roshan
Arcane
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2004
- Messages
- 2,444
Im stuck on the first map of the game (after exiting temple). where should i go exactly?! I explored the whole area but find no way out...
There is an exit to the south that leads to a village.
Im stuck on the first map of the game (after exiting temple). where should i go exactly?! I explored the whole area but find no way out...
Is this really how far we've fallen? Can't find an exit for the first map?
Did this get moved into this thread?Wonder if anyone could provide me some general impressions about this game.
...
One fact that I dislike in the lore is "gods" stuff.
- Combat is a clickfest with cooldowns
- While I don't think character creation and advancement is as bad as some do, it's still a dumbed-down version of 5e rules. Skills, proficiencies, archetypes, and spells are all mixed up together in a way that gets less satisfying the more you play.
- It runs like shit, and I don't have much faith they'll put in the work to optimize it at this point
- One save slot per character. Ugh.
- Extremely mediocre writing
- Mostly bad voice acting
- Make sure you set the play mode to default to "solo", otherwise you'll have random jackholes hopping into your SP game.
- I played up to the first town (Luskan), and have pretty much had enough. So far, the story has not mentioned gods.
Bottom line... I'm not giving them $20 for this.
One fact that I dislike in the lore is "gods" stuff. It is a thing that I dislike in general in fantasy settings: by rational thinking, it is hard to call a supernatural entity "a god", just because it has powers. "A god" is something that's existence is not a certainty, something you believe in, or not, but you're not sure if it is there or not. Because of this dung&dragons is a major decline for me - "gods" just exist there, they walked among humans and you have to deal with it. Why are they called "gods" then if they existence is assured?
Using your line of reasoning ("something that's existence is not a certainty, something you believe in, or not, but you're not sure if it is there or not") you could disprove of virtually every fantastical creature in fictional worlds. Ghosts? Vampires? Elves? How many of fantasy games have them?Wonder if anyone could provide me some general impressions about this game. My feelings are mixed about this - I liked the concept about self-written journal entries, the lore is quite nice, but that completely pathetic combat system just made me not interested in wasting time on this game. It is not "difficulty" when two people have hard time killing one wolf without getting gravely wounded. It is "tediousness".
One fact that I dislike in the lore is "gods" stuff. It is a thing that I dislike in general in fantasy settings: by rational thinking, it is hard to call a supernatural entity "a god", just because it has powers. "A god" is something that's existence is not a certainty, something you believe in, or not, but you're not sure if it is there or not. Because of this dung&dragons is a major decline for me - "gods" just exist there, they walked among humans and you have to deal with it. Why are they called "gods" then if they existence is assured?
This is wrong. You can find many Christians who will say their god did answer them. As the going says, "god works in mysterious way". Greek Mythology also had gods answering their people. Not answering has nothing to do with them being a god.None of them answered prayers of their followers. That's what make them "gods". They don't answer.
I think you are projecting your own beliefs, to be honest. To which I have to say, what you wrote about elves - just an "element of the fantasy world" - can be easily applied monoteistic gods too.Using your line of reasoning ("something that's existence is not a certainty, something you believe in, or not, but you're not sure if it is there or not") you could disprove of virtually every fantastical creature in fictional worlds. Ghosts? Vampires? Elves? How many of fantasy games have them?
I'm not sure you follow. Our world have had many gods before Christian one. None of them have been proved to be real. None of them answered prayers of their followers. That's what make them "gods". They don't answer. That's why I cringe when I see superguys with superpowers being called "gods". Why should you believe in something when you have clear proof that something exists? You don't believe - you have knowledge that it is real because it answered you, gave you a bit of their power or whatever. The fundament of believing in a deity is that you don't have a simple answer.
Other races and creatures like elves are just there, they're element of the fantasy world, okay. My butthurt is caused by giving a name "god" to something that shouldn't be called this way.
One fact that I dislike in the lore is "gods" stuff. It is a thing that I dislike in general in fantasy settings: by rational thinking, it is hard to call a supernatural entity "a god", just because it has powers. "A god" is something that's existence is not a certainty, something you believe in, or not, but you're not sure if it is there or not. Because of this dung&dragons is a major decline for me - "gods" just exist there, they walked among humans and you have to deal with it. Why are they called "gods" then if they existence is assured?
I agree.Never too much S.
Isn't that just a reference to the start of the game? It starts the day after the Moon Lord's winter solstice festival. And something did go wrong.
Foul Creep, Nauseate, Searing Light are purely damage-dealing spells iirc, with no status effect on the side. Then a lot of the debuff spells have also a damage-dealing component, like Hallucinogen.Finally got around to picking this one up and have spent a few minutes rolling characters + looking at the systems... am I wrong in stating that there is effectively no damage-dealing magic? I see lots of buffs and debuffs, and a couple of healing spells, but nothing that would make for a purely offensive caster.
If so then that seems like a pretty glaring oversight in a fantasy RPG... even games that are biased against spell-slinging (like D&D) at least had fireballs and stuff.
Also, this is fairly minor but the toons look identical to me regardless of gender... as in, the chicks are just as bulky and muscular as the dudes, and everyone kinda looks like they have a beard. Love the rest of the art and art design but this aspect of the sprites just puts me off.
Finally got around to picking this one up and have spent a few minutes rolling characters + looking at the systems... am I wrong in stating that there is effectively no damage-dealing magic? I see lots of buffs and debuffs, and a couple of healing spells, but nothing that would make for a purely offensive caster.
If so then that seems like a pretty glaring oversight in a fantasy RPG... even games that are biased against spell-slinging (like D&D) at least had fireballs and stuff.
Also, this is fairly minor but the toons look identical to me regardless of gender... as in, the chicks are just as bulky and muscular as the dudes, and everyone kinda looks like they have a beard. Love the rest of the art and art design but this aspect of the sprites just puts me off.
even games that are biased against spell-slinging (like D&D) at least had fireballs and stuff.