Back to Crafty Games Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 04, 2015, 06:51:20 PM
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Welcome to the Crafty Games Forums!

Note to New Members: To combat spam, we have instituted new rules: you must post 5 replies to existing threads before you can create new threads.

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 169
1  Community / Off-Topic / Re: Video game news and reaction on: Today at 01:29:32 AM
Oh, no doubt.

And in my doubtless sad-looking little world despite having seen Hudson confirm as much at a convention panel I just can't buy that how ME3 originally concluded was part of any plan.

It's just so....clumsy.
2  Community / Off-Topic / Re: Video game news and reaction on: October 03, 2015, 11:34:49 PM
There was never going to be a cliffhanger ending to #3.

Sounds likely, but you sound certain.
3  Community / Off-Topic / Re: Video game news and reaction on: October 03, 2015, 03:15:40 PM
It's been quite a while, but I thought the main reason the ME3 ending is what it is was because the initial story/ending got 'leaked' when a demo or something got cracked, which prompted the lead writer to shut himself in a room and rewrite the entire thing on his own at the very last minute?

I've got no idea if that's true though that story sounds dubiously churlish to me ...though it has the merit of explaining why the original cliffhanger ending was so terrible a design decision. I can't take seriously the idea that anyone who could have plotted out the series that far thought "you'll have to wait for episode 4!" would be a worthy way to end anything.

Edit: Actually no, let me correct myself.

The cliffhanger ending, this being purely my personal speculation, is a logical choice to me in the light of a specific ambition: to make Mass Effect 4 reflect the fundamental last choice of the trilogy. If Casey Hudson and company were planning on having ME4 be in a galaxy truly altered by the decision to Destroy, Control, or Synthesize the Reapers then deciding not to announce this ambition does them the incredibly useful favor of not having the results tainted by internet ...everything. And given fan devotion it might not have looked like too much to ask to try to do this under the radar with the hope of everyone just rolling with it 'til ME4 was announced.

Again, purely my own guesswork. Certainly would have been taking the "player agency" idea up quite a notch though.

This is all being discussed in examination of the Extended Cut ending of course.
4  Community / Off-Topic / Re: Video game news and reaction on: October 03, 2015, 03:12:28 PM
Here's the thing, my favorite explanation for the Reapers' cycle is the one Sovereign gives in the first game. "YOU CANNOT POSSIBLY UNDERSTAND OUR PURPOSE. "

The biggest problem with the ending is Shepard doesn't even try to argue or negotiate, she just listens to what the Catalyst has to say and kinda just goes with it. No matter what ending you choose, the fact is that you are implicitly agreeing to the Catalyst's views. For any other protagonist that might work, but Shepard has argued people to death and ended wars with rhetoric. Did the devs think the argument with TIM was enough? Hell, the Catalyst makes a lot of the same points as TIM, but this time Shepard just rolls with it.

I categorize the former under "bluster" intended to intimidate the organics.

Hmm, true.
Truth being I didn't see nonsense in it's arguments and the way the scenario is constructed I didn't see room for negotiation. Shepard has very little influence, what could she say that would create more choices? The Extinction choice illustrates as much.

At least now you trigger the final purge if you shoot starbrat in the face as an alternative to psychopomp-assisted suicide

Not that you think murdering everyone you know, might know, and would ever exist among the known races out of pique is a worthy choice.
5  Community / Off-Topic / Re: XCOM (Reactions, stories, let's play setups, etc...) on: October 03, 2015, 03:01:18 PM

"For those who decide to pre-purchase XCOM 2, they will receive the Resistance Warrior Pack, which will offer additional soldier customization options. Players will be able to customize their squad of resistance fighters with bonus outfits and headgear, as well as custom facial war paint. The Resistance Warrior Pack will also include a Survivor of the Old War, who will instantly show up as a new recruit in the Avenger’s barracks."

Hey mate, mind putting that image behind a spoiler?
It's breaking the bbs table.
6  Community / License to Improvise / Re: [Setting conversion] Rokugan on: October 02, 2015, 05:41:48 AM
Actually my idea was a bodyguard. Cool

In X setting a DM is a person blessed by the God of Death at birth and who is sent to a monastery for isolation and training. Upon graduation they're released in the presence of a bodyguard who's job is to get the Death-Monger to their glorious immolation without him/her getting bogged down in butchering villagers because someone spilled gruel on their sandals.

The Bodyguard is the voice of reason, throws the first punch to keep the Death-Monger in check when less than apocalyptic violence is required, and generally acts as the shield of sanity for the cursed berserker.
7  Community / License to Improvise / Re: [Setting conversion] Rokugan on: October 02, 2015, 04:10:16 AM
Didn't see that coming.

For The Black Touch could the DM have a non-Undead PL?
8  Community / Off-Topic / Re: Cool pics on: October 01, 2015, 08:14:03 PM

Yeah, that is something. Shocked

Good find.
9  Community / Off-Topic / Re: Video game news and reaction on: October 01, 2015, 05:28:43 PM
Because zealotry requires pride and I don't see much reason to think an artificial mind, existing without the evolutionary pressures that prompt in-group out-group social instincts, would need pride.

(click to show/hide)

If memory serves there is actually Bioware dev chatter to support the rumor that the original purpose of the Reapers was to sample and harvest all organic life before said life's overuse of element zero caused fatal localized supernovae. That's what the "Mass Effect" originally was and how it functioned as a kind of parable about the over-dependence on irreplaceable materials.

At some point that truck swerved, probably budgetary limitations on ME 2, and things went as they did. Personally I'm contented by the new version as I think it's a bit more properly Space Opera and that it's much meatier as a philosophical topic.
10  Community / License to Improvise / Re: [Setting conversion] Rokugan on: September 30, 2015, 07:14:13 PM
Oh, and my original question about a DM being mounted was about asking "is the mount in use a viable target for a repeat attack?"

Like literally so berzerk you kill the horse you're riding. Shocked
11  Community / License to Improvise / Re: [Setting conversion] Rokugan on: September 30, 2015, 06:51:38 PM
Thanks, of course. Smiley

For clarification on my part assume the channeled spell is literally "cast Lightning Bolt through sword as part of a melee attack once per round. Uses up 1 Lightning Bolt token."

Would it fire twice and would it fire twice if the caster didn't have enough tokens?

Edit: ah. I think the question really is "does Death Rage allow once a round attacks to be repeated?"
12  Community / Off-Topic / Re: Video game news and reaction on: September 30, 2015, 06:43:25 PM
If you haven't already Heroes of the Storm is worth a try as the "1-calorie MOBA."

Also Wildstar's gone F2P and Star Citizen is seeming some "development woes" that might be harbingers of bad things given some it's founders past business follies.
13  Community / License to Improvise / Re: [Setting conversion] Rokugan on: September 30, 2015, 06:35:32 PM

So a Cleave can trigger a Death Rage follow-up, but it can only do so a number of times specified by the number of allowed Cleaves.

One Cleave, one follow up, boom done because follow-ups can't trigger follow-ups, right?

Look, I get how that must seem obvious Tongue but humor me so I stop wondering if this isn't a long-form of "make one attack roll against any viable target within Reach and then repeat that sequence at Reach +1 until everything's been attacked at least once" like a Death-Monger's basic attack is a version of the Spiral Cutter Greatsword trick.

And for clarification the follow-up does not benefit from anything that's not on that list, right? So if the DM later gets some form of Arcane Strike that channels a spell into the first attack the follow-up doesn't also automatically get the channel?
14  Community / License to Improvise / Re: [Setting conversion] Rokugan on: September 30, 2015, 06:10:25 PM
Oh, that's fucking awesome.
If you Cleave you keep tagging new targets as long as new targets are possible as your follow up attacks start requiring resolution -BUT because Free Attacks can't trigger Free Attacks....

Wait, now I'm a little confused. Let's game this out.

I attack target A; A survives so I attack B. Straight forward. If all survive, turn over.

If B dies I Follow Up back to A who survives and then I also Cleave A - and if A survives, that ends the turn.

But if A dies at any point after B dies I have to find a C to Cleave if I can, and does that Cleave trigger a follow-up?

And can I choose to spend any additional strikes on previous targets? I get that follow ups must always be on new targets -if A's alone I can't just hit A again- but if I hit A and B and kill B, I can Cleave A but have to follow up on a C if possible?


edited for more thoughts.
15  Community / License to Improvise / Re: [Setting conversion] Rokugan on: September 30, 2015, 05:09:10 PM
So how does Death Rage's attack restriction work with Cleave effects?

By my reading it's compatible as the limit to taking one attack action doesn't state there can't be secondary effects as those aren't chosen as part of the one attack limit. They are an outcome that can happen, not one that must happen.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 169

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.13 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!