-Ihrno is probably eldest of the group primarily because Vahnatai live a very long time. The ranking of the dragons in power at the time of A1: Motrax Athron Pyrog Khoth Sulfras Motrax is the eldest of the bunch.

Where does Rentar try and kill you aside from the hackfest in the Sulphrous Flats? The "trap" was so contrived it makes me laugh that I purposely have to be so stupid as to fall into it. I understand Rentar's character quite well. The problem is twofold: Jeff never exploits it, and she's just like Erika except on the "wrong" side. She could have been a great villain, but her actions could have been done by anyone in A4. They aren't unique to her in any way. You are correct about the environmental changes. They don't necessarily have to take the same lair, just a different one in the same region. Of course, I would extend this to main plot stuff.

Quote: Anyway, I am beginning to understand what you all want, but just barely. You seem to want a game where NPCs and the environment evolve and change completely independent of player action. I am having trouble visualizing this. Can you give me an example of such a game? The closest I can think of would be a MMORPG like World of Warcraft. Is that seriously what you expect from Spiderweb? Be reasonable. I do not want things to happen completely independent of the player's actions, that's NEVER what I said. I said more should other characters should do things in response to the player's action, outside of their control. I'm not sure how I can be more clear. The worlds in Avernum are too static. They should be more reactive to the player's actions. Right now, the extent is villains run away and people change their conversation options. Nobody actually really does anything in response to the events around them. For example, kill a bandit leader and another rival bandit leader moves his band in to take their turf. I'm sure I could think of more, but it's very situationally dependent. The party does something and a bunch of consequences, intended and unintended would happen. Also, creativity is cheap. Quote: This sounds like Rentar to me. Not really. Yeah, you hear about her from other people, but she doesn't really DO a whole lot other than sit and wait for you to kill her. After you almost do, you chase her and kill her. Why should I care about Rentar? I really don't. She's just another architype villain with some beef and makes lots and lots of monsters. I could have interchanged her for any other villain. Her actions are so predictably bland and senseless from my perspective that I'm indifferent about her. I don't hate her, I don't sympathize with her, she's just another enemy plain and simple. She doesn't interact with any of the other characters in the story really, she's just out to make trouble for [insert motive here].

Quote: Are you saying the plot should not be driven by the players? If you want to simply observe the story rather than drive it, perhaps you would be more suited to reading books than playing games. There should be a mixture. The player should not be responsible for every major thing that goes on. The antagonists or other factions (with interests different than either the party or the antagonist) should do things in response to the party's actions. This puts the party into a reactive rather than a proactive role. The Avernum series typically involved the player as a completely proactive entity. This doesn't mean the party should be completely reactive, but there should be a balance. Quote: Again I must ask, what games are you playing where the main villain sits down with you, tells their life story, spells out their motive for you, and then proceeds to meet up with you on a regular basis to catch up on things? Alorael, your description of a perfect villain brings to mind Gary from Pokemon, not a very good villain or plot, in my opinion. No, they shouldn't sit down and tell you everything through idle chats; that is too bland. However, the actions of the villain and his/her allies and adversaries can illustrate their motives and background. Nethergate is good because of its uniqueness. I don't think duplicating it would bode well.

Or Snidely Whiplash for that matter.

Quote: I think Avernum 4 did have such characters! Look at Rentar. When she first finds out about you, she doesn't think much of you. Later, she is annoyed to see how far you make it. You can feel her pain and frustration as she loses battle after battle against you. You chase her across the world, taking on everything she can throw at you. She becomes your nemesis, and you become hers. By the time you have the final confrontation, she is practically a member of the party. That, my friend, is a living, breathing character. No, it's not. She actually has to do things and interact with the player in more than trivial ways. You seem to ascribe a lot more to Rentar than Jeff actually did. Rentar was a barely passable villain. I understand her motivations and all that, and it's good she had that -- that's what makes her passable. Beyond having basic motivation, she doesn't really do a whole lot. She pretty much sits in a place until the player comes and finds her, fights her, and flees. Repeat again twice in A4 except that she dies/leaves in the second encounter. You could have replaced her with Snidely Whiplash and his monster making machines for the same effect. The problem is Rentar (and most other villains in Avernum) are passive villains. They pretty much sit in their towers and antagonize the party. They don't move around and shake the plot personally, they have thousands of minions do it for them. The interactions with the player are fairly minimal. As for Nethergate, the point was not well developed characters, but an example of a good game that did not use monster plagues. The "villain" in the story could be the rival party that the player can use as well. That was fairly creative.

Quote: I am curious to know, how would you do it better? Actually have real living breathing characters rather than 1D caricatures resembling people. Quote: Let’s assume that any good game has a variety of enemies culminating in an epic boss battle in the end, with few exceptions. One could make a good game with this, but there can be a lot more. Sure, you will usually have the henchmen leading up to a boss, but this does not make it a good game in and of itself. You can always add a lot of storyline along the way. Make the people outside of the player's control alive and actually do things that influence the plot in more than trivial ways.

Not wanting to spoil things, Drayks are horribly underpowered.

While I don't have time at this moment to debug your script, perhaps I can offer a little advice. Make use of the print_num() command to get a feel for the flow of logic with these scripts. I know sometimes I have counterintuitive (at least to me) results. Then modify your script around those if possible.