Codex Review RPG Codex Review: Pathfinder Wrath of the Righteous

[ga♥]

Ok the writing is bad, so which recent RPG in the last 5 years have better writing? I am not saying it's top notch, as I already said I think kingmaker was better on that side, and it has very low moments (that would have been nice to have pointed out in the review for example) but pussies like NEG uses that as en excuse together with "boring", while the reality is that they found the game too hard and instead of learning the mechanics, or you know, lower the difficulty (that would have shattered their frail egos), they decided to call the game shit (also muh tranniesssss).

So, which RPGs have better writing?

 

[Non-Edgy Gamer]

I don't even disagree with you all that much about the writing sucking. It has its moments, but it's overall quite meh.

No, it's bad, not meh. It's just awful writing. I didn't see anything that was even tolerable.

But holy shit, you give the dumbest reason for it.

Did you miss all the other criticisms I had of it? The characters? The lack of consideration for player motivations? The longwinded self-insert dialog?

No, I don't think you did. You're just strawmanning because you know it's an indefensible piece of shit, and your best argument is "well, yeah, it sucks but it's good for what it is."

I'm not trying to make you like the game, I'm just calling out the dumb shit you post.

No you're being defensive over a game you know is shit.

"You are free to just not play the game"

As I've said, if you have to strawman this hard, you've already lost.

 

[Non-Edgy Gamer]

Ok the writing is bad, so which recent RPG in the last 5 years have better writing?

This is low-grade cope, even for a vatnik.

Speaking of boring, what's the point in arguing with people who admit I'm right, but are just butthurt that I'm saying anything about it?

 

[ga♥]

Ok the writing is bad, so which recent RPG in the last 5 years have better writing?

This is low-grade cope, even for a vatnik.

Speaking of boring, what's the point in arguing with people who admit I'm right, but are just butthurt that I'm saying anything about it?

I am not agreeing with you. I think the writing has low moments but overall is more positive than negative, and the main plot, which you continue to say is bad, is quite interesting, compared to things like... PoE1 were the main plot is obscure and after half the game you don't what are you are doing and why.

So, which games were easy enough for you and with better writing? Hmm?

 

[Non-Edgy Gamer]

I think the writing has low moments but overall is more positive than negative, and the main plot, which you continue to say is bad, is quite interesting, compared to things like... PoE1 were the main plot is obscure and after half the game you don't what are you are doing and why.

It's actually similar to PoE in a way: there's very little consideration given to player motives.

You're expected to follow the plot on rails just because in both titles, even if it makes no sense for your character.

So, which games were easy enough for you and with better writing? Hmm?

I'll answer when you tell me why you love tranny cock so much.

 

[Roguey]

They're casting spells, aren't they?

And those Spells are often a very sub-optimal choice for the current situation. Baphomet, for example, often acts really stupid for one of the smartest and most cunning Demon Lords in the Abyss by wasting his Actions on casting a Spell that does ~20 AoE damage to the Party. Or those genius-level intellect Devas you can summon with that book who always spend their first Action after being summoned on casting Holy Aura even though they already have that buff applied to them by another Deva.

Despite his sky-high intelligence score, Baphomet really isn't all that smart. Areshkagal had to tell him how to move the labyrinth to the abyss and by his own admission it took him years to understand just how he did it. He simps for Nocticula and sulks when she rejects him. He thinks he can use Areelu and betray her before she can betray him and is wrong on that count.

None of the angels come across as particularly smart in their actions either. Smart people are difficult to write and of course no one at Paizo or Owlcat would really be up for the task, but one can just chalk up attributes as something not to be taken too seriously when it comes to narrative. D&D Dragons have sky-high intelligence and charisma but I have never seen a dragon ever depicted as gorgeous/persuasive and brilliant. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Non-Edgy Gamer]

Despite his sky-high intelligence score, Baphomet really isn't all that smart. Areshkagal had to tell him how to move the labyrinth to the abyss and by his own admission it took him years to understand just how he did it. He simps for Nocticula and sulks when she rejects him. He thinks he can use Areelu and betray her before she can betray him and is wrong on that count.

Your enemies are all retards, your tranny ally and his wife are both incompetent fools, the queen is a retard and the protagonist is sticking around and fighting someone else's war for no reason. What a game.

Sounds like the only bigger moron is probably the guy who spends $60 on this after reading the thread.

 

[Lambach]

Did you miss all the other criticisms I had of it? The characters? The longwinded self-insert dialog?

There's nothing to respond there. If you don't like the characters, you don't like the characters. Telling you that you're wrong for not liking character [X] would be almost as stupid as the shit you post.

The lack of consideration for player motivations?

Lulz. Rofl. Lmao, even.

Nothing easier than coming up with a motivation for your character in this scenario. Good characters want to protect people from Demons, Evil characters are motivated by the power that keeps coming their way as they Crusade etc.

Actually, no, you're right. An adventurer wanting to be a major part of a world-changing event and reap all the rewards that come with it? Total weirdo with unfathomable motives.

You're just strawmanning because you know it's an indefensible piece of shit

Careful with that edge, Coldsteel, you'll cut yourself.

No you're being defensive over a game you know is shit.

You're spending quite a bit of time writing about a game you hate/don't care about. Curious.

 

[Raghar]

I enjoyed first half of Kingmaker. I struggle to find a part of WotR I like.
I guess some companions are interesting in that "what the hell is wrong with you" and "is this anime" kind of way.

And I still don't understand what writers tried to achieve with Camellia.

It's to have sex and eat bodies.

 

[Lambach]

and the protagonist is sticking around and fighting someone else's war for no reason.

>no reason
>literally turning into a demigod in real time

Yeah, becoming one of the most powerful beings on the planet is for gay retards anyway, how could that possibly be a reason for anyone to fight?

 

[Non-Edgy Gamer]

There's nothing to respond there.

Not responding isn't the same as pretending I didn't say it.

Lulz. Rofl. Lmao, even.

Nothing easier than coming up with a motivation for your character in this scenario.

Ok, reddit.

I don't mean your make believe reasoning for why you're playing a plot-on-rails game, I mean reasons that are in the game and I mean giving the player a choice not to commit himself to defending literal faggots and fantasy Sodom.

Work out a way around that. I gave several, and yes, you can still start your precious 5th Crusade afterward.

Actually, no, you're right. An adventurer wanting to be a major part of a world-changing event and reap all the rewards that come with it? Total weirdo with unfathomable motives.

And which part of that says "defend the orc faggot and the tranny"?

Speaking of defense, why are you defending this so hard? You know the writing is shit. Is it such a difficult admission that maybe there was another way around this?

Careful with that edge, Coldsteel, you'll cut yourself.

Nice canned response. How is that edgy? Oh wait, it's not and you just don't have an argument.

You're spending quite a bit of time writing about a game you hate/don't care about. Curious.

It's almost like I enjoy arguing about RPGs on a site famous for arguing about RPGs, isn't it?

 

[Non-Edgy Gamer]

>no reason
>literally turning into a demigod in real time

Because you have to serve the queen and defend the tranny and his wife to do that?

No, seriously, I dropped the game. Was this ever explained? Is the tranny the key to the player's power? Do you have to defend his orc lesbo at the start in order to unlock it? Do tell.

becoming one of the most powerful beings on a planet for gay retards

ftfy

 

[ga♥]

the fight during the first act at the inn was a fucking slog in turn-based mode holy fucking shit. i absolutely hated (and still do!) the campaign system almost as much as i hated the equivalent system in kingmaker and put that shit just above causal (fuck you) so i could build warps and not have to mess with it too much. whoever came up with that system needs an ass-reaming with a cactus

At least it was a fight that had meaning though.

But even there, why am I being forced to defend the tranny's orc wife? I do not care about xir or its green gorilla. I actively want them both to die - something that can't happen until late game.

So for people who didn't play the game, what the tetris expert above says, is wrong, you don't have to defend the tavern, you can avoid all together. Just don't go back to defend it, to stick it to the "trannies". The attack happens anyway and they get a sore beating.

 

[Roguey]

Your enemies are all retards, your tranny ally and his wife are both incompetent fools, the queen is a retard and the protagonist is sticking around and fighting someone else's war for no reason. What a game.

Sounds like the only bigger moron is probably the guy who spends $60 on this after reading the thread.

What applies to the later Ultimas also applies here

As we've discussed, Lord British's stature takes a series of major blows in the last few games. It started in Ultima VI but really ramped up in Ultima VII and this game. In his attitude towards the Fellowship and a lot of other things happening in Britannia, he is ignorant, negligent, and useless. I had a chance to mention this to Richard Garriott recently. I was curious if there was a deliberate effort to deconstruct the character or whether it was a matter of Garriott being less involved in the games and his employees simply not treating their boss's alter-ego with much respect. "None of the above," Garriott answered. "It was purely to give space for the player to shine!"

Everyone sucks so you can look that much awesome by comparison.

Anyway all games have supported ranges of expression. In a tabletop game of Wrath of the Righteous you're expected to play the kind of person who will want to kill demons. The group will just kick you out if you object.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

You're expected to follow the plot on rails just because in both titles, even if it makes no sense for your character.

This is such a retarded argument. The PC is narratively defined by the predefined choices that you can take within the game as a player which have narrative C&C (dialogue options chief among them), not by your imaginary LARPing as some deep complex character that should have Dostoyevskian novels written about him. And since this isn't some freeform TTRPG session with a real DM who can make shit up on the fly, you can't expect the plot of a premade game that was made with limited resources to be unlimited in scope (esp. with the modern trend of devs not wanting to waste too many resources on content that won't be seen by most players on a single playthrough hence leading to mostly linear plots).

And sure, you can complain that the options given to you to justify your PC's actions feel contrived within the context of the game's plot. And that's perfectly fine, quality of writing is a perfectly legitimate thing to critique about a game. But that's not what you're doing, you're complaining that a game with a particular plot isn't some other game with a different plot.

There's nothing to respond there.

(Don't mind if I join tho. )

 

[Lambach]

I don't mean your make believe reasoning for why you're playing a plot-on-rails game, I mean reasons that are in the game and I mean giving the player a choice not to commit himself to defending literal faggots and fantasy Sodom.

"Abandon your allies, let them get slaughtered, then assault the occupied fortress with a Demon army inside all by yourself" - Sun Tzu

It's almost like you need the lesbo Orc and her men to fight the bulk of the Demon army so you can get to the Wardstone. It's really not that hard to figure out what would motivate your character do to the things he does if you stop guzzling Retard Juice for 2 seconds at least.

Work out a way around that. I gave several, and yes, you can still start your precious 5th Crusade afterward.

No you can't. The Fifth Crusade was called specifically because your character demonstrated near god-like power in the battle for the Wardstone, causing people to believe he's chosen by the Goddess they worship to lead it. If things happened any differently, there would be no Crusade. Which would be really weird in a game that's literally about the Fifth Crusade.

And which part of that says "defend the orc faggot and the tranny"?

See above.

Is the tranny the key to the player's power?

Yes, every time you gain a Mythic rank, the game blasts interracial tranny scat porn at you in the form of a two hour long unskippable cutscene And to make sure you really watched all of it, you have to take a quiz with questions about the scene and score 100% before you can go back to the game.

 

[ga♥]

I think the writing has low moments but overall is more positive than negative, and the main plot, which you continue to say is bad, is quite interesting, compared to things like... PoE1 were the main plot is obscure and after half the game you don't what are you are doing and why.

It's actually similar to PoE in a way: there's very little consideration given to player motives.

You're expected to follow the plot on rails just because in both titles, even if it makes no sense for your character.

This is true and maybe you are correct about railroading... but all the single players RPGs are more or less like this? If you want "freedom" to do anything that's not the genre.

(exept POE is just worse in every single aspect, so the comparison is a hyperbole).

So, which games were easy enough for you and with better writing? Hmm?

I'll answer when you tell me why you love tranny cock so much.

I liked the main plot because I found the main Owlcat adaptation of it intriguing, the part that is different than the AP, without spoilering too much. While the AP thing about a war against demons (which is quite retarded) plus generally the setting is paizo's so can't really blame Owlcat.

So, which games?

 

[vitellus]

And since this isn't some freeform TTRPG session with a real DM who can make shit up on the fly, you can't expect the plot of a premade game that was made with limited resources to be unlimited in scope

people actually believe shit the marketing machine says as well. 'totes my gawd it isn't tailored to me?' like, no fucking shit dude, get some friends and some dice. you're gonna get a multibranching railyard to play in, that's about it unless you go for something that you can play akin to dwarf fortress. until artificial 'intelligence' becomes intelligent, you're looking at the nadir of current gaming. the big dicks spooge out their dreck following the same formula and whether any of us on this forum like it or not, people gobble and gurgle that shit right up. i remember when nba2k came out. there's twenty-fucking-three of them now. smaller guys get one or two good ones out and they get bought or go big enough to follow The Formula™.

it actually says it in the loading screen to go get friends if you want a better ending lulz

 

[Non-Edgy Gamer]

So for people who didn't play the game, what the tetris expert above says, is wrong, you don't have to defend the tavern, you can avoid all together. Just don't go back to defend it, to stick it to the "trannies". The attack happens anyway and they get a sore beating.

Nice. Unless you're there already, in which case you get forced to defend it?

And what about after this? Why are you still teaming up with the tranny for the rest of the story?

"Abandon your allies, let them get slaughtered, then assault the occupied fortress with a Demon army inside all by yourself" - Sun Tzu

Why not? You said this was about power fantasies. You said the player has godlike power.

You'll accept infinite shit writing, but oh no you can't just heck'n let the player have a choice!

No you can't. The Fifth Crusade was called specifically because your character demonstrated near god-like power in the battle for the Wardstone, causing people to believe he's chosen by the Goddess they worship to lead it.

I already said there could have been one or more others that receive similar power. It might actually make the story, you know, interesting even if you still get railroaded to defend gaytown from the evil misogyny demons or whatever.

See above.

Yes, every time you gain a Mythic rank, the game blasts interracial tranny scat porn at you in the form of a two hour long unskippable cutscene And to make sure you really watched all of it, you have to take a quiz with questions about the scene and score 100% before you can go back to the game.

It wouldn't shock me given how gay the game is, and how it incorporates coprophilia at one point. (Saw it in the Cringefinder thread, fyi, since I know the possibility of you sperging and calling me a liar for saying I dropped it is nonzero.)

 

[Lambach]

But that's not what you're doing, you're complaining that a game with a particular plot isn't some other game with a different plot.

Yup.

Assuming that we have to lead a Crusade at all. Assuming we can't join one of the invading factions early on or a neutral faction that seeks to play both sides against each other.

Dude is actually questioning whether it's necessary that you lead the Fifth Crusade.... in a game that's about leading the Fifth Crusade.

 

[ga♥]

So for people who didn't play the game, what the tetris expert above says, is wrong, you don't have to defend the tavern, you can avoid all together. Just don't go back to defend it, to stick it to the "trannies". The attack happens anyway and they get a sore beating.

Nice. Unless you're there already, in which case you get forced to defend it?

And what about after this? Why are you still teaming up with the tranny for the rest of the story?

I have no idea if you could leave if the attack starts when you already in the tavern. But let's assume you can't.. since it seems unrealistic you could sneak away.
So, since YOU are under siege, it makes sense to try defend it to save your ass no?

You are forced to stick with the trannies because one of them is a high officer of the Queen that gave you command of the crusade. But you can bully her for like 2 chapters and finally kill her at the end.

 

[Non-Edgy Gamer]

This is true and maybe you are correct about railroading... but all the single players RPGs are more or less like this? If you want "freedom" to do anything that's not the genre.

As I explained before, if you're going to railroad, you need to do some decently heavy investment in justifying it to the player, or give them some kind of other option.

E.g., Fallout: you have to find the waterchip etc. or the game ends. This is fair, I guess. The story of the game is about the VD and saving the vault, just like the story here is about muh 5th Crusade.

However, Fallout doesn't actually force you to stay in one area and defend a vault full of assholes until you do this, with no reason other than 'you have to save them because that's the game'. You're free to get the chip however and whenever you want within the time limit. You're also free to fail. If you really just don't care and want them all to die, you're free to allow that and 'lose' the game.

I guess an example of this would be to let the inn be invaded like you said, but they all die and you need to continue without them. Pretending that they can't be replaced in the story is a bit silly, and the fact that Lambach wrote a trolly response to my questions as to why they can't tells me I'm right.

So, which games were easy enough for you and with better writing? Hmm?

I'll answer when you tell me why you love tranny cock so much.

I liked the main plot because I found the main Owlcat adaptation of it intriguing, the part that is different than the AP, without spoilering too much. While the AP thing about a war against demons (which is quite retarded) plus generally the setting is paizo's so can't really blame Owlcat.

So, which games?

These are unconvincing reasons for loving tranny cock. Thus, I think I'm justified in refusing to respond.

But seriously, I'll skip the first part of your question since it's a strawman and say that BG2 is an adequate example of better writing than Wrath of the Tranny (a low bar), and I've already discussed why.

 

[Non-Edgy Gamer]

This is such a retarded argument.

It's not an argument, it's a comparison.

The PC is narratively defined by the predefined choices

Except there isn't a choice, predefined or otherwise. That's the issue I take with this aspect of the writing.

And since this isn't some freeform TTRPG session with a real DM who can make shit up on the fly, you can't expect the plot of a premade game that was made with limited resources to be unlimited in scope

I don't. I gave specific examples of how to improve the writing, which Lambach said were impossible because muh 5th Crusade can only occur with the tranny and this specific plotline.

And sure, you can complain that the options given to you to justify your PC's actions feel contrived within the context of the game's plot. And that's perfectly fine, quality of writing is a perfectly legitimate thing to critique about a game. But that's not what you're doing, you're complaining that a game with a particular plot isn't some other game with a different plot.

It is what I'm doing though. You literally quoted a sentence where I'm complaining about this. The lack of motive makes the pc's actions seem contrived. You can say it's not all that I'm doing, but you're lying if you say I'm not doing it.

And there's nothing wrong with complaining about the entirety of the plot when you're criticizing the writing and design of a game. I think the entire plot sucks, yes. That's why I'm not playing it. That and all the other reasons I've mentioned. Is this hard to understand?

 

[Lambach]

Why not? You said this was about power fantasies. You said the player has godlike power.

The power manifests itself at the end of that battle. Up until that point, you're just a regular low-level adventurer that most certainly cannot take on a whole fortress full of Demons by his lonesome.

I'm starting to think you're this critical over the writing because you're just too stupid to keep up with it, even as simple as it is.

You'll accept infinite shit writing, but oh no you can't just heck'n let the player have a choice!

No game allows you infinite freedom. You can't make a choice that will cause you to deviate too much from the pre-established plot.

I already said there could have been one or more others that receive similar power.

If you're not a unique special snowflake, that undermines the "power fantasy" aspect of the narrative.

I guess an example of this would be to let the inn be invaded like you said, but they all die and you need to continue without them. Pretending that they can't be replaced in the story is a bit silly

Continuing without them at that point in the story would get your character and his Party massacred when attacking the fort. Sure, they could be replaced later on in the story, but at that moment they're indispensable because of the urgency of the plot.

As to why you're not allowed to replace them later, using familiar characters to fill the role of quest dispensers and move certain plot points along is more convenient than creating new characters for that purpose and "I want them gone because they're degenerates" isn't a reason for devs nowadays to spend extra time and resources on replacing them. It's Current Year, what'd you expect?

 

[ga♥]

But seriously, I'll skip the first part of your question since it's a strawman and say that BG2 is an adequate example of better writing than Wrath of the Tranny (a low bar), and I've already discussed why.

I hate Imoen, why can't I kill her in chateu irenicus immediatly. Oh because she's tied to the plot. Can't Imoen be killed and be replaced? Why not?
I want to ally with Irenicus and torture Imoen but the devs won't let me do it.
What a shit game.

t. NEG