The Dark Eye Realms of Arkania - Blade of Destiny

[NotAGolfer]

a blanket (or better a sleeping bag)
a waterskin ... 1 for each char is enough
about 3 to 4 rations (replenish them with your hunter at rests, throw away the surplus)
some LP healing herbs (4-leafed loneberries are enough)
a replacement weapon in case the RNG doesn't like you in the upcoming battles (weapons degrade too, dunno if that is in RoA already but in Star Trail you can inspect them closer to see if they will break soon ... and use a whetstone to delay that, in RoA whetstones are useless afaik)
... not much else i think.

I don't think there isn't much sence in blankets in RoA 1, maybe in later games.

Seems to be true, just checked ingame and there's no difference (at least in summer) if I carry none.
Maybe it helps with disease related cold checks in RoA 1 though, but in RoA 2 a sleeping bag would be better for that.
ALso there is no recipe book in RoA 1, it is introduced in the second game. so carrying around ink and quill is pointless in Blade of Destiny.[/QUOTE]

 

[belowmecoldhands]

Other totally useless spells include:
Necrophatia, Witch's Eye, Respondami, Nihilatio, Without a trace, Walk on ice, Calm the storm, Claudibus, Freeze soft.

You mean, I won't need them even once in all three games? That cannot be. I heard that 2nd and 3rd games are both 3 times longer than Blades of Destiny.

People on the Codex continue to bash the RoA games for this reason, but they completely misunderstand what those games set out to be. Instead they judge them by what has become the modern RPG industry standard of balancing on the developer's side and min/maxing on the gamer's side.
The RoA games are three computer modules for the TDE roleplaying system. That means they do exactly what pen & paper modules do. They recreate every single spell and skill that the roleplaying system provides, regardless of whether it is needed in a specific module. I bet you can't name a single D&D module that requires every single spell and skill, yet somehow, when it is in pen & paper form, people are completely willing to accept that, but in a computer RPG, they say that it sucks and want the module developers use only a subset of the real ruleset.

The Realms of Arkania games specifically provide the possibility to print the character sheets, as it was intended that the players could use their characters from the computer games in Pen&Paper modules. So those skills might not be needed in the computer games, but they are still part of the character development and might be needed in a later pen&paper module.

If you develop your characters according to modern min/maxing standards, they will get you through the games, but they will not be well balanced characters in the TDE world, that would be ready to go for advanced p&p adventures.

I admit that most of this is not really relevant in a context where the pen&paper modules are not available in English (and the third edition is out of date), but it is important to understand why the games were designed this way, and not see it as a nuisance, but as a different approach, that has unfortunately been completely lost in modern RPGs.

How can they be well balanced charactesr in the TDE world if it's a different game?

Another thing I thought of is if they added those useless skills to the game for pen&paper players then why didn't they list that in the spell description (I assume there's a spell description in the manual or in-game?), so in-game players wouldn't spend points or time on them?

The reason it matters whether a skill or spell is useless is because players usually have to spend time learning skills or spells. If the skills or spells are not helpful then the player has just wasted time, time which might permanently cripple their character unless they create a new one.

I can't imagine even the best designers can make all skills/spells/etc equally useful to perfection. Balancing classes is not necessarily easy! In fact, I think many designers avoid this isue by making classes similar to each other, so similar it's just a linear cut/paste with some minor modifications. So the result seems to be that diversity in skills/spells/classes/etc is lost to ensure the best and most timely balancing. The result of all this is if you want a game with diverse things then you'll probably inevitably be confronted with unequal things. The real question is, how unequal will you allow it to be, and will you accept almost useless things?

I also want o bring up that exploring a game's systems is one of the joys of playing them in my experence. In MMO's, because things tend to not necessarily always be equal, competitive players will exploit it, especially in pvp.

It makes me think of the issue modern players have with bad builds and how designers have addressed this in part by allowing for respeccing or learning every skill without a cap on it. But this still doesn't eliminate dumb choices in the heat of the moment.

 

[belowmecoldhands]

One major difference tho is that you don't have a dungeon master in video game. If I see a broken bridge, I can come up with a dozen of possible solutions to overcome this obstacle, and DM will accept any of them with one result or another. Video game just gives me 2 or 3, and it doesn't give a flying fuck about all those repair tools I got, or Rainbow Hue spell I developed. "Either take an 8-hour detour or turn back".

Not to mention in PnP games you will usually know which spell does what before you're asked to pick a bunch of spells your character knows. RoA apparently expects you to guess the spells' function by nothing more than its name. Doesn't smell very PnP to me.

Ha, I take it you have never played a pnp session of the The Dark Eye? The whole system is designed to keep the player characters weak and on rails. The rulebooks are full of advice to the DM how best to fuck the characters over and keep them on rails. Hell, there even is an official adventure that starts of with the premise that the characters are cursed and therefore forced to kill the emperor because the plot and its resolution requires that the assassination proceeds almost to completion.

So, in this regard, RoA is a very faithful implementation of PnP.

Rails is a word used to describe games which HELP the player or prevent them from hurting themselves. The idea is a player shouldn't be allowed to do anything that might negatively hurt them without being prevented from doing it or at least explicitly being told what will happen.

What you should be saying is this:

Ha, I take it you have never played a pnp session of the The Dark Eye? The whole system is designed to keep the player characters weak and disoriented. The rulebooks are full of advice to the DM how best to fuck the characters over and keep them confused. Hell, there even is an official adventure that starts of with the premise that the characters are cursed and therefore forced to kill the emperor because the plot and its resolution requires that the assassination proceeds almost to completion.

If you're refering to the game forcing a player to walk around a mountain because there're no passes across it, thus having to toil for hours going around it, then I think what you're trying to say is the game is torturing the player without giving them any options. I guess you could say negative outcome rails, except rather than the rails always leading to a positive outcome, in this case they're leading to a negative one, or at least a repetitive boring one. The difference between this interpreation and the one I gave you above is that if the negative rails are avoidable then they're not really rails at all. For example, if I'm running in the dark and veer off the beaten path and plunge off a cliff, yet it was avoidable if I had been using a light or moved slower, then it's not an example of a negative rail. It's only a negative rail if you had no ability to avoid it.

Typically a negative outcome in a game has consequences: you lose something. Once you've lost something, it's like a negative rail, except that since it was avoidable, it's not. A game with rails, positive or negative, excludes any alternatives. You can't go off the beaten path and plunge off a clif in a game with positive rails. If it's a game with negative rails, you can't avoid plunging off the cliff.

 

[vonAchdorf]

Another thing I thought of is if they added those useless skills to the game for pen&paper players then why didn't they list that in the spell description (I assume there's a spell description in the manual or in-game?), so in-game players wouldn't spend points or time on them?

The reason it matters whether a skill or spell is useless is because players usually have to spend time learning skills or spells. If the skills or spells are not helpful then the player has just wasted time, time which might permanently cripple their character unless they create a new one.

They included the spells / talents because they thought they might need or want to use them in a future expansion / sequel and therefore decided to create a true to the source framework. The creator also stated that they wanted the player to be able to reach a dead end and hit a wall for a "wrong" choice, though admittedly some cases (where you have to restart the game) are a bit harsh (and probably not working as intended).

 

[Darth Roxor]

Wow, it's like Blade of Destiny was badly designed or something!

 

[:Flash:]

How can they be well balanced charactesr in the TDE world if it's a different game?

They are well balanced characters in the TDE world, if they could be sent into a P&P adventure module of the appropriate level.
They are not well balanced, if their skills have been developed with a specific module (in this case the computer modules) in mind.

Another thing I thought of is if they added those useless skills to the game for pen&paper players then why didn't they list that in the spell description (I assume there's a spell description in the manual or in-game?), so in-game players wouldn't spend points or time on them?

The reason it matters whether a skill or spell is useless is because players usually have to spend time learning skills or spells. If the skills or spells are not helpful then the player has just wasted time, time which might permanently cripple their character unless they create a new one.

I don't know, I play those games with a completely different mindset; and that's one of the reasons I enjoy them more than the modern games, because they can be played that way. I levelled certain skills and spells because I thought they would fit to the character I was developing. I enjoyed picturing what the character is able to do, and in the end I never remembered or checked if I ever used that spell or skill. The imagination of character development was enough for me. I also never would have had the idea to test whether you need blankets, it just seemed natural to drag them along.

If a game is so unforgiving that you need to level up "correctly", then this kind of gameplay becomes impossible.
I guess that's also the reason people on the Codex complain about the dice rolls during level up. They are so trained on min/maxing that they reload if the levelup goes wrong. I prefer this suspenseful minigame approach to leveling to the boring number-clicking in modern games, and live with the consequences, if it goes wrong.

Realms of Arkania is not about optimizing numbers, it's about enjoying a simulation of a Fantasy World.

 

[Morkar Left]

Guys, it simulates the p&p rpg as exactly as possible. In the p&p there are useless skills as well compared to other skills. Didn't prevent players from choosing them if it fits the char they had in mind to roleplay. Having such an odd skill wasn't that useful but it helped to define your char. It was cool when you actually could use it in an rpg session but you didn't count on it. The rule system as such paid attention to this style of taking flavour skills by providing you with enough skill points while level-capping skills at the same time. It's actually not that different in the crpg.

 

[Darth Roxor]

do you people even have any idea how pnp differs from crpgs

holy shit

 

[belowmecoldhands]

How can they be well balanced charactesr in the TDE world if it's a different game?

They are well balanced characters in the TDE world, if they could be sent into a P&P adventure module of the appropriate level.
They are not well balanced, if their skills have been developed with a specific module (in this case the computer modules) in mind.

Another thing I thought of is if they added those useless skills to the game for pen&paper players then why didn't they list that in the spell description (I assume there's a spell description in the manual or in-game?), so in-game players wouldn't spend points or time on them?

The reason it matters whether a skill or spell is useless is because players usually have to spend time learning skills or spells. If the skills or spells are not helpful then the player has just wasted time, time which might permanently cripple their character unless they create a new one.

I don't know, I play those games with a completely different mindset; and that's one of the reasons I enjoy them more than the modern games, because they can be played that way. I levelled certain skills and spells because I thought they would fit to the character I was developing. I enjoyed picturing what the character is able to do, and in the end I never remembered or checked if I ever used that spell or skill. The imagination of character development was enough for me. I also never would have had the idea to test whether you need blankets, it just seemed natural to drag them along.

If a game is so unforgiving that you need to level up "correctly", then this kind of gameplay becomes impossible.
I guess that's also the reason people on the Codex complain about the dice rolls during level up. They are so trained on min/maxing that they reload if the levelup goes wrong. I prefer this suspenseful minigame approach to leveling to the boring number-clicking in modern games, and live with the consequences, if it goes wrong.

Realms of Arkania is not about optimizing numbers, it's about enjoying a simulation of a Fantasy World.

People complain about it BECAUSE they're expected to level up "correctly" (re: ridiculously), according to ROA's rules, no? Why would you level up with a bad dice roll? Why would you carry a sleeping bag which takes up weight when it could prevent you from carrying something mcuh more important? Too many sleepin bags means you might not level up, or you might level up too slowly. And it's not just ROA having rules you have to follow to level up, but they're so cruel or confusing or boring. THAT'S why players complain.

It seems to me you're confusing ROA with something else. ROA has rules and you play it as if it doesn't? You carry sleeping bags and do what you want, and it doesn't matter if you level up slow or not at all? How can even say "...it's about enjoying a simulation..." without pausing and realizing what you're saying? You said simulation! Most players, when they use that word, use it negatively. As in: "This game is soooo simulated it forces you to use the toilet 30 min/day and walk for miles doing nothing just to get to the first dungeon. And if you catch a cold you die!"

 

[Morkar Left]

do you people even have any idea how pnp differs from crpgs

holy shit

Do you even have an idea what crpgs tried to achieve in the first place?

 

[Darth Roxor]

Do you even have an idea what crpgs tried to achieve in the first place?

Yeah, and LARPing that 'I'm picking useless shit because it fits my character!!!' was definitely not a part of that because, by definition, there are no useless abilities in PnP.

Also, how de fuck do I use this:
SOLIDIRID RAINBOW'S HUE: Carry To My Goal True. Creates a magic rainbow
bridge of up to 50 paces in length

There is a spot in wilderness with a broken bridge and options:
- build a new one (some kind of "tools" required - can't figure out which ones exactly, I already bought ALL of them, and it still says I don't have "neccessary tools", dammit)
- find another way
- go back

But I have this spell, fffuck. Should it be some high level in order to work? Will I ever need it?

Would this happen in the fucking pnp?

 

[Grimwulf]

Well, my dwarf simply doesn't have any spare space to carry a blanket. He can't just throw away his drinking horn now, can he? Coz then he'll be forced to drink ale from those DIRTY tavern mugs. Ugh.

 

[aleph]

Rails is a word used to describe games which HELP the player or prevent them from hurting themselves. The idea is a player shouldn't be allowed to do anything that might negatively hurt them without being prevented from doing it or at least explicitly being told what will happen.

Nope, rails, or more specifically railroading, in PnP just refers to a play style which forces a specific outcome.

 

[belowmecoldhands]

Rails is a word used to describe games which HELP the player or prevent them from hurting themselves. The idea is a player shouldn't be allowed to do anything that might negatively hurt them without being prevented from doing it or at least explicitly being told what will happen.

Nope, rails, or more specifically railroading, in PnP just refers to a play style which forces a specific outcome.

Read the rest of the post. I covered positve rails and negative rails. I'm an MMORPG player, so I'm used to "rails" meaning a forced positive outcome. So if a game has positive rails, it won't let you fall off the clif. If it has negative rails, you can't avoid falling off.

I think games can be partially "railed" or almost completely. There can be places or times where there's a positive or negative rail. However, if the rail is avoidable then it's not a rail at all. For example, if there's a trap you can step on and it's undetectable then ti's a negative rail. If the trap is detectable then it's not a rail. If the trap can't hurt you or just isn't there at all then ti's a positive rail.

What about the length or duration of the rail? What if when I die it's permanent, even if it's avoidable? What if you can't rely on save games to restart? Does that make the entire game have negative rails? Well, if it's avoidable, I'd argue not. However, I think a game can have an abundance of positive or negative outcomes, dependent on how easy it's to trigger them. If it's really easy then it's essentially a game on rails. However, what if I"m a person with v ery low IQ and I'm playing a game which expects average IQ at least? I"ll lose and lose and lose and it'll be a game with negative rails. So it's not just whether triggering the rails is easy or hard, as different players will have different abilities and tolerances. For example, if I'm severely afraid of spiders and the game is rich with them then the game will be on negative rails; not able to produce other things. Yet if I can shut off the spider models then suddenly the game can be positive (or negative), so options open up. It may not be on rails after that.

 

[aleph]

... I'm an MMORPG player, ...

So, what are you doing in a discussion about actual (PnP) roleplaying then?

 

[belowmecoldhands]

... I'm an MMORPG player, ...

So, what are you doing in a discussion about actual (PnP) roleplaying then?

Whaddya think? I've played cRPGs since the 90's. I'm not a PNP player. I have read about some of them. I even have the rules for Athala and Mithlund printed out next to me. Never played em, just thought they're relaly cool so printed em.

 

[Morkar Left]

Do you even have an idea what crpgs tried to achieve in the first place?

Yeah, and LARPing that 'I'm picking useless shit because it fits my character!!!' was definitely not a part of that because, by definition, there are no useless abilities in PnP.

I think we can agree that swordfighting is more useful than pottery (an actual skill in pnp). Doesn't make pottery useless but it's questionable if it ever comes to use in an adventure.

Also, how de fuck do I use this:
SOLIDIRID RAINBOW'S HUE: Carry To My Goal True. Creates a magic rainbow
bridge of up to 50 paces in length

There is a spot in wilderness with a broken bridge and options:
- build a new one (some kind of "tools" required - can't figure out which ones exactly, I already bought ALL of them, and it still says I don't have "neccessary tools", dammit)
- find another way
- go back

But I have this spell, fffuck. Should it be some high level in order to work? Will I ever need it?

Can't remember if it's properly implemented. It should be and if it's not that is a drawback by not getting the game finished properly before shipping. A gameplay flaw of course. But a technical one, not a design flaw. Not really the point we're discussing here.

Would this happen in the fucking pnp?

No, because the fucking pnp wouldn't have to rely on a computer to deliver results in the first place.

 

[aleph]

So, what are you doing in a discussion about actual (PnP) roleplaying then?

Whaddya think? I've played cRPGs since the 90's.

Do you see the contradiction, or do you need it explained with simple words and short sentences?

edit:

"Joined: Jan 4, 2014"

Why do I even waste my time and type up a reply?

 

[:Flash:]

People complain about it BECAUSE they're expected to level up "correctly" (re: ridiculously), according to ROA's rules, no? Why would you level up with a bad dice roll?

Why not?
If you start whining about a levelup gone wrong in a TDE pen&paper people will soon start to resent having you in their group.
Just be a man and live with the consequences of trying to max out a skill that you're already very good at.

It seems to me you're confusing ROA with something else. ROA has rules and you play it as if it doesn't? You carry sleeping bags and do what you want, and it doesn't matter if you level up slow or not at all? How can even say "...it's about enjoying a simulation..." without pausing and realizing what you're saying? You said simulation! Most players, when they use that word, use it negatively. As in: "This game is soooo simulated it forces you to use the toilet 30 min/day and walk for miles doing nothing just to get to the first dungeon. And if you catch a cold you die!"

Well perhaps I'm not most players.
If you are most players you should probably stick to MMORPGs and stop trying to play good games.

 

[vonAchdorf]

Why not?
If you start whining about a levelup gone wrong in a TDE pen&paper people will soon start to resent having you in their group.
Just be a man and live with the consequences of trying to max out a skill that you're already very good at.

I'd wager that the level up system for talents (and stats) was one of the most handwaved or houseruled part of the TDE 3rd edition ruleset. It's not fun for most people if they fail at improving their core competencies repeatedly.

 

[Gord]

Well, my old group certainly did adjust the rules a bit so that it was more likely to raise talents/attributes successfully (on lower levels, at least).
However, TDE is also a system that offers a lot of stuff for non-combat oriented characters or the (in comparison) shitty classes.
Several classes existed practically for roleplaying reasons only and absolutely sucked in comparison to the "standard" classes for 95% of the typical adventure module stuff.
Nevertheless they existed and some people liked to play them. If you've got a good enough DM that shouldn't be a problem.
Anyway TDE characters are far less powerful in relation to "normal" NPCs than e.g. in DnD.

 

[vonAchdorf]

Well, my old group certainly did adjust the rules a bit so that it was more likely to raise talents/attributes successfully (on lower levels, at least).
However, TDE is also a system that offers a lot of stuff for non-combat oriented characters or the (in comparison) shitty classes.
Several classes existed practically for roleplaying reasons only and absolutely sucked in comparison to the "standard" classes for 95% of the typical adventure module stuff.
Nevertheless they existed and some people liked to play them. If you've got a good enough DM that shouldn't be a problem.
Anyway TDE characters are far less powerful in relation to "normal" NPCs than e.g. in DnD.

I like the idea that not all classes have to be "equal". Even though at times, it was a bit extreme and at times you could read between the lines that they didn't want the players to even try to play elven characters because elves where "too special". In that regard, the RoA games were actually more accessible - witches, druids and elves where all more or less viable classes in the trilogy at a time, when they hardly where in the PnP.

 

[Gord]

Yes, TDE could get a bit schizophrenic at times with their classes.
Although in the case of elves, it never seemed that big a deal to me (well, at least if you used the standard Auelf/meadow elf class), most of it was fluff to balance the relatively potent elven classes a bit.

 

[Monstrous Bat]

One major difference tho is that you don't have a dungeon master in video game. If I see a broken bridge, I can come up with a dozen of possible solutions to overcome this obstacle, and DM will accept any of them with one result or another. Video game just gives me 2 or 3, and it doesn't give a flying fuck about all those repair tools I got, or Rainbow Hue spell I developed. "Either take an 8-hour detour or turn back".

Not to mention in PnP games you will usually know which spell does what before you're asked to pick a bunch of spells your character knows. RoA apparently expects you to guess the spells' function by nothing more than its name. Doesn't smell very PnP to me.

The description was originally in the manual (standard for rpgs of past days), but GoG version somehow fucked it up. Their manual doesn't have "Arcane Lore" section AT ALL. So here is the full original manual of RoA:
http://www.lemonamiga.com/?mainurl=http://www.lemonamiga.com/games/docs.php?id=1335

Holy shit man, I was never aware that there existed a manual of BoD which actually explains what the spells do. That changes everything.

Also, apparently the one you linked to is the manual for the Amiga version. I wonder if the lack of spell descriptions in manual is a problem with all DOS versions of BoD, not just the GoG version?

 

[Grimwulf]

Also, apparently the one you linked to is the manual for the Amiga version. I wonder if the lack of spell descriptions in manual is a problem with all DOS versions of BoD, not just the GoG version?

Makes sence. Forum people blame GoG, and I didn't give it much thought.