Eternity Does Pillars of Eternity have feature parity with Baldur's Gate?

[MjKorz]

D&D's abstractions are all intended to represent something real and/or easily understandable.

They aren't, DnD is just a rollercoaster of abstraction with no intent to simulate anything, a system that relies purely on internal gameplay logic and lacks common sense when exposed to real life comparisons. For example, let's take the simplest case of armor. Armor in DnD grants you an AC bonus, yet doesn't grant any inherent DR. In fact, a naked Barbarian has more DR than a fully armored Fighter wearing full plate and wielding a tower shield. Another example is strength determining the accuracy of non-finesseable melee attacks: a fighter using a shortsword without weapon finesse has to rely on raw strength for accuracy. Third example would be dexterity not influencing the speed of actions when it represents hand-eye coordination. A fourth example would be the ability to interrupt spells by inflicting damage, but not other actions such as attacking with melee weapons or performing complex weapon manipulations such as reloading a crossbow. There is no way to "easily understand" this retardation, the internal logic of the system is completely decoupled from real life comparisons and serves only to create a functional system, not a realistic or even "understandable" one.

PoE's systems are far more abstract.

This is false and it's easily provable. First of all, armor in PoE provides different DR values against different attacks, depending on the armor. This is intuitive and understandable.

Accuracy for all attacks and spells in PoE is determined by perception. This is intuitive and understandable even in the case of spellcasting.

Action speed in PoE is determined by dexterity. This is intuitive and understandable.

Most abilities, spells, attacks, reload and other actions can be interrupted with attacks that have a sufficiently high interrupt value which is based both on weapon and perception. Intuitive and understandable.

So where does your claim stem from? From the sole fact that spell and physical damage in PoE is defined by a single attribute - might? The internal logic of the system defines this in an understandable way: might is not mere physical strength, it is a combination of both physical and spiritual strength and the in-game attribute checks reflect this well: might is used both for physical actions as well as for intimidating others - inflicting fear. Compare the example of might to that of AC - a sum of both the ability to dodge attacks and the armor's ability to not get penetrated.

A proper examination reveals that PoE systems are far less abstract than those of D&D.

In D&D, a hold person spell holds a person.

Except hold spell doesn't "hold a person", it inflicts mental paralysis which is why the spell doesn't work on undead.

And it has a massive impact on the fight as it prevents an enemy from moving.

So just like Fetid Caress that inflicts paralysis on a target and "prevents it from moving"?

But Sawyer thinks not being able to move at all is too harsh a consequence for being hit by a spell.

Except the Wizard alone has 4 spells that inflict paralysis: Fetid Caress, Arkemyr's Capricious Hex, Ninagauth's Shadoflame, Tayn's Chaotic Orb. And there are other non-wizard effects that inflict paralysis.

So his hold person just... slows a person.

No, it doesn't. Arduous Delay of Motion is the DnD equivalent of Slow.

A lot of D&D spells have immediate battlefield-changing effects.

Just like PoE spells have devastating and immediate disabling effects: blindness, paralysis, petrification, domination, confusion, prone, stun, unconsciousness.

It's a system that's extremely obsessed with numbers, to the point of neglecting actual effects.

Except it doesn't neglect anything as was demonstrated above.

TL;DR: your entire post is just self-masturbatory drivel that is outright wrong when it comes to gameplay facts.

 

[Butter]

Accuracy for all attacks and spells in PoE is determined by perception.

Thanks for reminding me. This is actually retarded. You throw a Chill Fog at your opponent. He's standing right in the middle of it. His difficulty in resisting its effect is modified by how perceptively you cast it.

 

[kangaxx]

I realised ~20h into POE that I had no idea who my character was, what they were doing or why. Also who any of the people in my party were or why any of them had tagged along. I was well into Act 2 or 3 by that point.

 

[TumblingTorin]

POE was such a disappointment. Not even straight garbage, just dull and meh. I could never finish it, and I tried like 4 times to get through the game. Even with all the patches, it still felt like a slog to get through. That includes the writing and combat. In fact, most of the game didn't felt that great to me, just ok at best. You got a handful of things that stands out, but most things in the game just felt like a bootleg version of D&D.

The unique stuff involving souls was stupid. The non-stop talking about souls. Everything you do involve souls. Cleric don't cast spells because god gave it to them, it's because the powers of their souls! Like holy shit, it felt so much like the Force being space bacteria. No mysticism at all.

Playing POE just made me appreciate the D&D games more.

Accuracy for all attacks and spells in PoE is determined by perception.

Thanks for reminding me. This is actually retarded. You throw a Chill Fog at your opponent. He's standing right in the middle of it. His difficulty in resisting its effect is modified by how perceptively you cast it.

I remember the first versions of Pillars when perception didn't affect accuracy. In fact, none of the stats did. Sawyer was very insistent of doing it like that, I don't know why.

 

[Beans00]

D&D's abstractions are all intended to represent something real and/or easily understandable.

They aren't, DnD is just a rollercoaster of abstraction with no intent to simulate anything, a system that relies purely on internal gameplay logic and lacks common sense when exposed to real life comparisons. For example, let's take the simplest case of armor. Armor in DnD grants you an AC bonus, yet doesn't grant any inherent DR. In fact, a naked Barbarian has more DR than a fully armored Fighter wearing full plate and wielding a tower shield. Another example is strength determining the accuracy of non-finesseable melee attacks: a fighter using a shortsword without weapon finesse has to rely on raw strength for accuracy. Third example would be dexterity not influencing the speed of actions when it represents hand-eye coordination. A fourth example would be the ability to interrupt spells by inflicting damage, but not other actions such as attacking with melee weapons or performing complex weapon manipulations such as reloading a crossbow. There is no way to "easily understand" this retardation, the internal logic of the system is completely decoupled from real life comparisons and serves only to create a functional system, not a realistic or even "understandable" one.

PoE's systems are far more abstract.

This is false and it's easily provable. First of all, armor in PoE provides different DR values against different attacks, depending on the armor. This is intuitive and understandable.

Accuracy for all attacks and spells in PoE is determined by perception. This is intuitive and understandable even in the case of spellcasting.

Action speed in PoE is determined by dexterity. This is intuitive and understandable.

Most abilities, spells, attacks, reload and other actions can be interrupted with attacks that have a sufficiently high interrupt value which is based both on weapon and perception. Intuitive and understandable.

So where does your claim stem from? From the sole fact that spell and physical damage in PoE is defined by a single attribute - might? The internal logic of the system defines this in an understandable way: might is not mere physical strength, it is a combination of both physical and spiritual strength and the in-game attribute checks reflect this well: might is used both for physical actions as well as for intimidating others - inflicting fear. Compare the example of might to that of AC - a sum of both the ability to dodge attacks and the armor's ability to not get penetrated.

A proper examination reveals that PoE systems are far less abstract than those of D&D.

In D&D, a hold person spell holds a person.

Except hold spell doesn't "hold a person", it inflicts mental paralysis which is why the spell doesn't work on undead.

And it has a massive impact on the fight as it prevents an enemy from moving.

So just like Fetid Caress that inflicts paralysis on a target and "prevents it from moving"?

But Sawyer thinks not being able to move at all is too harsh a consequence for being hit by a spell.

Except the Wizard alone has 4 spells that inflict paralysis: Fetid Caress, Arkemyr's Capricious Hex, Ninagauth's Shadoflame, Tayn's Chaotic Orb. And there are other non-wizard effects that inflict paralysis.

So his hold person just... slows a person.

No, it doesn't. Arduous Delay of Motion is the DnD equivalent of Slow.

A lot of D&D spells have immediate battlefield-changing effects.

Just like PoE spells have devastating and immediate disabling effects: blindness, paralysis, petrification, domination, confusion, prone, stun, unconsciousness.

It's a system that's extremely obsessed with numbers, to the point of neglecting actual effects.

Except it doesn't neglect anything as was demonstrated above.

TL;DR: your entire post is just self-masturbatory drivel that is outright wrong when it comes to gameplay facts.

So why are baldurs gate 1-2 beloved classics(on the codex, and outside the codex), and pillows of eternity are games no one cares about except for yourself(you seem autistic) and Roguey(some turbo sperg who couldn't handle arcanum)?

 

[Cohesion]

Baldur's Gate shits on Pillars lol

Bg 1 and 2. It's important distinction because nowadays people think that baldur's gate = bg3.

 

[MjKorz]

I realised ~20h into POE that I had no idea who my character was, what they were doing or why.

Sounds like brain damage. My condolences.

So why are baldurs gate 1-2 beloved classics(on the codex, and outside the codex)

Because shit attracts flies.

 

[Roguey]

Thanks for reminding me. This is actually retarded. You throw a Chill Fog at your opponent. He's standing right in the middle of it. His difficulty in resisting its effect is modified by how perceptively you cast it.

https://forums.obsidian.net/blogs/e...itude-and-the-responsibility-of-expectations/

Something that seems to frequently come up when discussing the design of a game system is whether or not some aspect of that system adheres to reality. Or, more precisely, whether the outcomes of that system accurately simulate the results that the person making the argument expects, based on their particular interpretation of reality.

Generally, these arguments come from players, or from non-designers, or less experienced designers, and will take the form of, "But XXXX isn't realistic!" or "Realistically, YYYY should happen instead". And, frequently, experienced game designers will turn around and say "Who cares?" and merrily go on their way designing an "unrealistic" system.
...
First - game designers primarily ignore or devalue realism because their primary goal is rarely to construct an accurate simulation of a real world. At their core, game systems are sets of rules that encourage and discourage, or reward and punish, certain choices within the game versus others. In establishing both what choices players can take, as well as the rules effects of those choices, designers are generally attempting to create a system which a) avoids "dominance" b) provides opportunities for players to differentiate their strategies based on the decisions they take, and c) give players opportunities to make "good plays" in response to opponents (be they computer or human controlled).

This is the Obsidian design philosophy (thanks to Josh).

 

[Cryomancer]

It's that Sawyer's ideas were mostly shit. Every time Obsidian divulged some of its mechanics, the forums were flooded with people pointing out very obvious mistakes and offered solutions that were better.

Any link to an example?

I'm curious. Because IMO Pillows would be much better if Sawyer took GURPS, WoD (VtM and MtA), and other homebrew stuff for AD&D as bases to solve the """problems""" with AD&D. Instead of 4e.

Pick the "buff" problem from AD&D, look to how Arcanum handles buffs and multiple summons; there is a hard cap on how many spells with "mana upkeep" you can maintain, and if you want to have two powerful demons summoned, you will lose 12 mana fatigue per 10 seconds. Such system solves the same """problem""" without being as gamey as 4E.

Armor in DnD grants you an AC bonus, yet doesn't grant any inherent DR. In fact, a naked Barbarian has more DR than a fully armored Fighter wearing full plate and wielding a tower shield

Because armor bounces attacks IRL.

In every case. If I'm in bronze age and throw my spear into someone, the armor either bounces my spear or the spear pierces enemy armor and pierces enemy bodies. In modern combat, if I have a.22 LR and the enemy has an AR500 body armor, I can either hit an unarmored part and do full damage or hit the armor and deal no damage. If I have a.338 lapua magnum with armor-piercing rounds, that rifle would ignore any body armor; hence, in PF1e therms would use "touch armor.".

Another example is strength determining the accuracy of non-finesseable melee attacks

Because strength makes it easy to pierce enemy armor.

Bg 1 and 2. It's important distinction because nowadays people think that baldur's gate = bg3.

Not only people. Search engines too.

This is the Obsidian design philosophy (thanks to Josh).

That is bad.

Their best game, Fallout New Vegas, is the game where this philosophy is less strong. The result is that you find a lot of gun enthusiasts who love FNV and even make "IRL clones" of FNV guns. The anti-materiel rifle with AP rounds can make ANY armor obsolete in the game, while in FL4, it makes no difference in armor absorption using.22 LR or.50 BMG AP against power armor.



Again, what Sawyer sees as problem in P&P AD&D is also viewed as a problem by other people. See how many homebrew rules and other TT RPGs handles this problems. Much, much better than this 4e phylosophy. I play RPG for escapism, because I live in a totalitarian shithole which combines the worst of Chavism with the worst of the Baizuo idelogy. I'm unemployed and only managed to get temporary work, have a lot of problems IRL, I wanna play RPGs to get immersed into the fictional world and forget my IRL problems. I don't wanna a "balanced game", game mechanics should make easy as possible to make me immersed into the game. Not be a obstacle towards my escapism.

 

[Butter]

Thanks for reminding me. This is actually retarded. You throw a Chill Fog at your opponent. He's standing right in the middle of it. His difficulty in resisting its effect is modified by how perceptively you cast it.

https://forums.obsidian.net/blogs/e...itude-and-the-responsibility-of-expectations/

Something that seems to frequently come up when discussing the design of a game system is whether or not some aspect of that system adheres to reality. Or, more precisely, whether the outcomes of that system accurately simulate the results that the person making the argument expects, based on their particular interpretation of reality.

Generally, these arguments come from players, or from non-designers, or less experienced designers, and will take the form of, "But XXXX isn't realistic!" or "Realistically, YYYY should happen instead". And, frequently, experienced game designers will turn around and say "Who cares?" and merrily go on their way designing an "unrealistic" system.
...
First - game designers primarily ignore or devalue realism because their primary goal is rarely to construct an accurate simulation of a real world. At their core, game systems are sets of rules that encourage and discourage, or reward and punish, certain choices within the game versus others. In establishing both what choices players can take, as well as the rules effects of those choices, designers are generally attempting to create a system which a) avoids "dominance" b) provides opportunities for players to differentiate their strategies based on the decisions they take, and c) give players opportunities to make "good plays" in response to opponents (be they computer or human controlled).

This is the Obsidian design philosophy (thanks to Josh).

OK, but that doesn't make it good. Let me draw another example: gun damage scaling with Might. Besides the fact that it makes no sense, Josh missed an opportunity to do something interesting and create more meaningful distinctions between ranged weapons.

But he would've had to sacrifice attribute symmetry.

Perhaps guns have a chance of jamming, so they're less reliable and have worse overall DPS, but their per-hit damage is consistently high and doesn't scale with Might.

It's pure cope to insist that Josh had to choose between realism and good combat rules.

Circling back to Accuracy modifying spell DC, he could've chosen to simply not tie these values to an attribute. Different classes already have different base Accuracy values. Just say Wizards have 30 base DC, and it increases by 3 per level. Druids maybe have 25 base, Ciphers get 20 base, and so on.

 

[JarlFrank]

It's pure cope to insist that Josh had to choose between realism and good combat rules.

The funny thing is that simulationist systems are always more intuitive and more fun than even the most well thought-out gamist systems.

 

[MjKorz]

Because armor bounces attacks IRL.

Read what you're actually replying to. Nothing you've stated has any relevance to what I've said: armor has no inherent DR in DnD and you end up in situations where naked characters have more DR than those wearing full plate. Nothing you've said addresses this issue and there's nothing "intuitive" about this.

Because strength makes it easy to pierce enemy armor.

Strength defines accuracy regardless of target AC sources: you can have a target with sky-high AC without an Armor/Natural AC component and Strength would still be the attribute that defines accuracy. Nothing about this is "intuitive".

It's pure cope to insist that Josh had to choose between realism and good combat rules.

The issue was never about realism, the issue was about making all attributes matter for every single character and this goal was achieved: there is no attribute in PoE you can dump without consequences while there are multiple per class you can dump in DnD without blinking. That's what makes PoE system not just "good", but outright superior.

 

[Desiderius]

D&D's abstractions are all intended to represent something real and/or easily understandable.

They aren't, DnD is just a rollercoaster of abstraction with no intent to simulate anything, a system that relies purely on internal gameplay logic and lacks common sense when exposed to real life comparisons. For example, let's take the simplest case of armor. Armor in DnD grants you an AC bonus, yet doesn't grant any inherent DR. In fact, a naked Barbarian has more DR than a fully armored Fighter wearing full plate and wielding a tower shield. Another example is strength determining the accuracy of non-finesseable melee attacks: a fighter using a shortsword without weapon finesse has to rely on raw strength for accuracy. Third example would be dexterity not influencing the speed of actions when it represents hand-eye coordination. A fourth example would be the ability to interrupt spells by inflicting damage, but not other actions such as attacking with melee weapons or performing complex weapon manipulations such as reloading a crossbow. There is no way to "easily understand" this retardation, the internal logic of the system is completely decoupled from real life comparisons and serves only to create a functional system, not a realistic or even "understandable" one.

PoE's systems are far more abstract.

This is false and it's easily provable. First of all, armor in PoE provides different DR values against different attacks, depending on the armor. This is intuitive and understandable.

Accuracy for all attacks and spells in PoE is determined by perception. This is intuitive and understandable even in the case of spellcasting.

Action speed in PoE is determined by dexterity. This is intuitive and understandable.

Most abilities, spells, attacks, reload and other actions can be interrupted with attacks that have a sufficiently high interrupt value which is based both on weapon and perception. Intuitive and understandable.

So where does your claim stem from? From the sole fact that spell and physical damage in PoE is defined by a single attribute - might? The internal logic of the system defines this in an understandable way: might is not mere physical strength, it is a combination of both physical and spiritual strength and the in-game attribute checks reflect this well: might is used both for physical actions as well as for intimidating others - inflicting fear. Compare the example of might to that of AC - a sum of both the ability to dodge attacks and the armor's ability to not get penetrated.

A proper examination reveals that PoE systems are far less abstract than those of D&D.

In D&D, a hold person spell holds a person.

Except hold spell doesn't "hold a person", it inflicts mental paralysis which is why the spell doesn't work on undead.

And it has a massive impact on the fight as it prevents an enemy from moving.

So just like Fetid Caress that inflicts paralysis on a target and "prevents it from moving"?

But Sawyer thinks not being able to move at all is too harsh a consequence for being hit by a spell.

Except the Wizard alone has 4 spells that inflict paralysis: Fetid Caress, Arkemyr's Capricious Hex, Ninagauth's Shadoflame, Tayn's Chaotic Orb. And there are other non-wizard effects that inflict paralysis.

So his hold person just... slows a person.

No, it doesn't. Arduous Delay of Motion is the DnD equivalent of Slow.

A lot of D&D spells have immediate battlefield-changing effects.

Just like PoE spells have devastating and immediate disabling effects: blindness, paralysis, petrification, domination, confusion, prone, stun, unconsciousness.

It's a system that's extremely obsessed with numbers, to the point of neglecting actual effects.

Except it doesn't neglect anything as was demonstrated above.

TL;DR: your entire post is just self-masturbatory drivel that is outright wrong when it comes to gameplay facts.

So why are baldurs gate 1-2 beloved classics(on the codex, and outside the codex), and pillows of eternity are games no one cares about except for yourself(you seem autistic) and Roguey(some turbo sperg who couldn't handle arcanum)?

Of course he's autistic. He makes me look like a casual. What's wrong with that? His points here are well-taken (although D&D has many counter-examples).

Haplo is big on Deadfire and I like the gameplay in both mostly with a few caveats. Durance is interesting if long-winded and the Eskimo chick is fun even if her story gets into the weeds. There's something there with Millenial Aloth being haunted by his more plain-spoken (and free-thinking) ancestors. Idk, the characters in Pillows weren't as annoying as some of the overwritten ones in Deadfire, but even there Tehanu is like a Proto-Asstarion.

Soyer's plots are inane because his misosophies are at war with themselves. Those can be clicked through as usual.

 

[Cryomancer]

more meaningful distinctions

More meaningful distinction? That is against "balance".

The funny thing is that simulationist systems are always more intuitive and more fun than even the most well thought-out gamist systems.

Yes!!!

I play RPGs because I wanna escapism, the "game" part of RPG should reinforce the "RP", not be a barrier in it. If I all want is a well designed game, I would play chess. You can't beat the design of it, learning is easy but becoming a grand master incredible hard, takes a lot of time, effort and only a tiny minority manages to do it.

 

[MjKorz]

The funny thing is that simulationist systems are always more intuitive and more fun than even the most well thought-out gamist systems.

That is true, but "simulationist systems" have nothing to do with DnD in any of its forms. The comparison ITT is between PoE and DnD of various editions so it's just a comparison of systems that use their own sets of abstract rules.

 

[scytheavatar]

I'm curious. Because IMO Pillows would be much better if Sawyer took GURPS, WoD (VtM and MtA), and other homebrew stuff for AD&D as bases to solve the """problems""" with AD&D. Instead of 4e.

Pick the "buff" problem from AD&D, look to how Arcanum handles buffs and multiple summons; there is a hard cap on how many spells with "mana upkeep" you can maintain, and if you want to have two powerful demons summoned, you will lose 12 mana fatigue per 10 seconds. Such system solves the same """problem""" without being as gamey as 4E.

Josh never took "4e" as the base to solve the "problems" of 3e. What he had is roughly the same design goals and mindset as the 4e designers, and ended up creating a similar system. Arguing that a RPG system is good or bad is like trying to argue that a programming language is better than another, when in reality you end up comparing apples with oranges. For every one person who loves how realistic GURPS is you will find someone who hate the system for the exact reason.

You can try to argue if Josh's design goals are good or bad, that is fair game. But it should be clear that any system he picked for POE was always going to be similar to 4E, cause that's the direction he chose to go.

 

[Cryomancer]

What he had is roughly the same design goals and mindset as the 4e designers, and ended up creating a similar system. Arguing that a RPG system is good or bad is like trying to argue that a programming language is better than another, when in reality you end up comparing apples with oranges

Yes, but again, a good game desiner should be able to satisfy the expectations and demands of its target audience. This for any product. You said "comparing apples with oranges".

Lets suppose that in the kickstarter, Obsidian was clear "this is a spiritual successor of BG1/2 but our system will be much more like 4e than AD&D". How many people do you think that would back this project? Don't get me wrong, I'm grateful to obsidian, if was not by them, we would't get Kingmaker and other similar games. But imo Pillows fails to satisfy the modern audience like Larian did and fails to win over old school audience like OwlCat did.

 

[Nas92]

Thanks for reminding me. This is actually retarded. You throw a Chill Fog at your opponent. He's standing right in the middle of it. His difficulty in resisting its effect is modified by how perceptively you cast it.

https://forums.obsidian.net/blogs/e...itude-and-the-responsibility-of-expectations/

Something that seems to frequently come up when discussing the design of a game system is whether or not some aspect of that system adheres to reality. Or, more precisely, whether the outcomes of that system accurately simulate the results that the person making the argument expects, based on their particular interpretation of reality.

Generally, these arguments come from players, or from non-designers, or less experienced designers, and will take the form of, "But XXXX isn't realistic!" or "Realistically, YYYY should happen instead". And, frequently, experienced game designers will turn around and say "Who cares?" and merrily go on their way designing an "unrealistic" system.
...
First - game designers primarily ignore or devalue realism because their primary goal is rarely to construct an accurate simulation of a real world. At their core, game systems are sets of rules that encourage and discourage, or reward and punish, certain choices within the game versus others. In establishing both what choices players can take, as well as the rules effects of those choices, designers are generally attempting to create a system which a) avoids "dominance" b) provides opportunities for players to differentiate their strategies based on the decisions they take, and c) give players opportunities to make "good plays" in response to opponents (be they computer or human controlled).

This is the Obsidian design philosophy (thanks to Josh).

What a load of horseshit, he's worse than I remembered. The reason people want realistic is not some autistic obsession with a system that tries to simulate reality, it's that shit makes sense so that you can reliably build a character without necessarily reading 120 pages about the mechanics. Yes, you do that shit in tabletop RPGs, but guess what, CRPGs are a different beast altogether. But even tabletop RPGs change their system to make it more obvious, like doing away with the whole less AC is actually more thing. Not to mention that even the most autistic tabletop RPG tries to make it make sense.

 

[damager]

Replace non-game designers and less experienced designers with non-autists and less autistic persons and his argument makes a lot of sense.

It's also bad how arrogant this text reads. Imagine getting told you don't like his systems only because you have less experience while working on a game

While every sane person here argues against his autistic, obsessive-compulsive "stat symetry". It would drive me crazy

 

[Desman]

PoE is just bland on every aspect (mechanics, lore, dialogs, companions, world etc...) it's not even a truly bad game, it's just super boring

 

[damager]

Well it has one thing going for it. Really beautiful 2D graphics and a nice art direction.

 

[Ryzer]

PoE is just bland on every aspect (mechanics, lore, dialogs, companions, world etc...) it's not even a truly bad game, it's just super boring

It's on parity with Baldur gate 1 on that.

 

[Desman]

Well it has one thing going for it. Really beautiful 2D graphics and a nice art direction.

Its only saving grace and it makes me even more sad. If it was just an ugly bad game it would have been forgotten.
Every couple of years i give it another try, i'm like wow it's beautiful, and then i fell asleep

 

[Cryomancer]

autistic obsession with a system that tries to simulate reality

Is not exactly "simulate reality", is just simplistic abstractions. Simulate reality with for eg, a mage casting frost spear and throwing into the enemy would involve droppage, windage, a complete anatomy book to calculate the damage and simulate how being pierced in each part would affect the char.

The point is just that in RPG, is great when the "G" helps with "RP" instead of being a obstacle.

 

[Riddler]

Well it has one thing going for it. Really beautiful 2D graphics and a nice art direction.

Some of the music is pretty good as well.