computer games forum

fabulaparva wrote:Having said that, I would have actually preferred to have everything taken away from them, possibly making an exception for what they'd have equipped. The Dingirra arena could just give them some crappy weapons in the beginning for show. Losing all possessions would make the story feel more real and all that jazz, despite powerful spells, etc. :D

Yeah, from a story perspective it makes sense for them to lose all their equipment, but from a gameplay perspective, if you did that then you'd discourage people from caring about gold (both obtaining and spending) in the first act. Unless they lost their gear for a brief time period, then it might work out okay, but for an entire act? Why bother buying anything? (Or rather, just buy all the one-shot items that are powerful because anything permanent will go away.)

The story inconsistency won't be too bad either, considering you start in the arena at level 1, then go back in time to level up to 5-7 and return to the arena.

Are we on the same page here? I'm just saying losing all gold is bad from a gameplay perspective. Equipment is kept and it should be.

I was replying to the other person. I'm more indifferent when it comes to gold as I usually end up with hundreds more than I can spend*, and I'm sure the same will be true by the end of Act 2. Though I do see what you're saying about encouraging people to spend their money on junk items (unless only equipped items persist, but that might be confusing, and you could still buy trash rings).

No don't you dare touch that

(and it's 370g)

It definitely needs to be dropped now! Especially since there's no actual consequence for it.

150-200g is about what you get for a dozen pelts normally, isn't it?

It's always 10 rare pelts you steal, and they are worth 75g each, vendors pay half the value, erroneously rounded down to 37 because Jack is a mean babyeater.

I'm broke all the time on nightmare, even with stealing pelts

Don't worry you can make money in second act In the grand scheme of things even losing 500g after first act won't be an issue at all!
And from a story perspective, is much more likely that they grab your gold and leave your items (otherwise, what you use to fight in the Arena? bare hands? ) than the opposite!

Troyen wrote: Yeah, from a story perspective it makes sense for them to lose all their equipment, but from a gameplay perspective, if you did that then you'd discourage people from caring about gold (both obtaining and spending) in the first act. Unless they lost their gear for a brief time period, then it might work out okay, but for an entire act? Why bother buying anything? (Or rather, just buy all the one-shot items that are powerful because anything permanent will go away.)

True, I was concentrating mainly on the story. I've played at least one RPG before where, between episodes, all my character's money, weapons and even house were taken away. After a brief 'WTF?'-moment, I was fine with that, but I was not fine about some of my levels and skills disappearing, too. The material things can be taken away for all I care, if it benefits the storyline, but for taking levels and skills away .... that would really need some fancy story-telling to have it not hurt "just" the gameplay. I hope that won't happen!

Fighting with bare hands? Nuuuu....that's not what I was going for. Thinking back to stories like Spartacus, the Gladiator, Dragonlance (the Twins' story, Caramon having to fight in mock-gladiator fights), one of the things that happened was that the arena slaves/fighters did not get to use their own weapons, but were given some weapons by the Arena. This makes sense, as then the fight organizers have more control on the fights, and even a possibility to "cripple" a certain fighter they want to die (or, more likely, a certain slave owner they want to lose) by giving them a bad weapon. It's like rigged dice. But with more mortality. Why risk letting the fighters keep their own weapons? What if one of them has the Hawk Blade or something?

Anyway, I'm not trying to insist that the weapons should be taken away. If they'll stay in the game, there are plenty of ways to justify that as well, like it was already pointed out.


As to the pelts.. do we really know that dishonest actions during the first Act don't have repercussions later on - say close to the end in Act IV?

fabulaparva wrote: As to the pelts.. do we really know that dishonest actions during the first Act don't have repercussions later on - say close to the end in Act IV?

Mouhaha you can't know!
I won't say anything to avoid spoilers, since there are many plot twists and in particular the last act has several WTF moments

jack1974 wrote:

fabulaparva wrote: As to the pelts.. do we really know that dishonest actions during the first Act don't have repercussions later on - say close to the end in Act IV? :?

Mouhaha you can't know! :twisted:
I won't say anything to avoid spoilers, since there are many plot twists and in particular the last act has several WTF moments :mrgreen:

Liars and thiefs will be rewarded with Rafik as life partner?