V_K
Arcane
Well, the key word is "used to".
IMO, those abominations are just there to allow the devellopers to brag about how much skillcheck they put in their games, while all those checks should be natural and invisible.
It is like watching a movie and having some messages on the bottom that tell you that the camera is panning, that there is a scenery, that this actor is famous, that this character is suspicious, that the climax will happen soon etc... LET ME WATCH THE MOVIE, DON'T BRAG ABOUT IT ! ! !
When you go to the restaurant, you don't want to know each recipe/ingredients/taste/etc.. You just want to eat it yourself.
Nah. http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...to-the-new-thread.75947/page-929#post-2949709IMO, those abominations are just there to allow the devellopers to brag about how much skillcheck they put in their games, while all those checks should be natural and invisible.
It is like watching a movie and having some messages on the bottom that tell you that the camera is panning, that there is a scenery, that this actor is famous, that this character is suspicious, that the climax will happen soon etc... LET ME WATCH THE MOVIE, DON'T BRAG ABOUT IT ! ! !
When you go to the restaurant, you don't want to know each recipe/ingredients/taste/etc.. You just want to eat it yourself.
Opened the conversation in the editor.Just got 2 Prosperity Tower. Made it to Lab level (after doing the other 2 floors). Is there no way to bluff the guards into thinking I'm Omega level? Or is this where the final combat gauntlet begins?
I'm almost certain that this is the way that I will proceed - Attribute check name only, without a number.In systems where the stats checked increase throughout the game, such as SR:HK or PoE's skills, it's useful to know when your skills are being checked or if you can't hit an option because of a low skill check, as it influences the decision on what to improve at level up. I'd be perfectly happy with a blank option with only the skill checked noted, though.
What a shocker.Pretty boring, actually.
A successful strength check may scare the guard and make him call the guard and failed one will result in him not taking you seriously. It's interesting concept.One way to hide the check but tip to the player that hus skills matter is to actually hide the skill check from the player dialog option and show something like "Decking 3 required, skill check failed." on the NPC reaction, if you don't have enough to pass the check, your skill check will backfire, to make selecting those skill check responses not something 100% safe would be something like "ironic" consequences where a failure was actually something good or a success was actually a bad thing. That barter skill check on Dean Domino on Dead Money is an example of this.
Etiquettes are weird because sometimes they imply your character has the knowledge (he was a ganger and knows the streets for example) or that he just knows enough to simulate having knowledge (your character wasn't a ganger but know a few, limited knowledge, just enough to pretend having it). Etiquettes would be far better if you could only select one at the start of the game and you could use charisma (the social intelligence, the ability of lying with conviction) to pretend having the others.Its weird if you can pass security check without knowing anything on the subject for example
Yeah, this is also the conclusion that I came to. I will have to brainstorm the etiquettes a little more.1 problem with you example. Etiquettes come from charisma. For builds to talk their way through through the game: High cha, many eti. As such bonus to cha is laughable.
But yeah, I like the idea that you can use it to help your poor STR/Will etc instead of just success. Its weird if you can pass security check without knowing anything on the subject for example
Unfortunately the editor doesn't give you such option.Etiquettes would be far better if you could only select one at the start of the game and you could use charisma (the social intelligence, the ability of lying with conviction) to pretend having the others.
Well, you have to write the "Get help from a companion" dialogue option manually. The engine uses tags (keywords) given to each actor to make checks and other functionalities.another thing is companions help. Im not sure how it works since I did every check by myself, but I wonder how is it handled.
If you find str 5 check, ability to grab companion help is hardcoded each time or is handled nicely by engine?
Sorry, I can't understand what you mean.If 2nd, do you want that external help to work with eti?
A successful strength check may scare the guard and make him call the guard and failed one will result in him not taking you seriously. It's interesting concept.
The way that I'm going to implement the Etiquette's is make them give you bonuses to different checks. For example in a conversation with corp exec, a dialogue option with [Charisma Check] is going to be successful on Charisma > 4 or Charisma > 3 and Corporate Etiquette.
Unfortunately the editor doesn't give you such option.
one solution would be to give chars with the fitting etiquette an automatic success, while others could test their charisma against a random attribute check. 1d20+attr >= predefined dc.Unfortunately the editor doesn't give you such option.
Such option are not hard to implement. The engine can also check team member attributes.perfect sense.
My last question:
Lets say there is 6 STR check. Etiquette x can lower it by 2. You still dont have 4STR. What you do have however is bulky companion. Would you enable him to help with that check: at 4STR/full 6/ half the value: 5/or dont enable this at all.
Or a featured a startup dialogue where the character can select his background and the etiquetes to be for "pretending" or "additional knowledge".What if a Mission had 3 Routes.. One required Corporate / Security Background and one Required more street smarts from Shadow Runner and Gang Member.. We never really got those. As it stands.. it's kind of a crap shoot on what kind of missions you get and if your Etiquette will do diddly squat. I love your idea of just having them fudge numbers in your favor instead of being a make or break for charismatic solutions.
You could do this by assigning the First picked Etiquette to a Variable and use that as their "Background" choice then all future Etiquette checks are "I'm pretending to be ____"
It would be annoying as fuck to deal with it in conversations and you would need to explain it to the player upfront so they know the gravity of their choices.
Such option are not hard to implement. The engine can also check team member attributes.
Or a featured a startup dialogue where the character can select his background and the etiquetes to be for "pretending" or "additional knowledge".