Reinhardt
Arcane
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2015
- Messages
- 32,079
She don't need to. Name one point in all of BG 2 where you act like a man.Name one point in all of BG1&2 where she seriously calls you her "master".
She don't need to. Name one point in all of BG 2 where you act like a man.Name one point in all of BG1&2 where she seriously calls you her "master".
Reasonable. I also think even that said by Cats is too nonchalant: we want to make game inclusive? My question would be: why?I want men hamming it up, in large towering metal armors with huge claymore swords resting on their shoulders god dammit
Reasonable. I also think even that said by Cats is too nonchalant: we want to make game inclusive? My question would be: why?I want men hamming it up, in large towering metal armors with huge claymore swords resting on their shoulders god dammit
Your audience is most likely same audience for something like Diablo 2 resurrected - 96% men older than 25. It is traditional RPG players who founded your game. Even Pathfinder enjoyers who helped with Kickstarter, instead of accepting game for what it was, almost downshitted PKM rating to nothing on steam forums because it was "too hard" and they are "dms for 20 years".
It is traditional rpg players who are the actual minority, it is we who should be pampered since we are relied on to carry your studio. If developer doesn't understand something as simple as that, and refuses to add romance with a female elf cleric, their fate usually is all the same - to be bought by Microsoft.
well Dark Souls for example relied entirely on pandering to a minority (people who like difficult games) and made that its meme and studio does well, achieving legendary status by this point.Sadly from point of view of market and results they are right
Nah, it's also written into the lore that there are STRONG and INDEPENDENT women (who are not women at all because they are supernatural creatures, but you can't expect the strangehairs to understand such concepts I suppose) who FORCED the evil men of Hell to accept them.
No really, I'm not making any of this up.
https://pathfinderwiki.com/wiki/Queen_of_the_NightI lol'd at that last bit.The Queens of the Night, or their mortal-given title of whore queens,[1] are a group of four unique female demigoddesses who have managed to distinguish themselves despite Asmodeus' and the rest of Hell's unvarnished misogyny.
Oh wow. So glad I never got into Pathfinder's PnP.
You move goalposts so often you really should put wheels on them.They manipulate each other.Drow females don't really manipulate men in their society
Pretty sure saving her life multiple times and killing every enemy before you like a tidal wave of death qualifies.She don't need to. Name one point in all of BG 2 where you act like a man.Name one point in all of BG1&2 where she seriously calls you her "master".
well Dark Souls for example relied entirely on pandering to a minority (people who like difficult games) and made that its meme and studio does well, achieving legendary status by this point.
Basically filling a gap in a market, that is also smart practice.
That feeling when fedora, fanta and victor are the only peope who actually made any progress in the game...
Nah, I think in this case the Owltrannies were always pozzed and their first game was just a foot in the door to do more woke crap later.well Dark Souls for example relied entirely on pandering to a minority (people who like difficult games) and made that its meme and studio does well, achieving legendary status by this point.
Basically filling a gap in a market, that is also smart practice.
It always goes like this:
1) You build cult success and reputation by catering to a hardcore/niche audience
2) The mainstream hears about this, has it recommended by that niche audience
3) Money and fame follow
4) The product is consistently watered down in favor of the new audience, or the perception of the new audience
Rarely 5 will arrive at a later date where the watering down becomes so excessive it starts to fail, but it takes actual decades to get there.
That is not how it works. Your XP is always split 6 ways no matter how many companions you have. If you turn off XP sharing and you have less than 6 in your party XP will be split by that number but any future companions you meet will be lower level (as well as any you don't bring with you). And if you got 6 in your party, turning off XP sharing does nothing, it only gives 0 XP to those outside your party while same to those inside your party.I find it pretty dumb that companions you haven't met or might not ever meet get a share of your experience right from the start. Wouldn't be surprised if they keep taking XP even after you get rid of them. I'll be playing with 'only active XP' from now on after I tested it.. Fucking degenerates were stealing my XP even though I never met or recruited some of them.
Sorry but you'll have to first beat sadistic russian dm dungeon with op alchemist enemy, all the negative energy and fire and gigantic minotaur one-shotting your ass.Ok, fuck your nigger trannies. I want to advance the story and bitch about gargoyles and shit too.
That is not how it works. Your XP is always split 6 ways no matter how many companions you have. If you turn off XP sharing and you have less than 6 in your party XP will be split by that number but any future companions you meet will be lower level (as well as any you don't bring with you). And if you got 6 in your party, turning off XP sharing does nothing, it only gives 0 XP to those outside your party while same to those inside your party.
Did you play PKM, we had this discussion there 100 times and answer was always the same. When you turn off XP sharing that XP is total XP, not per person in party. Divide that by 4 and you will see how much you actually got.That is not how it works. Your XP is always split 6 ways no matter how many companions you have. If you turn off XP sharing and you have less than 6 in your party XP will be split by that number but any future companions you meet will be lower level (as well as any you don't bring with you). And if you got 6 in your party, turning off XP sharing does nothing, it only gives 0 XP to those outside your party while same to those inside your party.
Active only with 4 party members:
Sharing:
Nah, I think in this case the Owltrannies were always pozzed and their first game was just a foot in the door to do more woke crap later.well Dark Souls for example relied entirely on pandering to a minority (people who like difficult games) and made that its meme and studio does well, achieving legendary status by this point.
Basically filling a gap in a market, that is also smart practice.
It always goes like this:
1) You build cult success and reputation by catering to a hardcore/niche audience
2) The mainstream hears about this, has it recommended by that niche audience
3) Money and fame follow
4) The product is consistently watered down in favor of the new audience, or the perception of the new audience
Rarely 5 will arrive at a later date where the watering down becomes so excessive it starts to fail, but it takes actual decades to get there.
Why would they change how they display XP gains?Did you play PKM, we had this discussion there 100 times and answer was always the same. When you turn off XP sharing that XP is total XP, not per person in party. Divide that by 4 and you will see how much you actually got.
While that 18XP is actually what each character gets. Blame devs for confusing newbies.
Did you play PKM, we had this discussion there 100 times and answer was always the same. When you turn off XP sharing that XP is total XP, not per person in party. Divide that by 4 and you will see how much you actually got.
While that 18XP is actually what each character gets. Blame devs for confusing newbies.