Hi, I've thought through this puzzle for a long time and changed the situation a bit to describe my question about it.
Instead of the guest vs host, there are three people choosing from the door.
A choose 1st B choose 2nd C choose 3rd
Each of the guest has 33.33% of winning.
B and C are friends so they decide to team up.
Their team has the probability of winning raised to 66.66%. No problems yet.
B checked the door but found goat. C decides to betray his friend
Now what is the chance of C winning? Is it the initial 33.33% (which turns into 50 50 against A), or 66.66% from the previous alliance he had with B?
Will A get a better chance winning if he exchange the door with C?
If B and C didn't team up from start, would A get a better chance winning if he exchange the door with C after B got it wrong?
Milo Goodfellow wrote:
Back in NWN, one of the RP server require "roleplay points" from DM to have characters rolling a d20 to get the special race template. Once, I was roleplaying a poor beggar in the sewer who had lost all his gears asking for mercy and would flee in any second when the tide turns to enemies.
After a few hours I went to the city, there was another player who just passed by me used the same idea as beggar and earned some rp points from GM while other players praising the player to be innovative... kind discourages players from roleplaying something different since only the selected few would benefit from the system.
Like Fallout New Vegas--we all know somebody shot the Courier in the head and that the Courier hunted his or her attempted murderer down, we all know that the Courier will go certain places and do certain things in his or her search for justice, and we all know the Courier gets caught up in the war for New Vegas and whatever side the Courier chooses will win, but who wins, who loses, who dies, who survives, who lives successfully, who lives but in general misery... that all depends on you.
I've played through all 4 endings in NV and the linearity would become more apparent after each play through, due to the nature of events in game are triggered by player only.
Without the player triggering the event, the powder ganger would never begin its attack on goodspring, for example. I've done all three quests (you only need one) for the seer in the brotherhood of steel at first playthrough and it became clear that many "fetch quests" are simply linear dungeon crawls.
After I bought the DLC, I had trouble going back to the game due to I need to do identically the same things to reach the required level (which was also a problem in Skyrim, although NV offered more "real choices that have consequences" than ES5, there were less npc with minor quests available. Quality over quantity I guess). Even the spawn points of roaming monsters are the same, so further playing became more about its system than for the story after a few runs, and NV wasn't really good at the gameplay department. Modding may also make it buggy, the game was nearly unplayable at its early stage...
How many characters will be there for an account? If we can have multiple characters (but still one toon under full training when log off), the special race can be added later with a requirement of one character at least obtaining enough capstones in order to be chosen from in creation screen. Other templates such as lich, werewolf/vampire affliction can be ingame contents introduced later.
Lots of video games with multiple paths feel rather like choose your own adventure books, you got the choices through the adventure but the outcomes are still determined by the writer (dev).
There was the D&D greyhawk adventure movie - scourge worlds that rather feel like the recent big rpg titles without the gameplay. Both of them got multiple choices the player get to choose from and offer different paths. It made me realize that choose your own adventure books, visual novels, and multiple paths games minus the combats are in the same vein.
That's why I enjoy games that are semi-sandbox like Taikou Rishhiden. While the historical events are scripted, they don't get triggered unless the conditions are met, and playing a different character can have a different view on the event. Some character may have the player as participant in said event, while other characters may just hear it as news talked by npcs, and it's possible to change multiple historical events by player's actions.
A sandbox with no player/npc triggered events makes me uninterested due to I find no reasons spending time in it. Unlike tabletop, there are little interactions if any with other players in a single player game, which made up the lack of stories/events in a sandbox game. While some people enjoy games for their gameplay, people like me may need to look for a reason in playing a said game. There may be simply no motivations for people who share the same thoughts as me when there are no likable stories / characters in a game once the player pass the new toy syndrome. Why would I want to spend time to dominate the game if there are no stories (events) or anyone I like.
I still read visual novels time to time due to the same reasons, found myself having little to no interest in most influential novels, movies, and other mediums. Les Miserable no longer felt that depressing when I grew up and see the real world around me, for example. If I want dark and gloomy, gritty natures for thoughts, I can just turn on TV or read news (local television programs prefer to broadcast ill events or brainwashing political viewpoints, especially when 90% of television sponsors are by corporations that are under China government's control in my country, despite I ain't even in China).
Escapism and depth don't click on each other in such situation, so I would choose materials that resonate with me. These may be treated as inferior creations by the majority but I'm happy with them as long as the companies can manage to survive and produce them within the M-shaped society I'm in.
Civilization 4 got memory problems though, and it's a mod. Cannot remember but did it have victory conditions equivalent to space / culture / diplomatic victory?
I would argue that romance of three kingdom & king arthur are grand strategy games, the prior is focused on combat especially in later installment. The only thing you did in 11 was build up resources then going into war using a similar setup like Nobugana's ambition 12. Nobugana's ambition 10th installment was the only one in koei's "recent" games that don't require much wars, and that's like 10 years ago.
King arthur (well, 2 at least from my memory)was a railroaded rpg style of game that use RTS combat like total war, and it failed hard in the combat department despite that's what the title focused on.
Haven't had my hands on elemental / warlock so cannot tell, hope they're what I'm looking for.
I took the quiz and got this.
You Are A:
Chaotic Neutral Human Barbarian (4th Level)
Seriously, a high WIS barbarian with all other stats falling in the range of average or below? Require professional assistance in customizing a variable build for real life challenge!!!
Heroes of might and magic felt rather RPGish and railroaded from my experience. I remember in 3, many if not most stages require rushing of some form.
> from wiki >
Grand strategy expanded on the traditional idea of strategy in three ways: first, expanding strategy beyond military means to also include diplomatic, financial, economic, informational, etc; second, examining internal in addition to external forces - taking to account both the various instruments of power and the internal policies necessary for their implementation (conscription, for example); third, including periods of peacetime in addition to wartime.
Scott Betts wrote:
I can simply point out the presence of random genre such as grand strategy games in fantasy settings is nearly none-existant.. don't think any exist, there are mods for grand strategy to make them fantasy setting but actual games, none that I know of.
There aren't many companies filling the gap between the big name comapnies and small indie developer imho, which often results in "fast food" mmorpg that are made to be sold for a few months or even weeks for quick profit, or DLC.
I would say digital distribution also play a role fastening the process. For the best pays of the bucks, if a none "hardcore" player can choose between buying a huge blockbuster hit title for $2.5 (steam sale, amazon sale, etc.) with digital purchase or an unheard game from a small dev that no one ever hears about that cost $20 or more in physical copies, I would believe most players would choose the prior.
It may not be as obvious in a country with enough population that has purchase power, but it can be observed clearly in place with much smaller community. That's what I've observed for nearly a decade now, about 95% of local game companies had been shut down in my country in the past 15 years. It's pretty much the same logic as how M-shaped society forms.
I'll recommend a few more oldie anime.
Hmm, since Tomino had been mentioned in this thread quite a bit, there are also Dunbine, Xabungle, L-gaim that might be worth a watch.
There are mods that fix NPC (including wild life) doing real surrenders and escape rather than running back to fight till death.
If I remember correctly, there is actually a hidden "can only be killed by player" function in skyrim (heard it from nexus modders) but was never used, which could easily fix lots of problems the essential npcs had caused.
Actually, personally I found niche titles to be rarer as technology improves in today's world as cost of development raises. Most companies would follow their successful business model unlike in the early games day when they were still trying to explore what would make them profit.
Now games are multi million if not billion business,the uncompetitive genres are filtered out by the consumers' choices. Unless by enthusiasts who don't require salary nor payment programming / composing music / etc., making "proper" indie games would still cost a fortune, I would estimate the cost at least would be ranged from 200k~300k by kickstarter standard.
Companies that still make niche games may also follow big corporations' models to squeeze out any potential earnings by introducing music dlc, skin dlc, and such, which may further separate their customers to different groups, so only the most die hard loyal fans would be left, buying games that have dlcs/expansions that may cost a few hundreds bucks.
I'll recommend a few that haven't been mentioned(unless I miss it).
If you like samurai and can stand violence & gore & nudity, I would recommend Shigurui.
Sexy commando gaiden & Mad bull 34 for humor. (?)
If you don't mind the art style, Kaiji may be a nice choice since you like Death note.
Haven't watched anime for several years now though...
Make gained spell list random and spell books rare. For example, only low level magic books can be found for wizards on market, the rest requires a wizard either to find by slight chance of luck or spend time and resource to create the formula.
Sorcerers and spontaneous spell casting classes have no controls over their spells, so they have not a single clue what spells they would gain when leveling up. For clerics and druids, the deity grant random spells to them for an ongoing quest and the player cannot switch the spells at least for one week of preparation.
Because the majority of people in my countries earn about 1,000 USD a month, there are 8 million laborers (civil servants not included) and less than 10 percent earn more than 2,000 USD a month in the statistics.
A millionare (in USD) would require at least 82 years of working if I don't belong to that 10% of people.
I think it's due to conflicts seem to be the integral part of a story, and due to the limitation of programming, conflict types are limited compared to real life.
You can have lawsuits, debates, company competition, and other conflicts in video games, but they're nowhere near the depth as a random case in real life imho. For example, lots of people claim how much depth Witcher 2 had within its plot line, however when I read random financial news like possibility of hyperinflation caused by QE between eastern countries or political news about parties inner conflicts with bribes in estate investment and such, I simply cannot find any appeal to the called depth in conflicts within most video game. The most easily portrayed conflicts for a video game would be direct violence.
There are also games that with multiple paths that don't even have any conflicts, like in one of Koei's game (takiou rishhiden 5, not brought to US) you can be a smith and just do smithing all day till you've achieved the title of great smith and won the favor of Emperor to beat the game, or be a "tea man" and be the match maker who improves relationship between warlords, but those kind of niche games aren't appealing to the mainstream market.
Velcro Zipper wrote:
Same here. When I found that even traveler like the High Elf counselor cannot be killed when meeting her in wildness, the illusion of "write your own story" is diminished. A random unkillable npc, once become hostile, would follow you from dawn to dusk if you don't knock him off from of a bridge or mountain.. New vegas did it better in this regard.
29 here. Although I had played plenty of pc games that used ac in the system such as Might and magic 4, it's not till the mid 2000s that I played my first pc game in D&D setting (BG2), and only afterward I began joining tabletop session (3E) for 1 year or 2 during my college years. Although I no longer play tabletop after I moved back to my home country in Asia, hard to find players/dm.
Bought pathfinder core books despite never playing it. Also gave 4e a read but felt the fluff for monsters were too short, most of them were one liner, rest of the descriptions were combat tactics.
Guess the archtype classification would label me as the 2nd, despite I don't really listen to Tohou music or play their games, but am very much into Japanese anime/manga/game/sengoku time period till the last few years. Now I only read niche manga such as Sengoku record of Tensho or patriotic Rasputin (don't think they've been translated so I just do a brief translation on those titles).
Had read some popular fantasy novels like dragonlance during high school years, however now I no longer read any novels. My English vocabulary is extremely limited though, due to my learning of English began when I was 13ish. I no longer communicate in English in my daily life unless surfing on internet or play games in English, and I don't game much due to lack of interests in pc titles. There're only around 4~6 game titles per year that would slightly interest me.
For the music preference, I found myself listening to really different music from Charles Aznavour to some Japanese erotic visual novel games ost... I guess my taste sounds a bit extreme.
The casus belli of land claiming from Crusader kings 2's systems may seem to work in this case. =p
From historic stories that I've read, there were emperors who were once roaming bands of outcasts that began their path to the ruler from attacking military settlement. If they lose, the worst would be they'll be slain. Liu Bang (Han's dynasty 1st emperor) started with no land of his own, only by taking over one of the county for example.
Due to PFO not implementing severe death penalty, such scale of war (skirmish?) would become more like what griefer do in MMORPG... since they've nothing to lose.
If there are penalties applied to the losing side with no settlements such as losing equipment, loss of reputation, decreasing health condition, forfeit, payment of what they've damaged & waging skirmish, jail time (a character in prison cannot train certain skills during jail time), etc., the small scale wars (skirmish) wouldn't be as easy as griefers would like them to be.
Well, if there is a limit to city/wilderness population and a necromancer can only create undead minions from the deceased, then I wouldn't say it's overpowered. A necromancer has to gather enough remains to form an undead army, so it will take time and some luck (or risk). It'll take more developing resource though to create undead counterpart of the living creatures.
I think the original batman killed joker in the very 1st issue, then after several years the personality of batman changed and dropped the gun due to US laws.
Well, that's why personally I prefer works to be created by single author... I remember even dragonlance had parallel time for the 2nd generations by different authors (printed in books).
There are too many versions of batman... some batman snap villain's neck, batman that uses a gun, batman that burnt some villain, batman who hanged some giant villain, batman that kicked villain into poison pool to kill him, etc. It's pointless to name an alignment to "a" batman when there are like 20 versions of batman out there...
Hi, in gothic 2 when you've the character's weapon skill exceeding a certain amount, the skill level would change and the character would get a n improved combat animation. Since normally there are less things a fighter can do than other classes especially in a mmo (climb tree, grapple, sunder,exotic weapons like net/mancatcher, etc.), will there be some kind of combat style upgrade (not "cool down attacks") for a fighter type?
I'm thinking that would it work what a hex has "statistics" to affect the spawns encounters? For example, if the hex has 1000 human bandits, 100 villagers, and only 5 bugbear, you're unlikely to meet villagers assaulted by bugbears in an encounter. It would also make killing spawned npcs meaningful (decrease the number of creatures on the statistics list according to the kill), though I don't think any games have done this before or could even be achieved in this gen.
How about short-term skill penalties like how death penalty is done in Dragon age origin? If a character dies too often, he'll be temporarily crippled with the negative penalties (and maybe uses a slower rate of gaining skill exp for a few days?). The player will need a medical kit or healing spells to heal the wounds, or just wait for the penalties to wear off.
Recently I was reading a comic, in it the group of heroes could take some drugs to turn them into anthropomorphism of insect temporarily. It gave me some idea of building up a character that can turn into insect-humanoid to fight for a few rounds. When I looked up through the rules, I found most abilities were about anthropomorphism of animals such as beastmorphs / anthropomorphic animal.
Then, I start to think about the most (none scientific) fantasy works I've read. Animal-headed humanoids seem to be pretty common, human-headed animals are rare but still can be seen once for a while. Insect anthropomorphism, however, just seems to be extremely rare. The closest thing is drider but spiders aren't insect. There are some anthropomorphism of spiders and centipedes in classical literature like journey to the west but neither of them are insect as well.
Is it some kind of taboo to use it in none-scientific fantasy settings?
Thanks for the comments. :)
Agree with the inability/difficulty to calculate wisdom and charisma from the characters' shoes. There don't seem to be a standard and seem abstract if being measured.
In real life, there are things that we invest time learning and sometimes there are little to no results(for example, I've trouble remembering Japanese alphabet after months of practicing, while my sister simply spent a few weeks and had them memorized). Therefore, I assumed in a fictional world, if characters have no knowledge of their (exact) mental stats, they might be in the same shoes, so would the modern human party members.
I was thinking in the way of a session being told as a story like a RPG novel with only me roleplaying each character rather than a session with friends, so there wouldn't be the players complaining over complex issue. (sorry if I don't explain it well, cannot seem to find the right words to phrase this)
Good night, everyone.(it's 3 a.m here)
Recently, I was imagining an old cliche about modern humans get thrown into a fantasy world and wondered how would they survive with lower than commoner physical stats (my personal assumption) & restricted, low magic / high fantasy setting (so they wouldn't all go casty) & starting class as commoners.
Then, this notion brought up the question. If I roleplay as one of the modern humans in a fantasy world, how do I find my "character sheet with stats?" Do I go through some kind of physical tests & mental exams to gain the knowledge of my character stats?
Within a story, do characters know their stats and choose the most suited profession/class? If they have no knowledge of their character sheet, wouldn't there be int/wis/cha lower than 9 characters who wanted the power of magic and spent time training in caster classes despite their inability to cast from their chosen classes?
Not sure if this had been asked before, I've searched around internet but haven't found anything similar.
Triggering the fireball to explode in the mid-air idea from the PHB sounds better than magical resistance. Even when the troop didn't hit it, the fireball will probably hit the front formation and cause explosions there instead of destination the caster planned to. Rock thrower would probably do better intercepting a fireball than an archer. Setting obstacles in front of army would also help its defense.
I think the difficulty to accept troop magic resistance is due to how humans' warfare evolve. People develop new technology to counter the enemies. WWI tanks were made to counter trench warfare, for example.
From what I remember, Golorian is a baseline magic world (somewhere around the Greyhawk level), and most of the time the more north you go, less magic it would be. Here
If physical damages have a higher chance of being caused, methods to improve physical damage reduction would be put in priority rather than magic damage reduction. It seems more logical imho.
I'd love to get some thoughts on both of these ideas (#1 giving players some autonomy within formation for how to follow orders, #2 giving commanders the ability to issue complex orders) from everyone, but especially the devs. If you agree, cool! ... How come? If you disagree, okay; why?
How about both of them implemented?
The first one being more specialized and limited to similar characters. For example, everyone in the squad has a sword & shield, so they can do the fancy unified moves like in LOTR movie when they sheathe the sword together.
The second can belong to a generalized army, so when the commander says ranged attack, some may shoot arrows with their bows, some may cast magic missile, some throw bombs, others can fire their crossbow/ firearm.
#1 would be like when you're controlling a single squad in RTS games like company of heroes / battle for middle earth. The attacks of a squad members are unified. Except now the player gets to be the singular unit within the squad.
#2 would be similar to mount and blade. When cavalier / footmen are asked to attack with range weapons, they'll just do nothing due to inability. When all units are asked to charge, cavaliers / footmen / archer / musketeer will perform differently to fulfill the command.
I might misinterpret something I read (English isn't my mother language). The examples give me a vibe that spellcasters seem to be supplementary supporting roles within a troop that boosts physical attackers' damages / defenses / movement.
There was one NWN online module my friend invited me to play for a while. On that server many enemies and all bosses have magical immunities because they want the spellcasters to be always on secondary role, boosting physical attackers' damages / defenses.
If an army is composed of spell casters, would there be some kind of army command that allows them to cast spells other than "buff?" An army of evil cleric may cast some ritual-like spells and summon a small horde of demon/devil. An army of druids (though it sounds silly) may summon treants and alike. An army of illusionist can create illusions & mist that temper others movements, and so on.
Also, how about classes like rogue / rangers? How will their trap skills do against a cohered troop when they act individually, would it disperse the formation for a short while or simply become being resisted as well? I would imagine low level characters act as the "suicidal scouts" that search for small traps in order to have formation be maintained easier in such situations.
An army of rogue/ranger could setup huge traps that only trigger against enemy troop (giant pit hole for example). Varieties in an army makes them more versatile and well-rounded, while devoted one-class army represent specialty and do well under certain circumstance.
There could be some kind of temporary minor penalty like DAO if a character dies imo, it's not severe enough to break the game but dying over and over in a short period of time would make characters noticeably weaker. Well it's just my thoughts anyway. >_>
ps. for the general granting magical resistance argument, I found it hard to swallow as well at first thought, so I changed my logic and think those generals are Battle Heralds alike in disguise and grant some saves.
Interesting read, would be great in a single player war game such as Mount & Blade (F1 & F2 were simply enough in M&B none siege combat >_>). However, in a mmorpg, wouldn't this further promote more players to join larger guilds?
Since larger guilds have more people, they are likely to have characters who are devoted to none-magic profession.
From what I read, magic seems to be undesirable in a war either against a cohered troop (magic resistance), or be participating in a cohered force (cannot cast independent spells which are their main abilities).
Larger guilds have more members, so it's easier to from a troop. Unless there are exceptional things smaller guilds can do (such as banditry mentioned above), it seems a new disadvantage against them. The only drawback of a troop is when the leader dies, (s)he receives the leader penalty.
ps. this somehow reminds me of cranium rat
In one of NWN server, it used a system with a different way of determining the required time to rest. (there are no limits of resting in vanilla) There is a "fatigue" and a character has to be tired enough to rest, which usually takes about 20~30 minutes of adventuring. There are other ways of speeding up the required time to rest such as drinking alcohol, but the character might die due to dehydration if too much alcohol was consumed.
I used to have a character that lurked in the sewers and drank free ale that were stored there, and eventually fell unconscious then died due to alcoholism. lol
Recently I watched the new Neverwinter online gameplay video (the one with infinite ? magic missile video)
Some may like this kind of combat for a caster, though personally I hope a wizard wouldn't be like this, felt rather like a hack & slash game. ie. Gaunlet legend, the King of dragons
Fire Bud wrote:
Sounds cool, thanks for the answer. :)
How does separate the lawful alignment sound? Being lawful may have different meanings.
- "lawful" in a deity worship (I've no idea if programing is possible to portray a character's belief in a video game, so I assume simplying it to being loyal to a deity's belief system would be more doable)
Being a paladin means the character is going to be "lawful" to the code (and usually the paladin faction s/he belongs to), but the character isn't necessary to be obedient under a nation's influence. The paladin is still supposed to be "lawful" in daily lives, not roaming around murdering villagers/raiding poor commoners' harvest sites.
A lawful rogue under a kingdom's service (a royal spymaster) is lawful to the country but doesn't necessarily be "lawful" in other regards. A barbarian can be "lawful" and obedient toward his clan(faction), but the other faction/kingdom/villages they loot will not perceive them as lawful. And so on.