Bard's Tale IV External News Thread

Announcements & media coverage pertaining to The Bard's Tale series. Only moderators & inXile can make new threads on this forum.

Moderator: Bard Hall Bouncers

Post Reply
User avatar
Zombra
Global Moderator
Posts: 6213
Joined: March 8th, 2012, 10:50 pm

Re: Bard's Tale IV External News Thread

Post by Zombra » July 10th, 2015, 11:59 am

thebruce wrote:Like I expounded upon, it's not existence of the visualization of battle in a grid, it's the tactical content of the combat process which may include primarily grid-focused visual strategies, as opposed to the linear us-v-them back and forth combat. That's what doesn't feel Bard's Tale.
Yeah, I agree. I hope that the grid doesn't command much attention in combat; I don't want to be worrying about maneuvering my guys all the time. Bard's Tale in particular and blobbers by and large aren't (and shouldn't be) about tactical movement.
Image

User avatar
Drool
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9788
Joined: March 17th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Location: Under Tenebrosia, doing shots with Sceadu.

Re: Bard's Tale IV External News Thread

Post by Drool » July 10th, 2015, 12:09 pm

Gizmo wrote:
Drool wrote:
Gizmo wrote:Including losing [splitting of] party members who refuse to continue on... out of fear or disagreement
I trust you mean for NPCs to do this, not PCs...
Of course I meant PCs... Provided the character gen is advanced enough... but if not, then ~there'd be no point.
That's a big fat nope. The PCs do what I tell them to do. That's why they're player characters. This isn't a first-person survival horror game, it's a party-based game. I make the party and they do what I say. I provide their personalities, not the game.

Yes, if I was playing an Indiana Jones game, I wouldn't expect to be able to jump into the snake pit. And if I was playing Mario Brothers, I'd expect to jump on sentient mushrooms. But I'm not playing those games, I'm playing a dungeon crawler with characters I created. If the NPC wants to bugger off, fine; that's part of the NPC package. But the designers can keep their grubby paws off my characters.
Alwa nasci korliri das.

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3730
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Bard's Tale IV External News Thread

Post by Gizmo » July 10th, 2015, 12:13 pm

I think that if it is at all grid based, that moving the party off the tile will likely avoid incoming attacks; hence the suggestion that some attacks affect more than just the occupied tile.That's not Bard's tale, to be sure, but didn't we all get the message when Brian discounted the idea of recreating the text ribbon UI? While of course any Bard's Tale sequel should retain the core gameplay mechanics ~I don't think that they believe it would be accepted today, even among a crowd of Bard's Tale series fans... It's our loss; but what they do deliver will at least be playable, and if we're lucky, it will include inside references for those that can spot them for what they are.

Drool wrote:That's a big fat nope. The PCs do what I tell them to do. That's why they're player characters. This isn't a first-person survival horror game, it's a party-based game. I make the party and they do what I say. I provide their personalities, not the game.

Yes, if I was playing an Indiana Jones game, I wouldn't expect to be able to jump into the snake pit. And if I was playing Mario Brothers, I'd expect to jump on sentient mushrooms. But I'm not playing those games, I'm playing a dungeon crawler with characters I created. If the NPC wants to bugger off, fine; that's part of the NPC package. But the designers can keep their grubby paws off my characters.
Do you honestly believe that?

What PC outside of Bethesda's digital cosplay games ever did anymore than take your suggestions? PCs are more about limitations than strengths, and if a PC is complex enough, its weaknesses will (and should) intrude on the player's suggested course. If the PC is deathly claustrophobic, then they should absolutely refuse to go where they cannot force themselves to travel. (The player should only ever see of the game, what the PC is capable of showing them.)

Have you not played dungeon crawlers where the PC was paralyzed, for one reason or another? And the PC refused to take your commands for being incapable of complying? RPG PCs are not avatar marionettes, they can only take player suggestion; or the developer is doing it wrong.

Image

User avatar
Crosmando
Supreme Jerk
Posts: 5136
Joined: January 3rd, 2013, 8:48 am

Re: Bard's Tale IV External News Thread

Post by Crosmando » July 10th, 2015, 12:52 pm

I don't think I can even think of a worse suggestion if I tried Gizmo. Kindly GTFO with your story-driven nonsense in my dungeon crawlers! My party ARE my marionettes. In party-based dungeon crawlers like BT "you" the player are not one PC or even all of your PC, you are like some man in the sky giving them commands, which explains why in BT you could dump all your characters at the Guild and create entirely new ones.

What you are suggesting if like saying that in Red Alert if you have a tank and click for it to attack an enemy, it should be able to say "No thanks I don't want to risk my life".

No seriously, think of dungeon crawlers like wargames.
Matthias did nothing wrong!

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3730
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Bard's Tale IV External News Thread

Post by Gizmo » July 10th, 2015, 1:18 pm

Crosmando wrote:I don't think I can even think of a worse suggestion if I tried Gizmo. Kindly GTFO with your story-driven nonsense in my dungeon crawlers! My party ARE my marionettes. In party-based dungeon crawlers like BT "you" the player are not one PC or even all of your PC, you are like some man in the sky giving them commands, which explains why in BT you could dump all your characters at the Guild and create entirely new ones.
;)
Then what is the point of even giving them a name, much less a skill or two. I'm reminded of just how impressed I was in Gothic two, when I first tried the option to pick a locked gate, and my PC idly mused of having no understanding of locks ~that's in the game, until the PC is taught how to pick locks; and subsequently becomes capable of complying with the demand to pick locks.

I don't think I could stay interested in an RPG, if the PCs were just action figures; it defeats the point of roleplay, and they become purely mechanical and predictable tools; not individuals in a situation.

**Now... Bard's Tale 1-3 did not have as complex a group of characters as Realms of Arcania ~for example. In BT they really were just base archetypes; but even so ~they too could but try to follow suggestions; and they could fail at it. With a marionette, you cannot fail unless you [the player] make a mistake; and that has no influence (or fault) from the PC... In the case of an expert warrior, that is the player handicapping the PC... who would probably not have missed. That is also the problem with RPGs trying to simulate puppets for the player. :(
Last edited by Gizmo on July 10th, 2015, 1:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Crosmando
Supreme Jerk
Posts: 5136
Joined: January 3rd, 2013, 8:48 am

Re: Bard's Tale IV External News Thread

Post by Crosmando » July 10th, 2015, 1:24 pm

For single-character games like Gothic (or Fallout) you might be right, but for party blobbers like BT or MM or Wizardry that's a bad idea. You just need to understand that there's many sub-genres of CRPG's, and what might be a good idea in one might not be so in another. Torment and BT4 are both CRPG's, but will likely be vastly different games.
Matthias did nothing wrong!

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3730
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Bard's Tale IV External News Thread

Post by Gizmo » July 10th, 2015, 1:30 pm

Crosmando wrote:For single-character games like Gothic (or Fallout) you might be right, but for party blobbers like BT or MM or Wizardry that's a bad idea. You just need to understand that there's many sub-genres of CRPG's, and what might be a good idea in one might not be so in another. Torment and BT4 are both CRPG's, but will likely be vastly different games.
This is actually backwards ~IMO. From a technical gameplay perspective, that means the player would lose all influence in the game, once the PC falters for any reason [that incapacitates]. This is usually handled as a death, if near hostile opponents. In multi PC games, it just means that the player's options change.

A game like Fallout, with just the one PC probably cannot afford a more complex system, that potentially removes [all] control in the game. The only area in Fallout where this could plausibly happen, is in the corridor of revulsion; and the devs just made it damaging to walk through; rather than a place that some PCs feared to tread. Unfortunate IMO; I'd have preferred at least a stat check and/or minimum stat to be able to steel their nerve and pass through the tunnel.

Still... In lesser form, it could work if the game was setup to allow alternative paths, and/or the finding of some kind of method to negate or alleviate the PC's fear or inability in a situation.

I mentioned RoA earlier; in that game the PC(s) gained strengths, along with weaknesses... You could have a fierce warrior who was simply terrified of the undead ~and this affected them when around any undead. In fact [ brilliant game that it was! ] you could have a PC who was overly curious of everything... They would touch stuff, and open things... It meant that interaction with trapped items was likelier to trigger the trap on them. That's a good pair of examples for specific persons being in a situation, and their personal effects on the outcome.

In Wasteland, Angela Death could ~snap under stress, and act on her own. I always thought there should have been a stat related risk of that for anyone in the party, not just a tag-along NPC.
What you are suggesting if like saying that in Red Alert if you have a tank and click for it to attack an enemy, it should be able to say "No thanks I don't want to risk my life".

No seriously, think of dungeon crawlers like wargames.
It's true, most dungeon crawlers are not what I'd call RPGs... (not wargames either). They are usually puzzle games; games that would stand on the puzzles alone ~sans monsters. There are not many dungeon crawlers that support roleplaying personalities in situ.

User avatar
ZiN
Adventurer
Posts: 681
Joined: January 27th, 2015, 7:57 am

Re: Bard's Tale IV External News Thread

Post by ZiN » July 10th, 2015, 3:50 pm

I agree that RoA(2) was a wonderful game. I'd also suggest Darkest Dungeon for all your "heroes with flaws, who refuse to do stuff for you" needs. But i want nothing of the sort in BT4 please.

User avatar
thebruce
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1876
Joined: February 17th, 2015, 8:46 am
Contact:

Re: Bard's Tale IV External News Thread

Post by thebruce » July 10th, 2015, 3:51 pm

Gizmo wrote:Gothic two, when I first tried the option to pick a locked gate, and my PC idly mused of having no understanding of locks ~that's in the game, until the PC is taught how to pick locks; and subsequently becomes capable of complying with the demand to pick locks.
=/ in those cases, BT wouldn't give you the option to try the lock pick, if the character couldn't do it. What you're suggesting is basically opening up the entire gamut of commands, but having the UI make characters respond that they can't/won't do something (yet). This is just the other direction - if a PC can't/won't do something, it's simply not an option.

If they can do it, but based on a skill level, then most certainly you can command them to do it, and you work with the result of that choice. If they can be negatively affected by something in some way (but not entirely incapacitated; still capable of continuing) then you can still command them to do it, and you work with the result of that choice.
That's the agency and where the role play comes in.
Visit BardsTaleOnline.com - your community Bard's Tale classic RPG resource!
Twitter: @BardsTaleOnline / Facebook: Bards.Tale.Online
@thebruce0

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3730
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Bard's Tale IV External News Thread

Post by Gizmo » July 10th, 2015, 4:03 pm

thebruce wrote:...
I am by no means a fan of set threshold skill systems ~in RPGs. Nor am I a fan of withholding plausible options. There is this locked shack in New Vegas, near the nuclear test site. I know it's probably quest unlocked, but it's out in the middle of no where and a PC would be able to pick the lock ~eventually. Lock picking as a skill, is really the reliability of success in a short time ~anyone can pick a consumer cylinder or combination lock if they have fingers and/or some kind of tool... and all day to do it. Not so with threshold systems, where the PC cannot even try if they want to. The PC would be there all day with tools, and/or a super sledge, and no way to enter the shack.

In Fallout, the PC was able to try ~and fail; but eventually either succeed or jam the lock.
If they can do it, but based on a skill level, then most certainly you can command them to do it, and you work with the result of that choice.
But they need to be able to fail at it, or they are effectively infallible. That's the other problem with threshold systems... The PC never attempts anything without guaranteed success.... else they never even try.... It's as bad as labeling the empty crates "Empty" ~before they've been looked in... and the player never bothers to look inside.
_________________
**Brian Fargo is giving an explanation of the game on Twitch: http://www.twitch.tv/quill18

Mechanically BT4 really seems to sound like a cross between RoA, and Thunderscape.
Last edited by Gizmo on July 10th, 2015, 4:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Drool
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9788
Joined: March 17th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Location: Under Tenebrosia, doing shots with Sceadu.

Re: Bard's Tale IV External News Thread

Post by Drool » July 10th, 2015, 4:15 pm

Gizmo wrote:What PC outside of Bethesda's digital cosplay games ever did anymore than take your suggestions?
Wasteland, Eye of the Beholder, Eye of the Beholder 2, Pool of Radiance, Curse of the Azure Bonds, Secret of the Silver Blades, Pools of Darkness, Champions of Krynn, Death Knights of Krynn, Dark Queen of Krynn, Gateway to the Savage Frontier...

Oh yeah. Bard's Tale 1, 2, and 3.

Hell, you're always banging on about Grimrock. I don't recall any moment where the PC decided they didn't want to do what I told them.
If the PC is deathly claustrophobic, then they should absolutely refuse to go where they cannot force themselves to travel.
If I pick a claustrophobic trait, knowing that it will create mechanical limitations within the game, that's rather different than the game randomly deciding my character doesn't want to do something and then splitting my party. But that's something I've decided. Like that hypochondriac WL2 quirk. If I take it, then yes, I expect the character to refuse other people using medpacks on them (or whatever it is), but again, that's a choice I've made for my characters. Essentially, a limitation I've placed on them, not the game. If I don't take any, then the game shouldn't come up with any on its own.

And, frankly, those kinds of limitations seem really out of place in a blobber. I can see it in Fallout where it's a single character, or in... I dunno... Witcher or something. Since I'm controlling an entire party, I don't feel the need to drill down to what side of the bed they like to sleep on or what their favorite cheese is.

Having those kinds of quirks makes it feel like I'm playing 6 individuals simultaneously, as opposed to playing a party of six. There's an intangible difference. Like the difference between having six cans of beer and having a sixpack.
And the PC refused to take your commands for being incapable of complying?
Outside of physical impossibilities, the PC, in a party-based dungeon crawling blobber, should never refuse a command.
Crosmando wrote:For single-character games like Gothic (or Fallout) you might be right, but for party blobbers like BT or MM or Wizardry that's a bad idea. You just need to understand that there's many sub-genres of CRPG's, and what might be a good idea in one might not be so in another. Torment and BT4 are both CRPG's, but will likely be vastly different games.
Exactly. And it's the attempts to take things from one sub-genre and apply them universally that's resulting in crappy, watered down games.
Alwa nasci korliri das.

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3730
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Bard's Tale IV External News Thread

Post by Gizmo » July 10th, 2015, 4:17 pm

Drool wrote:
Gizmo wrote:What PC outside of Bethesda's digital cosplay games ever did anymore than take your suggestions?
Wasteland, Eye of the Beholder, Eye of the Beholder 2, Pool of Radiance, Curse of the Azure Bonds, Secret of the Silver Blades, Pools of Darkness, Champions of Krynn, Death Knights of Krynn, Dark Queen of Krynn, Gateway to the Savage Frontier...

Oh yeah. Bard's Tale 1, 2, and 3.

Hell, you're always banging on about Grimrock. I don't recall any moment where the PC decided they didn't want to do what I told them.
I have every one of those games [except Death Knights] currently installed, and I disagree with you.

*Do you not recall in Curse of the Azure Bonds, when your party is compelled to act on their own?

It's true that most of those games do not have PCs complex enough to have personalities; but conceptually they take suggested commands, and do them if able. My aforementioned examples were conceptually the same; the PCs did it if they could.

User avatar
thebruce
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1876
Joined: February 17th, 2015, 8:46 am
Contact:

Re: Bard's Tale IV External News Thread

Post by thebruce » July 10th, 2015, 6:12 pm

Gizmo wrote:
If they can do it, but based on a skill level, then most certainly you can command them to do it, and you work with the result of that choice.
But they need to be able to fail at it, or they are effectively infallible. That's the other problem with threshold systems... The PC never attempts anything without guaranteed success.... else they never even try.... It's as bad as labeling the empty crates "Empty" ~before they've been looked in... and the player never bothers to look inside.
I think you misunderstood... I did say that if they can do it - that is, if they can be successful, even if not 100% of the time, then it's a skill they have, and as a player we have the role-play agency to decide whether the PC will attempt a lock pick. But if the skill is not available - that is, if they would never be successful, then the option isn't even available. A more obvious example would be a non-spellcaster having the ability to cast spells. It's not a skill of theirs, so it wouldn't be an option in the game. And we distinctly separate certain skills for certain classes; otherwise what's the point of classes in the first place?

In this game, we have classes, which imply that certain skills are available; at some point the PC can make use of that skill - whether they're successful or not. Others don't even have the option. Not as a restriction that they're not even given the 'chance to fail', but it's simply not something they do (or prescriptively, not something they want to do, because it's not their class).

I'm definitely not for having all skills available to every PC just so they can try and fail. If so, then scrap the classes and just build your character on skills, having classes as descriptive, not prescriptive.
Visit BardsTaleOnline.com - your community Bard's Tale classic RPG resource!
Twitter: @BardsTaleOnline / Facebook: Bards.Tale.Online
@thebruce0

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3730
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Bard's Tale IV External News Thread

Post by Gizmo » July 10th, 2015, 6:51 pm

thebruce wrote: I'm definitely not for having all skills available to every PC just so they can try and fail. If so, then scrap the classes and just build your character on skills, having classes as descriptive, not prescriptive.
Neither one of us are for that; or for scrapping classes.

But I'm reminded of BG1 & BG2, for instance; the thieves had thieving [class] skills, but even then they were not infallible.

IHaveHugeNick
Master
Posts: 1200
Joined: September 23rd, 2014, 7:31 am

Re: Bard's Tale IV External News Thread

Post by IHaveHugeNick » July 10th, 2015, 7:26 pm

Now now, comparing anything to Gothic 2 is just ill-advised :) Its by far the best designed game world in the genre, in terms of RPG elements at least. If they ever make RPG university, this game needs to be textbook for entire freshman year.

Some other stuff about it was quite poor though, camera, controls, dated graphics even at release, and so on. But the world, man. They really made it come alive, it was all very clever and innovative for the time. I laugh every time Bethseda bullshits people about their "revolutionary" AI for NPCs. Sorry Todd, Gothic made it 10 years earlier, and they've done it bether then you, too.
Two rite whiff care is quite a feet of witch won should be proud.

User avatar
Crosmando
Supreme Jerk
Posts: 5136
Joined: January 3rd, 2013, 8:48 am

Re: Bard's Tale IV External News Thread

Post by Crosmando » July 11th, 2015, 3:03 am

I find it a bit odd that you mention Gothic when you mention role-playing features, a game where you don't create a character and are stuck playing ONE (and only one) character who is completely pre-set with his own personality, gender, appearance, race and so on already chosen for you.
Matthias did nothing wrong!

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3730
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Bard's Tale IV External News Thread

Post by Gizmo » July 11th, 2015, 7:21 am

Crosmando wrote:I find it a bit odd that you mention Gothic when you mention role-playing features, a game where you don't create a character and are stuck playing ONE (and only one) character who is completely pre-set with his own personality, gender, appearance, race and so on already chosen for you.
What does that have that is at all counter to roleplaying? A roleplaying game needs but a good role to play; where it comes from is insignificant. Witcher is [also] a superb roleplaying game; as is Planescape:Torment.
Zombra wrote:Yeah, I agree. I hope that the grid doesn't command much attention in combat; I don't want to be worrying about maneuvering my guys all the time. Bard's Tale in particular and blobbers by and large aren't (and shouldn't be) about tactical movement.
I do disagree [Bard's Tale-like or not], all [other] dungeon crawlers I've played are about tactical movement ~once combat starts.

User avatar
Drool
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9788
Joined: March 17th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Location: Under Tenebrosia, doing shots with Sceadu.

Re: Bard's Tale IV External News Thread

Post by Drool » July 11th, 2015, 12:17 pm

Gizmo wrote:It's true that most of those games do not have PCs complex enough to have personalities; but conceptually they take suggested commands, and do them if able. My aforementioned examples were conceptually the same; the PCs did it if they could.
Now you've retreated to semantics. Again. Frankly, I don't even know what you're arguing here anymore. I'll make it simple:

If there's a wall of fire, and I tell the party to go into it, I expect them to go into it. I don't want them to refuse, I don't want them to break the fourth wall, I don't want "witty" comments about the temperature. I expect them to walk into that wall of fire. If the game designer doesn't want me walking into a wall of fire, then have it kill the party. Don't have PCs refuse, don't have PCs run screaming, don't have PCs scold me. Walk into the damn fire and die. Save all that crap for the NPCs.

I'm not playing Daniel in Amnesia. This isn't some cooperative experience between me and the dev via some character they've created. I made these characters. If I want them to walk into a wall of fire, they want to walk into a wall of fire. I'm not their god, I'm them. My desires are their desires. That's the whole point of me creating them in the first place.
Alwa nasci korliri das.

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3730
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Bard's Tale IV External News Thread

Post by Gizmo » July 11th, 2015, 2:25 pm

Drool wrote:I'm not playing Daniel in Amnesia. This isn't some cooperative experience between me and the dev via some character they've created. I made these characters. If I want them to walk into a wall of fire, they want to walk into a wall of fire.
But in an RPG it should be; their character or one created by the player. Remember, the player usually has control over the future development of the PC; Don't make a character that's afraid of fire if you intend that they dive through fire. If the Dev's character is afraid of fire, then that's a limitation of the PC, and the player needs to work around that.
My desires are their desires. That's the whole point of me creating them in the first place.
So you create husks & puppets... There is no roleplaying in that... There is no "what would this warrior do in this situation", there is, "what would I do in this situation" or "Warrior does as told" ~~That's essentially Gauntlet.

The game handles the NPCs, but the player is supposed to handle the PCs... The player should not go against the character sheet, and IMO the PC shouldn't either. If the character sheet lists reasons to refuse a command (like fear of undead, or fixed ethical alignment), then I'd say that there should be at least a check to see if they cannot comply, or that they comply with penalties to their actions; because they'd be doing it under stress or duress.

The game has no means of knowing the PC personalities ~except for the character sheet; and if it's on the character sheet, it should have an effect. EOB and the like do not generally have anything but race, class, and stats; they are not really RPGs ~much, they are usually puzzle games with PCs that amount to little more than chessmen, and serve as the enabler for seeing more of the puzzle map.
I'm not their god, I'm them. My desires are their desires. That's the whole point of me creating them in the first place.
Do you mean that's why you do it, or that that's why the player does it? I would say that the entire point of roleplaying is polar opposite to "My desires are their desires".

User avatar
thebruce
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1876
Joined: February 17th, 2015, 8:46 am
Contact:

Re: Bard's Tale IV External News Thread

Post by thebruce » July 11th, 2015, 7:14 pm

Gizmo wrote:
Drool wrote:I'm not playing Daniel in Amnesia. This isn't some cooperative experience between me and the dev via some character they've created. I made these characters. If I want them to walk into a wall of fire, they want to walk into a wall of fire.
But in an RPG it should be; their character or one created by the player. Remember, the player usually has control over the future development of the PC; Don't make a character that's afraid of fire if you intend that they dive through fire. If the Dev's character is afraid of fire, then that's a limitation of the PC, and the player needs to work around that.
If my character has a fire weakness, then *I* know of that weakness, and if I choose to have the character walk into the fire, then I do so knowing that he will be hurt or die. For *my* character, it should do everything I tell it to do - that the role play, that's the agency. For an NPC, that's different. I didn't make it, I didn't build it; if I tell it do something it can't/won't do, then part of the story is how the character reacts. But for my character, the game should not tell me I can't (impossibly) do something that's entirely based on the character I chose to build within the bounds of the character attributes provided. Simply don't give me the option to do such a thing in the first place.
My desires are their desires. That's the whole point of me creating them in the first place.
So you create husks & puppets... There is no roleplaying in that...
That precisely is role play. You are the character. You make their choices for them, within the construct and ruleset that the game provides.
If the character sheet lists reasons to refuse a command (like fear of undead, or fixed ethical alignment), then I'd say that there should be at least a check to see if they cannot comply, or that they comply with penalties to their actions; because they'd be doing it under stress or duress.
In a game that provides such provides abilities and a character attribute such as 'fear', then the game has already allowed that a command that can be carried out - fear is now an aspect of gameplay for the character, and so yes - "if the character sheet lists [weaknesses] like fear of undad or ethical alignment" then that's an aspect I'd take into consideration when making decisions for my character.

We are saying those shouldn't be an option in this Bard's Tale. Shouldn't be listed on the character sheet in the first place.

The game has no means of knowing the PC personalities ~except for the character sheet; and if it's on the character sheet, it should have an effect.
Sure, because it's on the character sheet.
We don't want it on the character sheet :P

Back to the example of stealing - you were basically saying every character/class should list thievery on the character sheet, as option you command any character to do - even if they'd fail. We're saying, no nono, bad idea. Leave that ability to the thieves, even if they have the chance of failing most of the time, and improving. If you make it a learnable skill that any class can pick up, then thievery shouldn't be an available command until that skill is available - but then the argument is why have classes be prescriptive, when class-themed skills can be learned by any class? They become descriptive.

I'm not their god, I'm them. My desires are their desires. That's the whole point of me creating them in the first place.
Do you mean that's why you do it, or that that's why the player does it? I would say that the entire point of roleplaying is polar opposite to "My desires are their desires".
Then that may be the disconnect... Role playing really is "you are the character". You seem to be looking at it more like "you are playing chess with autonomous pieces"
Visit BardsTaleOnline.com - your community Bard's Tale classic RPG resource!
Twitter: @BardsTaleOnline / Facebook: Bards.Tale.Online
@thebruce0

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests