Vault Dweller said:
Dementia Praecox said:
If you don't have these types dialogue options in the game at this point, how does the game play as a "dumb" character now? Just more limited dialogue options?
Yes. Plus some extra dialogue options/quests/paths. When I made this thread, I meant flavor - unique text, reflecting your character's low INT background, not the actual options.
Well, I vote yes. That was the general gist of my post, actually. I really liked what I read in you OP, and more of that would definitely be a good thing. I wouldn't mind waiting another year (or two) if that's what it takes to implement a good "dumb" way of playing the game. It has to be of the type in your OP or even better, like the suggestion Section8 wrote, for it to be justified though. I'll play it that way for sure, and if I weren't sold already, it'd be a big selling point. Be sure to pimp it properly if you decide to implement it.
Vault Dweller said:
Anyone read "The Stars My Destination" by Alfred Bester? Awesome book, highly recommend. Anyway, the main character, Gulliver Foyle wasn't dumb, he was simply uneducated, and that's the kind of character I wanted to create. If anything I used Foyle as a prototype.
Seeing as this was one of my favorite novels during my childhood, you've got me sold (again). My uncle has the complete Galaxy Science Fiction from the beginning to the mid seventies, loved to read them when I was visiting during vacations. I have it in hard cover myself, along with The demolished man and Psychoshop.
Vault Dweller said:
I sure won't play AoD for the promised innovative tactical combat, (i.e. it's seemingly not one of the main focus points).
I didn't promise anything innovative or overly tactical, but combat IS one of the main focus points and those who had a chance to play the game liked it a lot and even suggested to make a dungeon crawler game using the same combat system later. We also have an article coming up explaining the combat system and illustrating it with screenshots.
Sounds very good, and I'm looking forward to the article. It's been a long time since the combat system-specifics has been up for discussion. Come to think of it, if I recall correctly you once mentioned to release a demo showing of the combat system. Will there be one?=
Vault Dweller said:
I've yet to find a good argument to play a combat focused character.
Because it's fun? I mean playing combat-focused characters in general. I played ToEE 8 or 9 times. The combat system is amazing. These things are subjective though.
Well, I love Jagged Alliances, and of course I see the incentive to play a combat focused character in a RPG. There is, after all, a reason to the action RPG to RPG-ratio, these days. However, I've never found an RPG that's fully satisfying in this regard, and it's not why I play RPGs in the first place. After a certain point in Fallout, combat always becomes a chore, and in Arcanum it is a pain the entire way through. For TOEE, I played it when it came out, but I had some serious troubles with all the bugs and gave up. Seeing all the praise it gets around here, I'll definitely try it again with the circle of 8 patch.
Vault Dweller said:
...however, would be if a "dumb" character build don't have anything to differentiate it from a smarter one, in any other way than fewer dialogue options and more effective ways to kill some one.
Combat skills will open some doors and sometimes create shortcuts that a talkative character will never see. Playing a combat character does NOT mean that all you do is fight. There are different dialogue/gameplay options, reflecting what your character is. I can post an example, if you like.
Sounds great, I'll expect some extreme collar grabbing options for my dumb, brute, mercenary. And an example is always welcome.