Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Teneb" data-source="post: 215351" data-attributes="member: 3572">A couple of things here:Regarding an NDA: I assume he's getting all of this from the beta toolset released to the public, so that's not a problem.&nbsp; Now, on to MoH's post:While its true that any item can have any property (and I can't comment on the costs issue, haven't used the toolset yet), keep in mind that players can't make items, only DM's.&nbsp;&nbsp; Don't want to give your players access to an item with True Seeing on it?&nbsp; Don't give it to them.&nbsp; Simple as that.You also misrepresent True Seeing a little.&nbsp; Bioware has specifically stated the spell DOES NOT reveal traps, though it does reveal hiden and invisible creatures.&nbsp; Exactly like the PHB spell?&nbsp; No.&nbsp; The stated reason is that illusions, by and large, are not in the game (too hard to make a GUI for them).&nbsp; In order to make True Seeing more powerful than the 2nd(?) level spell See Invisible, they had to give TS more of a kick.&nbsp; This is why it reveals hiden characters (which See Invisible does not).Hong basically hit the nail on the head.&nbsp; Its hard to translate a game that takes place in your head to a CRPG.&nbsp; I agree that Biowares track record indicates that, while not perfect, the game will still be fairly adherent to 3e rules.MoH speaks about 3e's finely tuned and balanced system and goes on to say NWN will destroy it.&nbsp; Hate to say it, but there are a lot of folks who would disagree about the finely balanced point.&nbsp; A lot of the splatbooks are decried as horribly unbalancing by a lot of people.&nbsp; I know, I know...apples and oranges since splatbook material isn't covered by the initial release of NWN.&nbsp; But I hope you see my point.Finally, MoH says blind faith in a company because they've done well in the past is a bad idea...I counter that judging a game before you have the final product in your hands is equally......questionable.Teneb</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Teneb, post: 215351, member: 3572"] A couple of things here: Regarding an NDA: I assume he's getting all of this from the beta toolset released to the public, so that's not a problem. Now, on to MoH's post: While its true that any item can have any property (and I can't comment on the costs issue, haven't used the toolset yet), keep in mind that players can't make items, only DM's. Don't want to give your players access to an item with True Seeing on it? Don't give it to them. Simple as that. You also misrepresent True Seeing a little. Bioware has specifically stated the spell DOES NOT reveal traps, though it does reveal hiden and invisible creatures. Exactly like the PHB spell? No. The stated reason is that illusions, by and large, are not in the game (too hard to make a GUI for them). In order to make True Seeing more powerful than the 2nd(?) level spell See Invisible, they had to give TS more of a kick. This is why it reveals hiden characters (which See Invisible does not). Hong basically hit the nail on the head. Its hard to translate a game that takes place in your head to a CRPG. I agree that Biowares track record indicates that, while not perfect, the game will still be fairly adherent to 3e rules. MoH speaks about 3e's finely tuned and balanced system and goes on to say NWN will destroy it. Hate to say it, but there are a lot of folks who would disagree about the finely balanced point. A lot of the splatbooks are decried as horribly unbalancing by a lot of people. I know, I know...apples and oranges since splatbook material isn't covered by the initial release of NWN. But I hope you see my point. Finally, MoH says blind faith in a company because they've done well in the past is a bad idea...I counter that judging a game before you have the final product in your hands is equally......questionable. Teneb [/QUOTE]

Verification