Interview ToEE silly questions and spanking answers on eToychest

Saint_Proverbius · Jul 30, 2003

Tags: Temple of Elemental Evil; Tim Cain; Troika Games

Veteran developer Tim Cain of <a href="http://www.troikagames.com">Troika</a> shows a little bite in his answer's to <A href="http://www.etoychest.org/">eToychest</a>'s most recent <a href="http://www.etoychest.org/interviews/interview_009.html">interview</a> with him about <a href="http://www.greyhawkgame.com">Temple of Elemental Evil</a>. Here's one about changing D&D rules in a D&D game to make it more accessable to the low brows like <a href="http://www.bioware.com">some other developers</a> might do:
 
 
<blockquote>Q: Developers on The Temple of Elemental Evil have claimed that it is the most faithful to Dungeons and Dragons 3rd Edition rules out of every game out there. A technical achievement worthy of boast, to be sure, but is it something that's really warranted, design-wise? Are you afraid players might get bogged down in having to read too many rules to make sure their actions will be beneficial?
 
 
Again, I am confused. Are you suggesting that it would be better for me to invent a new system of rules, so that anyone familiar with D&D would have to learn my own new hybrid system in order to play ToEE? Now that sounds like it would bog down the player.
 
 
The whole point in using the D&D core rules and having the computer act as DM is to free the player to enjoy the game. Just because our monsters have all of their abilities and because spells cast just like the rules say they should doesn?t mean the player is bogged down. On the contrary, players are liberated from the bookkeeping so long associated with role-playing games. They are free to play the game while the computer keeps track of hit points, weapon ranges, encumbrance and all the other minutia of the game. Any knowledge of D&D will help them play ToEE, certainly. But most of the rules don?t need to be understood by the player to enjoy the game.</blockquote>
 
 
Ask a stupid question, get pwnz0r3d by Tim Cain. Gotta' love it.
 
 
Thanks to Killzig of <a href="http://www.duckandcover.net">Duck and Cover</a> for the linky.

Psilon · Jul 31, 2003

Wow, someone else actually read the Penny Arcade! news post.

Sabotai · Jul 31, 2003

Hah, the first question is even dumber. What a way to start your interview:

Q: Right off the bat, I have to ask why in a genre with the likes of Neverwinter Nights and Planescape: Torment did you decide to take The Temple of Elemental Evil away from real-time and into turn-based?

I am a little confused. D&D is a turn-based system, so I didnâ€™t take ToEE anywhere. I am more surprised that you donâ€™t wonder why the developers of those other games felt compelled to license a game system and then rewrite many of its rules to cover a mode of play that it was never intended to support. I wanted to make a computer game based on D&D, not some hybrid system that I invented myself.

He sure has a way of expressing himself. Without mentioning NWN or saying anything downward negative, Tim kicks BioWare where it hurts.

Volourn · Jul 31, 2003

Not tomention he ignores the fact he is changing dnd rules himself. Talk about Pot. kettle. Black. Until Mr. Cain can make a perfect rendition of dnd rules in a crpg; he shouldn't be "looking down others' for doing the same thing he's 'guilty" of.

DrattedTin · Jul 31, 2003

Name some rules he's changing?

chrisbeddoes · Jul 31, 2003

Volourn said:
Not tomention he ignores the fact he is changing dnd rules himself. Talk about Pot. kettle. Black. Until Mr. Cain can make a perfect rendition of dnd rules in a crpg; he shouldn't be "looking down others' for doing the same thing he's 'guilty" of.

There is a difference between

a) Not implementing some minor rules

b) Rewriting and changing the whole D&D system to change turn based into real time.

Vault Dweller · Jul 31, 2003

Volourn, I copied a part of your post here to continue our discussion:

Volourn said:
In it, Mr. Cain is whining about how games like PST, and NWN don't follow the dnd rules to the letter; than he gloats about how exact his take on the rules are yet forgets the fact that as tight as TOEE is in regards to rules implemenation (I think it'll be the best dnd implemtnation rules wise); it isn't exact. He tries to imply that it is. He fails in that attempt to anyone in the know.

I just read the interview and frankly I'm confused. I don't see Tim Cain "whining" about PST and NWN.

Q. Right off the bat, I have to ask why in a genre with the likes of Neverwinter Nights and Planescape: Torment did you decide to take The Temple of Elemental Evil away from real-time and into turn-based?

As you can see it was the interviewer who brought up the subject of PST and NWN

A. I am a little confused. D&D is a turn-based system, so I didnâ€™t take ToEE anywhere. I am more surprised that you donâ€™t wonder why the developers of those other games felt compelled to license a game system and then rewrite many of its rules to cover a mode of play that it was never intended to support. I wanted to make a computer game based on D&D, not some hybrid system that I invented myself

Where do you see the hype here? It was a direct answer to a direct question. Do you disagree that DnD is a turnbased system? Do you disagree that making real time DnD means changing a lot of rules completely? Do you disagree that any TB DnD game is much closer to DnD rules by definition alone then any real time DnD game? So what exactly are you whining about? The fact that he's not afraid to respond properly to idiotic questions does not mean that he's hyping his game.

Volourn · Jul 31, 2003

1. I agree the interviewer asked some asanine quetsions. No doubt about it. I won't defend the questions as they are more annoying than what Mr. cain wrote; but then again the interviewer is unimportant. Mr. Cain is actually something that matters since he makes games I enjoy.

2. Please. He's basically saying since they'e not "tb" that they aren't really dnd which is baloney. First of all, they're not RT. They are RT with pause. And, more importantly; it's the stats just like in TOEE that effects what occurs in battle; not the player's reflexes. At it's core, the IE games (and NWN) are turn base games run in RT to better simulate dnd combat on a computer.

3. He's whining because in his attempt to defend his game from the unwarranted attacks; he lashes out at the BIo, and BIS games. "My game is closer to dnd then theirs! Na, na, na!" That's pretty childish, imo.

4. Do you agree that having other REAL players playing other characters is much closer to REAL dnd than 5 characters played by the same player which is basically a 5 headed monster. Last I checked, dnd is a role-playing game; not a stragedy game. That's the main problem with both TOEE, and the IWD series. You are playing a multi headed mosnter; not role-playing a character (though TOEE helps this with the added ability of three npcs).
Not to mention, don't you agree having a REAL live dm that can change things as you fly and write stories based on the characters being played as the game goes along much closer to REAL dnd? I think so.
TOEE will probably have a closer rules implementation; but no where close to what he implies; but it sure won't touch NWN when it comes to the spirit of dnd since you can't even play with other players'; or a dm. Instead, you control 5 characters which is why I look forward to TOEE as a dnd stragedy game with choices in how to complete quest; but not real role-playing since you are "role-playing" a five heaed monster; not a character.

"I wanted to make a computer game based on dnd, not some hybrid system I invented myself"

That sure seems like over hyping to me. It's code for the following:"My game is the bestest because it's actually dnd, and not those other fake ones you mentioned that aren't really dnd." Seriously, if you don't call that over hyping; I don't know what is.

Once again, if you haven't figure d it out, the IE games are not RT. It is turn based that runs smoothly in RT which is basically what dnd combat in pnp tries it's best to simulate. For starters, when playing the IE games, click your buttons as fast as you can when atacking your enemies. Do you swing any faster? No, I didn't think so. See, it's not RT; not in the strictest sense.

But, remember, Mr. Cain is the Messiah so he can't be wrong. I mean he has such experience in making dnd crpgs. Also, of note, if you were to ask the owners of dnd if they thought the IE, and NWN were dnd; I bet they'd say they were.

Seriously, this over protectiveness of Mr. Cain is sad. I mean, I remember when Mr. Gaider of Bio had the gall to point out that TOEE had tb combat in common with POR2; and everyone here jumped all over him for daring to compare TOEE in any way to that garbage game even though there was no insult intended. He was simply pointing out a "fact" when asked his opinion on TOEE. That is completely different than saying other companies versions of dnd games "isn't dnd; but just a self created hybrid". Seriously, if whoever owns dnd hear him say that; that's liable as that could cost them millions if people actually believe that the IE games are actually not dnd.

In the end, sorry about this long post as I'm not even sure if it flows properly. Oh well, I'm sure you can mess through it an dget the main points if you bother to.

Also, of note, I'm not bashing Mr. Cain for the fun of it. I mean I like FO1 (which he played a big role in), FO2 (which at the very least help set the basis up for), Arcanum (which I liked more than most; even most people hre as I actually had few problems with the graphics or the combat), TOEE (which I'm on the record already stating I feel it will be better than the NWN OC; and seems to be closer to the rules implemnation; but certainly not the spirit of dnd than NWN or PST); though i'd be the first to admit I have no interest in their new Vampire game (but it's too early to tell if I will ultimate hate or like the ame; gotta wait for more details). This is just what I see of another example of Mr. Cain sharing the same traits of other developers over hyping their games yet if others do it; they get attacked.

Go figure.

WOW! :shock: This is too long.

Enjoy. :D

HanoverF · Jul 31, 2003

Uh, if you want to know what hyping is, read any various Bioware press-release. Talk about insulting amounts of over-hype.

>>"I wanted to make a computer game based on dnd, not some hybrid system I invented myself"<<

That doesn't read to me as hype.

Volourn · Jul 31, 2003

Why am I not surprised?

DrattedTin · Jul 31, 2003

Because you are selective.

To make myself clearer, your analytical thinking is selective.

POOPERSCOOPER · Jul 31, 2003

hey

DrattedTin said:
Because you are selective.

very selective.

Araanor · Jul 31, 2003

The interviewer brought up those games, think about the context. He gave a clear answer to a question, there's no hype about it.

DarkUnderlord · Jul 31, 2003

Volourn said:
He's basically saying since they'e not "tb" that they aren't really dnd which is baloney. First of all, they're not RT. They are RT with pause.

Could you please succinctly explain to me the difference between "RT" and "RT with pause"?

Volourn said:
Do you agree that having other REAL players playing other characters is much closer to REAL dnd than 5 characters played by the same player which is basically a 5 headed monster.

I'm pretty sure that in DnD tabletop, you can play many characters at a time. Especially when someone doesn't rock up and you want/need an extra character, so one of the players can take on that role and play that character, along with their own.

Volourn said:
Instead, you control 5 characters

I haven't been following, but I thought that was a choice. I thought you could solo the game and that you didn't need a party?

Volourn said:
which is why I look forward to TOEE as a dnd stragedy game with choices in how to complete quest; but not real role-playing since you are "role-playing" a five heaed monster; not a character.

By that definition, no computer game ever released is a role-playing game, except for NWN.

Volourn said:
"I wanted to make a computer game based on dnd, not some hybrid system I invented myself"

That sure seems like over hyping to me.

So when JE Sawyer says "I wanted to make Fallout a real-time game for those who enjoy that", he's actually hyping it?

Volourn said:
Seriously, if you don't call that over hyping; I don't know what is.

No, apparently you don't.

Saint_Proverbius · Jul 31, 2003

Volourn said:
1. I agree the interviewer asked some asanine quetsions. No doubt about it. I won't defend the questions as they are more annoying than what Mr. cain wrote; but then again the interviewer is unimportant. Mr. Cain is actually something that matters since he makes games I enjoy.

The interviewer, as others have stated, provides the context of the answers.

2. Please. He's basically saying since they'e not "tb" that they aren't really dnd which is baloney. First of all, they're not RT. They are RT with pause.

And there's really no difference in the mechanics of RT and RT with pause. Both systems remove the sequencial order of turn based, which many things in 3E combat rely on.

And, more importantly; it's the stats just like in TOEE that effects what occurs in battle; not the player's reflexes. At it's core, the IE games (and NWN) are turn base games run in RT to better simulate dnd combat on a computer.

Totally incorrect. You can only have that sword swinging animation happen so many times within a time frame, Volourn. That means in a real time situation, you're going to have to limit the number of attacks per round, whether they're natural, AoO based, or feat based like Cleave and Great Cleave.

Arrows also have travel time, which is a problem for real time as well. You can come up with countless scenarios where the travel time being at the same time as another projectile travelling is a problem, or where movement of the target is a problem. With sequential turn based, it's not an issue. So, you get to fudge this in real time.

3. He's whining because in his attempt to defend his game from the unwarranted attacks; he lashes out at the BIo, and BIS games. "My game is closer to dnd then theirs! Na, na, na!" That's pretty childish, imo.

No, he's pointing out that since the D&D rules are turn based, making a CRPG with D&D turn based means you don't have to fudge rules, like the ones I listed above.

4. Do you agree that having other REAL players playing other characters is much closer to REAL dnd than 5 characters played by the same player which is basically a 5 headed monster. Last I checked, dnd is a role-playing game; not a stragedy game. That's the main problem with both TOEE, and the IWD series. You are playing a multi headed mosnter; not role-playing a character (though TOEE helps this with the added ability of three npcs).

And BG.. And PS:T.. In fact, any party based CRPG will have this problem.

Not to mention, don't you agree having a REAL live dm that can change things as you fly and write stories based on the characters being played as the game goes along much closer to REAL dnd? I think so.

You can't do this in NWN much either. If you want to add a monster that's not been released in the game or the subsequent patches, then you're going to have to pop open 3DSMax, make the model, then create the monster with the tools, etc. If you want to make a dungeon on the fly, you can't do that either.

However, if you've got a DM who is playing you through a campaign, you as the player, can't stop and say, "Hey, you know, a door here that leads to a new area would be cool!" either, and that's what we're talking about. The computer is acting as the DM following a scenario that already exists.

TOEE will probably have a closer rules implementation; but no where close to what he implies; but it sure won't touch NWN when it comes to the spirit of dnd since you can't even play with other players'; or a dm. Instead, you control 5 characters which is why I look forward to TOEE as a dnd stragedy game with choices in how to complete quest; but not real role-playing since you are "role-playing" a five heaed monster; not a character.

Again, context matters.. He's talking about rules implimentation.

"I wanted to make a computer game based on dnd, not some hybrid system I invented myself"

That sure seems like over hyping to me. It's code for the following:"My game is the bestest because it's actually dnd, and not those other fake ones you mentioned that aren't really dnd." Seriously, if you don't call that over hyping; I don't know what is.

Okay, so you don't know what over-hyping is. Never use the phrase again until you learn it.

Once again, if you haven't figure d it out, the IE games are not RT. It is turn based that runs smoothly in RT which is basically what dnd combat in pnp tries it's best to simulate. For starters, when playing the IE games, click your buttons as fast as you can when atacking your enemies. Do you swing any faster? No, I didn't think so. See, it's not RT; not in the strictest sense.

Once again, wrong. See above.

Azael · Jul 31, 2003

Dumb questions from the interviewer, good answers by Mr. Cain.

I'll give you this though Volourn, the systems used in the IE and Aurora games are attempting to simulate TB combat in a RT/P enviroment. Troika just decided to take the more obvious route instead, and do the game turnbased like it was originally intended.

Vault Dweller · Jul 31, 2003

Volourn said:
He's basically saying since they'e not "tb" that they aren't really dnd which is baloney.

I posted this in another thread, but SPECIAL in Lionheart is a different system now that has very little in common with the original system. I'm sure that those who played the demo would agree with me. Was RT XCOM the same as TB XCOM? Did FOT play the same as FO1,2? So yes, if it's not TB, it's not DnD, but a system that looks like it. If you want we can go into more detailed discussion about it.

First of all, they're not RT. They are RT with pause.

It's my turn to say 'please'

At it's core, the IE games (and NWN) are turn base games run in RT to better simulate dnd combat on a computer.

At its core, the IE games and NWN are simplistic representations of DnD missing many rules, unable to implement many, and changing the rest to fit RT gameplay. Sorry, I forgot, it's RT with pause.

He's whining because in his attempt to defend his game from the unwarranted attacks; he lashes out at the BIo, and BIS games. "My game is closer to dnd then theirs! Na, na, na!" That's pretty childish, imo.

Common, let's look at it. He's making a TB games because that's how it was meant to be played (no arguying about that, I suppose), a moron asks HIM why he decided to do a DnD in TB instead of RT like the other guys do. Any designer has a right to have an opinion, especially if they are being provoked. He didn't make this statement in a press-release, he did not brought it up himself, it was totally justified logical response that had a very good point. In fact, the point was so good that Sawyer decided to reply and be all defensive which is kinda stupid as he said it himself that they are doing RT because that's what the publisher wants. It's ether RT or RT/TB bundle.

Do you agree that having other REAL players playing other characters is much closer to REAL dnd than 5 characters played by the same player which is basically a 5 headed monster. Last I checked, dnd is a role-playing game; not a stragedy game.

What DarkUnderlord said. It's not uncommon to rp several characters.

Not to mention, don't you agree having a REAL live dm that can change things as you fly and write stories based on the characters being played as the game goes along much closer to REAL dnd? I think so.

Nobody said that ToEE=PnP, but it looks like it that ToEE is going to be much closer to PnP then any other game before.

"I wanted to make a computer game based on dnd, not some hybrid system I invented myself"
That sure seems like over hyping to me. It's code for the following:"My game is the bestest because it's actually dnd, and not those other fake ones you mentioned that aren't really dnd."

I really don't see how stating an intent (I want to make a true dnd compuer game) is a hype. Just like making a statement "RT DnD is a hybrid" is not a hype ether.He did not say "I'm the only one in the universe he can do that" or "the hybrid systems the others did sucked".
For comparisson, Bio's statements are like "we did the best game ever, damn, we are so talented, that's explains why we do those awesome games, no wonder everyone wanna play them"

Seriously, if you don't call that over hyping; I don't know what is.

Seriously, you don't

Also, of note, if you were to ask the owners of dnd if they thought the IE, and NWN were dnd; I bet they'd say they were.

That is an awesome argument, gee, I wonder if I ask Interplay, the owner of Fallout if they thought that FOBoS is a Fallout game, I bet they'd say it is :roll:

I remember when Mr. Gaider of Bio had the gall to point out that TOEE had tb combat in common with POR2; and everyone here jumped all over him for daring to compare TOEE in any way to that garbage game even though there was no insult intended. He was simply pointing out a "fact" when asked his opinion on TOEE.

Totally different. First, I think that it was Gaider who brought up POR2, Tim didn't. Second, POR2 officially sucked, so it was like comparing ToEE with a failed game, Tim comments were about NWN - critically acclaimed game and PST - very loved game. Tim didn't compare NWN with VtM, a disaster of a game, just because both games allow to play your own modules. Do you see my point?

EEVIAC · Jul 31, 2003

Also bear in mind that Troika will be coming to the end of their 18 month development window, so it probably wasn't a good time to start an interview with an attempted bollocking. There are a multitude of ways the TB question could have been posed, its just unfortunate that the most oblique was used. Its understandable that Tim would be a little brusque, if anything I'm suprised he was so restrained.

Volourn · Jul 31, 2003

How many times must I type this? I am not defending the interviewer. I mean, I agree the questions were just plain silly, and he deserved a smack. However, if you can't see the arrogance in Mr. Cain stating "I am making a real dnnd game; and those other two are wannabe half breeds "; I feel sorry for you. But, that's okay, that's the way it is. He is only defedning his game.

As for Mr. Gaider's comments, well.. he wasn't bashing TOEE. All he was saying that both POR2, and TOEE are both turn based games which is an undisputable fact.

What I mean about the five headed monster si that in TOEE you control themcompletely; unlike PST and BG where you may control them in battle; but the personality of the npcs are the npcs.There is a difference there. As for being able to playing mutliple characters in pnp. Sure you can. However, iI seriously doubt it's common practice; and it's not reccomnded. DnD is reccommneded to play with one player = one character. Soemtimes, in pnp, exceptions are made due to lack of players avaialble bu certainly isn't ideal.

dipdipdip · Jul 31, 2003

Volourn said:
That's pretty childish, imo.

Childish is posting "JE wins again!" on the Interplay boards.

Azael · Jul 31, 2003

Volourn said:
What I mean about the five headed monster si that in TOEE you control themcompletely; unlike PST and BG where you may control them in battle; but the personality of the npcs are the npcs.There is a difference there. As for being able to playing mutliple characters in pnp. Sure you can. However, iI seriously doubt it's common practice; and it's not reccomnded. DnD is reccommneded to play with one player = one character. Soemtimes, in pnp, exceptions are made due to lack of players avaialble bu certainly isn't ideal.

I'm curious, do you actually think it's better to control something with a personality of its own (kind of an oxymoron in itself), than it is to control a party that you created?

EDIT: Spelling errors, damn you Volourn, you are contagious!

Sabotai · Jul 31, 2003

Volourn said:
However, if you can't see the arrogance in Mr. Cain stating "I am making a real dnnd game; and those other two are wannabe half breeds "; I feel sorry for you. But, that's okay, that's the way it is. He is only defedning his game.

Your reaction feels similar to J.E. Sawyer's defensive reaction to the same interview. It's like you feel you are being attacked by Tim Cain with his remark "I wanted to make a computer game based on D&D, not some hybrid system that I invented myself". I agree it can sounds somewhat arrogant, but only to those people who find there is truth in those words and who feel that their self invented hybrid systems are somehow lacking or not good enough. If you are the designer of a hybrid system of which you are proud and which plays well, where is the arrogance in his statement? There is none. I think for a lot of designers and players this remark hit too close to home. Maybe (un)consciously they feel Tim Cain is right in his assessment that changing the system in order to cater to different tastes creates a hybrid which fails to please a lot of people.

An example: NWN did completely away with party dynamics. They tried to fit a party based system into a single player system. I still loath the fact that in NWN I didn't need a thief to open chests or disarm traps. One fireball from my mage was sufficient to destroy the trap, destroy the chest and get an unscathed/unburned paper scroll. All because they changed the original DnD system.

What I mean about the five headed monster si that in TOEE you control themcompletely; unlike PST and BG where you may control them in battle; but the personality of the npcs are the npcs.There is a difference there.

Not really sure what you are trying to say here "the personality of the NPCs are the NPCs"? Explain please.

As for being able to playing mutliple characters in pnp. Sure you can. However, iI seriously doubt it's common practice; and it's not reccomnded.

Recommended by whom exactly?

DnD is reccommneded to play with one player = one character. Soemtimes, in pnp, exceptions are made due to lack of players avaialble bu certainly isn't ideal

.
I agree with you that 5 self created characters can lessen the experience, like I felt it did in IWD. But that's why there are 3 joinable NPCs with their own motives, agendas and hidden inventories. What kind of play system do you prefer? Don't tell me you prefer NWN's style of a single person with a suicide henchman. I shudder at the thought of having one player controlled character with 4 AI controlled henchmen.

Crazy Tuvok · Jul 31, 2003

Volourn said:
How many times must I type this? I am not defending the interviewer. I mean, I agree the questions were just plain silly, and he deserved a smack. However, if you can't see the arrogance in Mr. Cain stating "I am making a real dnnd game; and those other two are wannabe half breeds "; I feel sorry for you. But, that's okay, that's the way it is. He is only defedning his game.

As for Mr. Gaider's comments, well.. he wasn't bashing TOEE. All he was saying that both POR2, and TOEE are both turn based games which is an undisputable fact.

that is not what he said, but don't let accuracy get in the way.
and if you don't see that Gaider was implicilty trying to draw a comparision between ToEE and PoR2, widely regarded as a steaming pile, in order to smack down on ToEE I feel sorry for you.

For all your bitching about the "Troika/Tim C apologists" that you imagine post here you certainly seem to have no problem being far more shameless in your Bio lovefests.

Jed · Jul 31, 2003

DarkUnderlord said:
Could you please succinctly explain to me the difference between "RT" and "RT with pause"?

Real Time with teh PauseTM has pseudo-rounds between the real rounds to make it seem like it's action-packed. Any system that embraces filler, objectively speaking, completely sux0rs.

Volourn · Jul 31, 2003

Ok, from the top...

Dip: And? Your point?

Azael: It's a step up. I prefer creating one character, and having npcs AI controlled. NPCs having their own personalities, stories, ethics; but still player controlled in combat is a step in the right direction (imo) than just having the 5 (or 6 headed syndrome).
As for spelling errors, heh. Remmeber, it's not the selling - I'm actually a pretty good speller; justa crappy typer.

Sabatoi: Why would I be defensive? I like the IE games, I find the combat fun and strategic; but I never said they are perfect.You keep on saying RT with pause displease a lot of people; but history shows it seems to please a lot moe people than it fails to please. It seems to be me only harecore turn base or RT gamers would be the ones most turned off. What's funny; I really like tb combat (POR2 aside); and hate RT combat yet IE's pseudo RT/TB half breed is extremely fun. As fun as any turn based combat. Remember, using turn base or real time combat also fails to please a lot of people. No matter what system you use; a set of players will be out of the cold. Youc an't please everyone.

As for NWN taking away from the party system. That has nothing to do with combat rules, or whatever. That's a (admittedly poor) design decison to limit players to one character, and one henchmen. I won't defend that. Heck, I wa sone of the harshest if not the harshest critic of that. So much so, I received several e-mails from BIo before NWN's release as I was complaining too uch of it. Heh. :D

Without. personality; characters are just numbers. It becomes justa stragedy game with dnd rules; not role-playing. This was the biggest difference between BG, and IWD. One has characters; the other has numbers.

Reccommnded by the dnd sourcebooks since its creation, obviously.

I prefer one PC with multipel AI controlled npcs - ie more like FO's system but characters with more persoanlity, and better AI. That's my ultimate system. Second, would be Bg's system of one created character + 5npcs with their own persoanlities; but you can control them (within limits) in combat; lastly comes the multi headed monster of IWD type dungeon crawls.

I already reccommned Troika for allowing 3 npcs in the aprty with their owna genda. That's a good thing; but it's kinda offset with the (up to) 5 PC party that TOEE also allows. You may have multpile ways to andle quests; but it would be true blue role-playing.

Crazy Tuvok: LOL, And, people say I'm reading too much into Mr. Cain's commnet. Nowehre in that post of Mr. Gaider's did he even imply that TOEE will suck. At worst, he implied just because a game is turn base doesn't make it automatically good. Also, like Mr. Cain, it was in reply to a direct question as well. It wasn't something he made up out of the blue.

Yes, I like Bio, and their games. Woopity do dah. The difference between me, and the Troika fanboys is thata coridng to them Troika (and espicially Mr. Cain) are Gods. They are not. Heck, I heavily criticize BIO when I dislike what they do. Want proof? Look at my reaction to their decisoon to go with only one npc in NWN; or the crapola ch2 in SOU. I am probably the most critical of that chaper of those who had played SOU. Yeah, I think BIO is perfect. Not. :roll:

Enjoy everyone. :D

Interview ToEE silly questions and spanking answers on eToychest

Administrator

Erudite

Liturgist

Pretty Princess

Liturgist

Erudite

Commissar, Red Star Studio

Pretty Princess

Arcane

Pretty Princess

Liturgist

Prophet

Liturgist

Professional Throne Sitter

Administrator

Magister

Commissar, Red Star Studio

Erudite

Pretty Princess

Liturgist

Magister

Liturgist

Liturgist

Cipher

Pretty Princess