Shadowrun Shadowrun: Dragonfall - Director's Cut

[tuluse]

Hmmm. I would say it could be more open for sure, and still has some limited-scope aspects that bug me. You're mostly right though, there's no intended aspect of the game I would say was done poorly.

Etiquettes.

 

[DalekFlay]

Hmmm. I would say it could be more open for sure, and still has some limited-scope aspects that bug me. You're mostly right though, there's no intended aspect of the game I would say was done poorly.

Etiquettes.

They could be used more often and for greater importance, for sure. I like the idea though. Didn't they increase them in the director's cut?

 

[SarcasticUndertones]

Etiquettes.

The lack of them doesn't make it poorly done, there can always be calls for more stuff.

 

[Shadowfang]

Hmmm. I would say it could be more open for sure, and still has some limited-scope aspects that bug me. You're mostly right though, there's no intended aspect of the game I would say was done poorly.

Etiquettes.

They could be used more often and for greater importance, for sure. I like the idea though. Didn't they increase them in the director's cut?

I think they did. For example, and if i am not mistaken, the Shadowrunner etiquette had no checks before the directors cut.

 

[tuluse]

Etiquettes.

The lack of them doesn't make it poorly done, there can always be calls for more stuff.

Randomly picking them with no idea of what you will get from them is already terrible design. When you add extremely poor between the various ones, you get extra terrible design.

It's so bad, they had to make everything they do ancillary, so in the end it doesn't really matter if you have them or not.

 

[DalekFlay]

Randomly picking them with no idea of what you will get from them is already terrible design. When you add extremely poor between the various ones, you get extra terrible design.

It's so bad, they had to make everything they do ancillary, so in the end it doesn't really matter if you have them or not.

Can't agree on the not knowing thing. It's a nice role-playing choice that defines your character in a way which will be important sometimes, not others, etc. New Vegas did the same thing with a ton of skill checks in dialog that were a lot more varied than just speechcraft every time. I enjoyed that as well.

 

[dryan]

Speaking about etiquettes:

Spoiler

if you have the Socialite etiquette and use it to grab a bottle of expensive liquor from the cabinet at the MKVI run, what do you gain out of it? Just an item for sale, or do you get to use it in another way? I never get this etiquette so I grab the cheap booze every time.

And BTW,

Spoiler

what do you do with the CEO sex video that you get from some DC new content (Trial Run maybe)? Do you get to sell it? I tried to see if I could offer it on Shadowlands BBS but to no avail.

 

[SarcasticUndertones]

Etiquettes.

The lack of them doesn't make it poorly done, there can always be calls for more stuff.

Randomly picking them with no idea of what you will get from them is already terrible design. When you add extremely poor between the various ones, you get extra terrible design.

It's so bad, they had to make everything they do ancillary, so in the end it doesn't really matter if you have them or not.

But everything is randomly picked when you build a character.. there is no omnipotence in this game.

 

[Shadowfang]

My turn, my turn!
The character progression and character creation is really shallow.
Other than troll, picking a race doesn't have really have an impact on the game.

The magic system, including shamanic summons, are shamefully simple specially when compared with the pnp versions.

 

[SarcasticUndertones]

*Raspberry*

 

[Shadowfang]

Etiquettes.

The lack of them doesn't make it poorly done, there can always be calls for more stuff.

Randomly picking them with no idea of what you will get from them is already terrible design. When you add extremely poor between the various ones, you get extra terrible design.

It's so bad, they had to make everything they do ancillary, so in the end it doesn't really matter if you have them or not.

But everything is randomly picked when you build a character.. there is no omnipotence in this game.

Thats why you pick custom class instead.

 

[SarcasticUndertones]

Etiquettes.

The lack of them doesn't make it poorly done, there can always be calls for more stuff.

Randomly picking them with no idea of what you will get from them is already terrible design. When you add extremely poor between the various ones, you get extra terrible design.

It's so bad, they had to make everything they do ancillary, so in the end it doesn't really matter if you have them or not.

But everything is randomly picked when you build a character.. there is no omnipotence in this game.

Thats why you pick custom class instead.

But you're still not going to be able to build for all eventualities, unless it's your second playthough.

 

[agris]

More racial awareness would have been nice, as would a proper inventory where you could give items to companions outside of the mission loadout screen. Hell, ordering a companion to loot an item outside of combat would have been nice.

Regarding etiquettes, I wish they had gone with fewer broad-based ones. Keeping all the current in game checks but reducing the pool to 4 would have made them feel more impactful.

I second eyeball's opinion though, the game was consistently fun and engaging. I would throw money at a new campaign.

 

[Shadowfang]

Etiquettes.

The lack of them doesn't make it poorly done, there can always be calls for more stuff.

Randomly picking them with no idea of what you will get from them is already terrible design. When you add extremely poor between the various ones, you get extra terrible design.

It's so bad, they had to make everything they do ancillary, so in the end it doesn't really matter if you have them or not.

But everything is randomly picked when you build a character.. there is no omnipotence in this game.

Thats why you pick custom class instead.

But you're still not going to be able to build for all eventualities, unless it's your second playthough.

I am probably not getting it, because that doesn't sound like a bad thing and is pretty common in rpgs.

 

[SarcasticUndertones]

I am probably not getting it, because that doesn't sound like a bad thing and is pretty common in rpgs.

It isn't a bad thing, you got it right, it's the same stance I take, mine was a reply to Tuluse who was proposing that not knowing before hand how to build was a design flaw.

 

[Athelas]

Randomly picking them with no idea of what you will get from them is already terrible design. When you add extremely poor between the various ones, you get extra terrible design.

It's so bad, they had to make everything they do ancillary, so in the end it doesn't really matter if you have them or not.

Can't agree on the not knowing thing. It's a nice role-playing choice that defines your character in a way which will be important sometimes, not others, etc. New Vegas did the same thing with a ton of skill checks in dialog that were a lot more varied than just speechcraft every time. I enjoyed that as well.

I don't see how they're comparable. You had plenty of reasons to take the skills in Fallout: New Vegas without their dialogue benefits. The etiquettes are just differently labeled speechcrafts.

 

[Shadowfang]

Oh okay. Well some etiquettes are pretty useless and thats flaw in my book.

 

[DalekFlay]

I don't see how they're comparable. You had plenty of reasons to take the skills in Fallout: New Vegas without their dialogue benefits.

The complaint was about not knowing when and how the etiquettes would be useful in dialog. I don't think that's a requirement for choosing speech perks and talents in any RPG. It's always more of a "oh I can convince this guy" surprise during a quest.

And of course no one makes you invest in them anyway, you do it to role-play a persuasive PC.

 

[SarcasticUndertones]

Oh okay. Well some etiquettes are pretty useless and thats flaw in my book.

But there are checks for all of them in the game. I chose Security and got 1, I don't feel that the lack of them is a bad thing, it would just be nice if there were more.

 

[Shadowfang]

If i am not mistaken Security is one of the most common ettiquetes.

 

[Athelas]

The complaint was about not knowing when and how the etiquettes would be useful in dialog. I don't think that's a requirement for choosing speech perks and talents in any RPG. It's always more of a "oh I can convince this guy" surprise during a quest.

And of course no one makes you invest in them anyway, you do it to role-play a persuasive PC.

Sure, but in this case the problem is exacerbated by the fact that there isn't one speech/persuade skill, but a bunch of different ones, varying wildly in usefulness. Skills in RPG's shouldn't have one specific use, they should have a bunch of different uses. Not only is this more interesting/fun, but it also makes it easier to make them useful. That's why dialogue skills are usually not that well-designed.

 

[Shadowfang]

I don't see how they're comparable. You had plenty of reasons to take the skills in Fallout: New Vegas without their dialogue benefits.

The complaint was about not knowing when and how the etiquettes would be useful in dialog. I don't think that's a requirement for choosing speech perks and talents in any RPG. It's always more of a "oh I can convince this guy" surprise during a quest.

And of course no one makes you invest in them anyway, you do it to role-play a persuasive PC.

Much better than the etiquettes is how Serpent in the Staglands is handling the Aptitudes.
Woodwise allows you to talk with animals, linguists with people from other cultures, nobility gives you more options with high borne characters and you get the idea.

 

[SarcasticUndertones]

If i am not mistaken Security is one of the most common ettiquetes.

Then I must have a faulty brain, which I'm quite willing to admit.

Sure, but in this case the problem is exacerbated by the fact that there isn't one speech/persuade skill, but a bunch of different ones, varying wildly in usefulness. Skills in RPG's shouldn't have one specific use, they should have a bunch of different uses. Not only is this more interesting/fun, but it also makes it easier to make them useful. That's why dialogue skills are usually not that well-designed.

I would disagree with this.

I don't see why an overall charismatic person would be able to take advantage of individual skill knowledge.. maybe as a fasttalk, or bullshitter skill, but the individual checks usually take advantage of specific situations or situational knowledge. I find that use of these skills to be quite acceptable and therefore a reasonable justification for their design in this manner.

 

[tuluse]

I would disagree with this.

I don't see why an overall charismatic person would be able to take advantage of individual skill knowledge.. maybe as a fasttalk, or bullshitter skill, but the individual checks usually take advantage of specific situations or situational knowledge. I find that use of these skills to be quite acceptable and therefore a reasonable justification for their design in this manner.

Because RPGs are not an attempt to recreate real life, they're an attempt to abstract it in a fun way. Etiquette are not fun, nor interesting. It's just blinding throwing darts and seeing what sticks. Especially if you take them after character generation and you are part way through the game.

 

[SarcasticUndertones]

I would disagree with this.

I don't see why an overall charismatic person would be able to take advantage of individual skill knowledge.. maybe as a fasttalk, or bullshitter skill, but the individual checks usually take advantage of specific situations or situational knowledge. I find that use of these skills to be quite acceptable and therefore a reasonable justification for their design in this manner.

Because RPGs are not an attempt to recreate real life, they're an attempt to abstract it in a fun way. Etiquette are not fun, nor interesting. It's just blinding throwing darts and seeing what sticks. Especially if you take them after character generation and you are part way through the game.

Opinion.

I have a different definition of what is and isn't fun, and I certainly don't think that just because my character doesn't know everything or doesn't have the option of talking his/her/it's self out of every situation, regardless of the grounding that would be required to do so, makes something 'not fun'.

I actually think that a character having a specific set of skill abilities/knowledge makes the game better rather than being in a 'one stat for everything' situation.

EDIT.. I'd actually even go as far as to say that this very kind of thing is what helps the game retain a truthful (to itself) atmosphere, it wouldn't be justifiable to consider that a charismatic person has situational knowledge just because 'everyone loves him, he's so uber', in fact if it did work this way that would kill my belief, or rather ability to suspend disbelief, in the created world.