Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 73   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Let's play AoD!  (Read 552142 times)
Mephisto
Novice

Posts: 43


View Profile
« Reply #240 on: January 14, 2008, 10:39:30 pm »

Quote
It's an intimidation check and these are always based on your weapon skills.

It would be nice if your reputation its also included. Now you dont have any, but it would be nice if it counted your body count and combat reputation.
Logged
cardtrick
Artisan

Posts: 553



View Profile
« Reply #241 on: January 14, 2008, 10:50:36 pm »

Quote
It's an intimidation check and these are always based on your weapon skills.

It would be nice if your reputation its also included. Now you dont have any, but it would be nice if it counted your body count and combat reputation.

Excellent idea!
Logged
Vince
Developer

Posts: 8035



View Profile
« Reply #242 on: January 14, 2008, 10:51:38 pm »

This Let's Play is finally getting juicy. Cool stuff. I'm fine with limiting the choices prior to killing the merchant -- as you said, this is a vignette, so you must get the map.

But I don't like that after intimidating the guard you have no choice but to leave quietly. You've now just seen that he's scared of you, so I think it's a little weird that your only choice is to turn and run, especially since this means sacrificing lewt.
Well, the way I see it, the guard is unsure, not afraid. The merchant is already dead, after all. While he won't attack you now, if you start looting the chest and feeling at home, he might take this opportunity. I thought of adding this option - you either leave or stay and loot, and when you open the chest, the guard attacks, scoring a nice hit, but then you are as good as dead because the guard is a tough opponent, and considering the penalty... Without a penalty, your choice becomes pointless as 99 out of 100 players will loot the chest.   
Logged
TheLostOne
Journeyman

Posts: 178



View Profile
« Reply #243 on: January 14, 2008, 10:57:18 pm »

How about a harder intimidation option to keep him from talking.  Well... I guess this guy probably doesn't have many supporters in the city anyway, but maybe for future contracts to keep from getting identified by enemy factions.
Logged
Claw
*
Posts: 315


Adun Toridas!


View Profile
« Reply #244 on: January 14, 2008, 11:15:22 pm »

More votes? I'm dying to know what happens next.
I was too, but after two days without updates I stopped checking every hour. Well, since all decisions have been made, get on with it!

Also, personally I would say I favor pointless options over no options. It adds to the flavor if you can do dumb things. Maybe you should even be able to attack the guard after managing to avoid the fight.
Logged
Special_Can
Journeyman

Posts: 124



View Profile
« Reply #245 on: January 14, 2008, 11:32:47 pm »

 I don't agree with that Claw. If the option is there, I expect it to lead me down a different path. Flavor choices have been apart of rpg's for way too long and once you start adding them where do you stop? You could end up hiding the real choices leading to certain people believing there is no real choices and consequences. I know you aren't saying to add these things all over the place, but as you ask why not I ask why?

 Anyways, I like the quest. Good to know if the guard lives, he gets involved later on.
 
Logged

Quote
I roleplay. If there un-conscious, i just walk away and pretend there dead.
Claw
*
Posts: 315


Adun Toridas!


View Profile
« Reply #246 on: January 14, 2008, 11:44:30 pm »

So being killed because you chose to ignore an armed guy while looting the room is no real consequence?
Logged
Priapist
*
Posts: 321



View Profile
« Reply #247 on: January 15, 2008, 12:14:41 am »

Quote
Well, the way I see it, the guard is unsure, not afraid.

Maybe you could better illustrate this:

"The guard studies you, evaluating his chances. Finally he nods and lowers his sword."

-becomes-

"The guard studies you, evaluating his chances. From behind narrowed eyelids, he considers your crossbow at great length. Finally he nods and lowers his sword, but shows no intention of backing away."

Quote
The merchant is already dead, after all. While he won't attack you now, if you start looting the chest and feeling at home, he might take this opportunity.

Would it be unreasonable/unfeasible for him to be standing next to or near the chest? That way you have to forgo the advantage of getting a bolt away if you want to try and loot. That might be enough for him to chance his arm. Likewise, he might take offense at you trying to get your hands on the only thing that's going to compensate him for losing his bodyguard's fee. You could potentially integrate either or both into further exposition/dialogue, that way you have those further options, but you make the high risk clear to the player.

If you were to extend it you could easily add another (harder) intimidation check, a persuasion check/bribe - offer to pay his bodyguard's fee and leave, as a gamble for what might be in the chest, a surprise attack, maybe even some kind of warning shot as a slight variation on intimidation, or simply a dumb "walk over to the merchant's chest and hope the guard doesn't mind" option. I think it would be good to have options beyond getting out in a hurry, but failing that, give the player impetus to leave. Maybe the guard lowers his sword, but takes a step toward you and raises an eyebrow. Would that show he's not going to stay non-hostile for long? I think it would work, at the very least it gives you another option of "Right, you asked for it!" in addition to "get the map and GTFO"

Logged
namad
Neophyte

Posts: 16


View Profile
« Reply #248 on: January 15, 2008, 02:19:35 am »

just because you try to bully someone doesn't mean you won't:
     bully them, get what you want, then break your promise and kill them anyways....




there's no reason to not let the person change their mind after seeing the guard's reaction... maybe you just like making cocky jokes before combat, instead of not taunting your opponent
« Last Edit: January 15, 2008, 03:58:53 am by namad » Logged
puppyonastik
Craftsman

Posts: 287



View Profile
« Reply #249 on: January 15, 2008, 06:04:56 am »

I like Priapist's ideas. Much more flavor.
Logged

Quote from: Mayday
Can a single dick even enter a group setting?
Quote from: Fez
You've never lived until you've tried it.
Hümmelgümpf der Bruzzelzwerg
Journeyman

Posts: 158



View Profile
« Reply #250 on: January 15, 2008, 06:06:53 am »

MOAR!
Logged

This is the story of one man's emotional journey through things good and ill, the things that make life worth living, the tears and dessert of existence – that is, it was until receiving feedback from focus groups, money men, their yes men and the mystics of marketing, and so now it's about a magic baseball player dating a stripper with a heart of gold who gradually unlocks his ultimate power with the help of an "urban" robot during their quest to defeat an evil samurai sword wielding
Morbus
Expert

Posts: 1068


Wastelander


View Profile WWW
« Reply #251 on: January 15, 2008, 08:36:12 am »

The way I see it, we've got to look at this from the player's perspective. May players, including me, often create a "dialog strategy" at the beginning of most dialogs, even before those dialogs. When the game limits that strategy, it becomes kind of... a deception? I don't know, it sounds right all the arguing and all, but I think I'm not paid for taking out two guys but I'm paid for looting the scene? There's no way of making my PC want to only kill one guy AND loot the scene (or at least the corpse). I think the option should ALWAYS (not only in this case) be included, even with deadly drawbacks. What about that? As long as you have a choice, the game is good. And if the choices are realistic, even better.

So, in the end, I say go for a deadly consequence. It's WAY better that the player has to reload because... hum... "ups, I'm a dead man" rather than a "shit, that's not what I wanted to say". Don't you agree? Because NOW, what *I* wanted to do is quickload and attack the guard... And that's what I would... will do in the real game.
Logged

Vince
Developer

Posts: 8035



View Profile
« Reply #252 on: January 15, 2008, 10:25:20 am »

I don't have a lot of time right now (and I'll definitely reply to and discuss all points you've made), but here is an interesting question:

Many people want meaningful (i.e. not fake, leading to the same outcome) choices *with* consequences. I gave you a very simple choice here: kill the guard or intimidate him. Turns out that the successful intimidation option avoids the fight and, what's even worse, limits your looting experience.

I think that "and less boring than attacking which we can always just do next anyways" comment summarizes what most people expected and explains the disappointments. Intimidating the guard, and then attacking and looting the place sounds lame to me. You want the loot? You must go through the guard. You want to handle things peacefully? Forget about the loot, try not to think about the sweet, sweet loot that the guard must be loaded with, and leave. Sound simple and logical to me, but for some reasons we aren't seeing eye-to-eye here.

Suggested "loot and face teh consequences" scenario is a reload fest that isn't about role-playing but about getting all the loot you can carry. Chris Avellone's cartoon comes to mind here. It sounds that people are curious about peaceful options, but in the end, they still prefer and expect some good ol' fashioned violence. Any comments?

[attachment deleted to save space]
Logged
Vince
Developer

Posts: 8035



View Profile
« Reply #253 on: January 15, 2008, 10:31:22 am »

Quote
It's an intimidation check and these are always based on your weapon skills.

It would be nice if your reputation its also included. Now you dont have any, but it would be nice if it counted your body count and combat reputation.
It does. When you play a merc (the bodyguard in the vignette), if you manage to kill the assassin, you'll see the difference right away.
Logged
Bluebottle
Apprentice

Posts: 87


View Profile
« Reply #254 on: January 15, 2008, 10:51:53 am »

Quote
Suggested "loot and face teh consequences" scenario is a reload fest that isn't about role-playing but about getting all the loot you can carry.

Agreed. In such a situation (bearing in mind that combat in AoD sounds like it always poses a realistically significant threat of death), opting to risk enraging the guard after he's been pacified with dialogue just seems unnecessarily suicidal. The question then becomes "should AoD present choices which pose such a risk that they are unlikely to be chosen by any sane person?" I'd tend towards the no side here, as (like you say) it just seems to promote a reload mentality.
Then again I am a coward and do tend to play games with an Ironman mentality, even when I'm saving and reloading.
Logged

A wise man may grasp how ghastly it shall be/ When all this world's wealth standeth waste.
Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 73   Go Up
Print
Jump to: