You also didn’t hear about it because it’s not great. I watched a stream of it: the gameplay looks uninspired, like a student project to mimic Burnout, and the visuals would have looked dated in 2010.

But it was functional. So it’s neither good nor bad enough to rave about. You just say “huh”, flip a coin, and either uninstall forever or play every 7 months when you remember it’s on your hard drive.

You are in essence gatekeeping enjoying a video game as a concept. Like people must enjoy them the way you envision.

What an incredibly inaccurate statement. I love modding video games, I spend more time modding video games than I spend playing video games. I understand that the vision developers have doesn’t often align with what I want from their product.

I don’t agree that developers should be spending dev cycles making a game functional for a user that turns off any configuration of gameplay mechanics.

Saying you can just set a variable from “true to false” is so laughably misunderstanding what goes into software development much less game development that it sounds entitled. What gameplay mechanics are you even saying should be configurable? All of them? Just turn off the combat in a fighting game? At what point is a gameplay mechanic integral to the genre/experience? And who is the person or persons that decide?

Developers should be free to create what they want, and the end user is free to mod it however they want. That includes, for the devs, not purposefully obfuscating things so that modding is more diffcult.

I disagree because it solely approaches games as some sort of “electronic commodity” and outright despises a development group’s artistry.

Sure, not every game is trying to be art. But games have long gone beyond the realm of simply “entertain me”. That opinion is like saying “books should be made in a way that allows users to change the story whenever and however they want.” It is something you can do but there’s no imperative to cater to it.

The book gives you examples of how DCs should translates to the world. Is this vaulting a head high wall, climbing a crumbling 2-story building, or scaling the outside of a tower in a storm? That need to know the number is only a problem when the table lets numbers replace story.

“You back up to get a running start and trip on a misplaced cobblestone just before you reach the wall.” = you rolled a 2 and failed

“You latch into the crevices between bricks and skillfully clamber up until the window is within sight. There is only a one, last leap to make, when the brick beneath your anchor leg crumbles and gives way. You landed winded, but someone else might now chart a better route.” = you rolled an 18 and only just failed

“You built as much speed as you could and manage to launch up against the rain-slick tower but your fingers fail to find any purchase, and you scrabble helplessly back to the ground.” = You rolled a 19 and weren’t even close to a success

Yeah, people that want to be their D&D characters are probably skewed by happy memories of a world that might occassionally challenge them but ultimately wants them to enjoy themselves and be the hero/protagonist.

That is to say, a fantasy world.

I think we should see what it’s priced at before we start making proclamations about the Steam Machine being the “standard gaming PC”.

Oh, I’m not diagnosed (I have a host of other things I would spend my nonexistant healthcare fund on first) but I have suspicions. It’s not debilitating, because I’ve been doing it for a couple decades now, but it sure isn’t ideal.

How can leakers confirm anything? Some fourth-party leaks confirmed that third-party leaks were legit? If I was going to believe “leaks” without material proof, I’d have started with the original, third-party.

What is “it”? I can’t trace that back to my comment.

Indie and AA.

I’ve gotten release copies of games for review. Unless they have another secret tier of pressers, this is nonsense. If anything, review copies are more likely to have bugs that making completing the game harder.

Stick to your day job, m8. The jokes ain’t landing especially when the whole “joke” is a weak-ass personal attack.

Do better. Or better yet, give up.

Really? You use the meme that basically says “you’re dumping a lot of irrelevant info in the wrong place” and have the audacity to get pissy when they hit you back with…a different meme?

The gall to call someone “emotionally damaged” when you immediately read an attack from an exchange of memes.

Haven’t any of y’all tried being incompetent?

I try to avoid caffeine, so I just am unhelpful instead.

The only Italian town of towers I recognize is “San Gimignano”. Shoutout to AC2.

Yeah, warlocks are just cutthroat clerics with off-market gods. If each of them had enough magical power to fuel another warlock’s power, they wouldn’t need to be a warlock at all.

Maybe I’m suddenly shite at games but parrying feels like happenstance rather than a technique. The block windup is too long for me to react to the quick strike they throw out. It feels like Skyrim combat, from a “battle flow” standpoint.

Yeah but what about the remaining 94 to 83% of regular people who rightly judged their ability to judo-chop a bear to death? Or does having the self-awareness to know you probably can’t win against a bear make you abnormal? I didn’t miss the point, I scaled the challenge. Because a bear is much less threatening and dangerous than a 20 ft giant.

Listing that stat is just assuming that adventurers are mainly pulled from the 6% group who, once they get their hand on a bit more power, would try something even dumber. I don’t think that is reasonable.

And the backgrounds in most RPGs are so varied that you can’t map it on to any amount of training. A background as a soldier might mean you spent years fighting and then you start as a level 1 fighter, so it took you decades to reach level 2. Or you could be a farmhand and then, after a couple weeks of travel later, you’re now a level 2 sorcerer. A year of serious BJJ training is rather generous.

Wasn’t familiar with “Touch of Death”; I don’t play clerics often. But it’s just a smite.

Assuming average HP on level up and +3 CON mod: Barb: 25; Fighter: 22; Cleric: 19.

And Touch of Death does +9 damage at level 2.

I’m only breaking out numbers to get a better idea of what the users of the ability would be seeing, and what level of lethality they would come to expect from repeated usage. And that’s not killing anyone with a touch except commoners, and level 1 wizards and sorcerers.

My only point is: people who have had to risk their life to even get to level 2 (unless they’re reckless or an idiot) probably wouldn’t have an overly big head over middling magical abilities. They might be feeling themselves and think they can fight a group of thugs at 4 to 1 odds but it’s bonkers to pretend a normal adventurer would need some ex machina explanation to warn them off fighting something like a giant or a dragon at level 2.

Again, if you want to play a character that doesn’t think well, that’s fine. But 6% (or even 17%) is not a majority of people and when a person sees something taller than most houses looming over them, I assume the average person would correctly adjust their chances of success.

This is about the need for a GM to establish for PCs that they can’t engage a giant in combat. Most people don’t do a year of BJJ and think they and 3 mates can wrestle down an elephant. I just have a higher opinion of people’s self-preservation instincts, especially when they haven’t been as far removed from nature as most people on the internet are. People used to be afraid of forests and the wilds, and I think that level of society is closer to RPGs than we are.