sorry, my mistake. i didnt mean classes, i ment faction as in gothic. so lets say you join a faction like a monk faction and do monk quests then paladin faction dont like you. practical a different way of alignment.
though i havent played it i only heard in fable the people actually see by the looks you are a bad guy and dont treat you good. or the visual effects of kotor when becoming corrupt is good. this is a good way of doing it.
edit: to tell the truth i like this leveln as it is done in morrowind and dungeon siege more than this straight steps. it feels more real somehow.
Schatten's Content
There have been 296 items by Schatten (Search limited from 04-May 23)
#175203 alignment
Posted by
on 14 December 2004 - 03:05 PM
in
Dragon Age Series
#175110 alignment
Posted by
on 14 December 2004 - 04:35 AM
in
Dragon Age Series
i think in every crpg is some form of alignment(good/bad) or faction(mage/warrior/thief). do you think this is good? would you like to abandon such thoughts? are they realistic? do you have a better concept? what do you think bioware should implement?
i mean lets assume some thief organisation is evil from the point of view of the authorithies. but do you think my fellow thief friend views me as evil? i dont think so. as an example.
i mean lets assume some thief organisation is evil from the point of view of the authorithies. but do you think my fellow thief friend views me as evil? i dont think so. as an example.
#174918 A whole new setting in DA
Posted by
on 13 December 2004 - 04:54 AM
in
Dragon Age Series
Well, then you won't be disappointed!
1.08: What world does Dragon Age take place in?
Dragon Age is set in a new world developed by BioWare. A large team of writers and artists have been busy detailing the societies, religions, history, races, monsters, and economy of the Dragon Age world. Several new languages are also being developed for Dragon Age by a linguistics expert.
And add a brand new ruleset. This sounds good to me, at least now.
urmmm.... you dont believe everything the devs say, do you? i think the history and rules wont be as complex as some may used to be but i like it this way. i dont know if i would play it if its just another d&d game.
#174917 Dragon Age
Posted by
on 13 December 2004 - 04:50 AM
in
Dragon Age Series
we will have to wait. somewhat problematic is always if you have to make everything from scratch. so no rules or history you can count on (d&d or something similar).
" I'm sorry, what problem exactly do you all have with scantily glad lady adventurers wink.gif? "
it completely destroys my illusion. a solid hit and you are as good as dead.
" I'm sorry, what problem exactly do you all have with scantily glad lady adventurers wink.gif? "
it completely destroys my illusion. a solid hit and you are as good as dead.
#174593 Insults to the authors
Posted by
on 11 December 2004 - 12:41 PM
in
Refinements
hehe, if mathematical questions arise for me you are now my new source. 
#174588 Dragon Age
Posted by
on 11 December 2004 - 12:36 PM
in
Dragon Age Series
Yeah, or it's just about stereotypes.
its in every game that way. i have seen pics from some mmorpg where warrior females wear only a string when using full plate mail.
#174405 Insults to the authors
Posted by
on 10 December 2004 - 10:50 AM
in
Refinements
I am a Math Student.
really?
#173909 planescape rats??
Posted by
on 07 December 2004 - 10:55 AM
in
IE Help
got my attention. i dont have ps. could someone send me the relevant scripting parts?
#173857 planescape rats??
Posted by
on 07 December 2004 - 05:17 AM
in
IE Help
i read a few days ago (if i read correctly and remember it correctly) that in ps: torment there are some "rats" who have a nice feature. the more rats there are the better they get, better spells and so. is that correct? never played it.
if yes, this could be implemented in bg2, too, for some neat surprises?
if yes, this could be implemented in bg2, too, for some neat surprises?
#172585 Sorcerer Changes
Posted by
on 30 November 2004 - 04:21 AM
in
Refinements
It's nice to follow Pnp for the good things, not for the lame ones.
Also, we don't have an electronic DM that can adjust things when needed!
I thought at first we could discriminate between the number of affected creatures,
but this isn't the case: there are spells that affect the entire party without projectiles, conversely there are spells that affect one single creature using a pro.
The ability isn't needed (sorcs have already TONS of abilities, especially in V2, it would actually create problems with tables like the ones for bards, which have less stuff), and it's just likely to cause bugs and inconsistencies.
All in all, it's a mess, and I see why this opcode was left unused.
My comrades, once again: please start working on things after they've been debated..
this has merits.... if only, i would implement this only for certain spells like stoneskin to save an extra cast after rest but not for things like protection from or so.... dont know...
#171769 Sorcerer Changes
Posted by
on 26 November 2004 - 06:32 AM
in
Refinements
ummm... what exactly is the difference between the spells it works and and it does not work on? only projectiles?
as for the different implementable ideas i would choose the first one with 30-40% or something.
as for the different implementable ideas i would choose the first one with 30-40% or something.
#169575 NPC corrections
Posted by
on 15 November 2004 - 06:00 AM
in
Refinements
This is a good point. I think she might get them back in the Underdark then.both the rules and viconias ingame journal say that she looses her abilities
does the environment there bring the powers? if no then i am against it. especially because it is mentioned she has lost them.
#168747 Overall Progress: Questions & Feedback
Posted by
on 11 November 2004 - 02:46 AM
in
Valen Expansion
i dont think so after all the work he has done. 
perhaps he needs a hug to continue to work? :love:
perhaps he needs a hug to continue to work? :love:
#168475 Tables for Multiclasses
Posted by
on 10 November 2004 - 01:32 AM
in
Refinements
concealment can be seen with true sight?
#166635 Revised Celestials
Posted by
on 02 November 2004 - 01:08 AM
in
Refinements
what exactly do you mean? it is more than a year ago since i had probability but perhaps i can help....Still, it will be a great teaching for me in Probabilities if I want to do it correct. (Probability calculus will be in my next year of Uni, not this one, so it will be a great challenge).
#165886 True Dweomers
Posted by
on 29 October 2004 - 10:05 AM
in
Refinements
if i wouldnt know you two were dudes i would think you are a married couple. you sound like my parents sometimes. 
#165508 Revised Celestials
Posted by
on 27 October 2004 - 09:38 AM
in
Refinements
If you're keeping fallen versions of normally incredibly good creatures, why not add in virtuous versions of normally incredibly evil creatures (i.e. baatezu and tanar'ri)?
yeah, i like that.
can you make those, tgm? with this face :love: and the body of a bunny? puuleaseeee. 
i really dont like the solar creatures. too powerfull and gamebreaking as summons. not to mention 25k is not enough for those powerhouses.
#165280 Shapeshifters anew
Posted by
on 26 October 2004 - 05:26 AM
in
Refinements
as a sidenote i noticed lots and lots of enemies are immune to normal weapons (during the course playing with my modified shifter.). 
#165209 mod ideas
Posted by
on 25 October 2004 - 11:57 PM
in
IE Mod Ideas
beholder dragon (dragon with beholder head)
#164489 Chosen One vs Nameless One?
Posted by
on 22 October 2004 - 09:54 AM
in
Planescape: Torment
Goku would win
doubt it. pikachu blasts the light out of him. :gun:
#164405 Missing HLAs
Posted by
on 22 October 2004 - 03:45 AM
in
Refinements
when outside (or only in the wood or whatever) rangers gain effects like invisible (every two rounds invis is cast on ranger) and/or better damage using range weapons. simulates that rangers know how to hide/hunt in the woods.
#164069 True Dweomers
Posted by
on 20 October 2004 - 01:49 AM
in
Refinements
i somewhat agree with tgm here. i would feel a bit offended when someone writes a guide as stone wolf said. it is a great amount of work. nevertheless everybody knows that their mod gets altered. man, there was one weapon, a dagger, that has like 25% chance of casing something (cant remember never used it much) without save and no res check from reign of virtue (??) and i have tweaked it a lot (still didnt used it.)
but tgm you sure has modded other mods. iirc, valen, for example. (as i have done, too) and chloe also? :turnip2:
but tgm you sure has modded other mods. iirc, valen, for example. (as i have done, too) and chloe also?
:turnip2:
#164044 True Dweomers
Posted by
on 20 October 2004 - 12:10 AM
in
Refinements
"I agree that XP drain can be a valid balancing method. I just happen to think that it's a poor choice both design wise in terms of 2nd ed / BG & that overall concept is broken. XP = experience = learning. XP by itself is not power in 2nd ed. A mage shouldn't permanently 'forget' the lessons he has learned simply for casting a spell.
XP loss in PnP *does* happen in 3x. It does not in 2nd. 3x has other factors that balance this out. 2nd ed does not.
If a 2nd ed GM told me that I just lost XP for casting a spell I would thank him for running the game, collect my stuff, and take a hike. I say this having only quit 2 games in nearly 20 years of RPGing."
that conviced me. :thumb:
"That's the range of a TD system that drained XP. That's all of it. Measure the cost and answer yourselves. Casting 100 True Dweomers is going to cost me an average of 500k XP in the "whole" game time, and that counting with 'every' TD costing experience. Which TGM said it wouldn't be the case."
this you say is your argument for td exp loss? its more against it. you can cast 100 tds because you loose the knowledge to breath (exp.) but you cannot do it because this td uses the holy avenger +6 as component. go figure.
"Exactly. By sacrificing a potent item or a component of an item, you don't lose anything: you merely lose the possibility to gain another power, for example an uber-item. Since the game (especially ToB) is swarmed with these already, we'd require around 4-5 existing powerful items for each castings to balance, which won't happen. Understand that *not gaining more power* not equals with *sacrificing power*. THIS is the point here. "
replace items with exp and you have a counter argument.
my last post here. tgms mind is set and mine is also. i dont use it then.
XP loss in PnP *does* happen in 3x. It does not in 2nd. 3x has other factors that balance this out. 2nd ed does not.
If a 2nd ed GM told me that I just lost XP for casting a spell I would thank him for running the game, collect my stuff, and take a hike. I say this having only quit 2 games in nearly 20 years of RPGing."
that conviced me. :thumb:
"That's the range of a TD system that drained XP. That's all of it. Measure the cost and answer yourselves. Casting 100 True Dweomers is going to cost me an average of 500k XP in the "whole" game time, and that counting with 'every' TD costing experience. Which TGM said it wouldn't be the case."
this you say is your argument for td exp loss? its more against it. you can cast 100 tds because you loose the knowledge to breath (exp.) but you cannot do it because this td uses the holy avenger +6 as component. go figure.
"Exactly. By sacrificing a potent item or a component of an item, you don't lose anything: you merely lose the possibility to gain another power, for example an uber-item. Since the game (especially ToB) is swarmed with these already, we'd require around 4-5 existing powerful items for each castings to balance, which won't happen. Understand that *not gaining more power* not equals with *sacrificing power*. THIS is the point here. "
replace items with exp and you have a counter argument.
my last post here. tgms mind is set and mine is also. i dont use it then.
#164039 Malak
Posted by
on 19 October 2004 - 11:58 PM
in
KotOR Series
i didnt like vader at all. the imperator is way cooler. :^^:
#163942 True Dweomers
Posted by
on 19 October 2004 - 09:56 AM
in
Refinements
i hope understanding what you meaning equals not with being on your side. 
i understand it, too. i am only strongly against it.
"I think you guys overreacted a bit against the idea of XP loss. Personally I think that 1000-10000 XP is a so piss poor ammount that you are not going to notice it. Honestly."
if i follow by the letter of that, please explain to me the downside then...
"However I also see XP as the character's real power, and this is what feeds a True Dweomer imho, the caster's power, his energy (therefore energy drain spell btw)."
hmm.... *scratches head*.... if you look at it this way....
i understand it, too. i am only strongly against it.
"I think you guys overreacted a bit against the idea of XP loss. Personally I think that 1000-10000 XP is a so piss poor ammount that you are not going to notice it. Honestly."
if i follow by the letter of that, please explain to me the downside then...
"However I also see XP as the character's real power, and this is what feeds a True Dweomer imho, the caster's power, his energy (therefore energy drain spell btw)."
hmm.... *scratches head*.... if you look at it this way....
