|
Genpei Turtle posted:Oh yeah, that was definitely it! Don't know why the robot stood out in my mind, how could I forget Guile With A Katana or Horrifying Clown? Those seemed ridiculously dumb even before I knew the origins of that game. I remember this bomb and at the time just thought it was like Power Moves and another attempt to cash in on SFII's success. I guess it sorta was, but via a more circuitous route than I initially thought.
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2014 03:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 01:43 |
|
|
I've been trying to google this but I can't find any numbers. Any ideas on how many distinct grid cells were in old grid based rpgs like World of Xeen or Wizardry 7? Maybe just the average for the dungeons?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 05:12
|
|
|
FuzzySlippers posted:I've been trying to google this but I can't find any numbers. Any ideas on how many distinct grid cells were in old grid based rpgs like World of Xeen or Wizardry 7? Maybe just the average for the dungeons? Pretty sure the answer is on gamefaqs in one of the walkthroughs.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 05:19
|
|
|
FuzzySlippers posted:I've been trying to google this but I can't find any numbers. Any ideas on how many distinct grid cells were in old grid based rpgs like World of Xeen or Wizardry 7? Maybe just the average for the dungeons? World of Xeen (and Might & Magic 3, which used the same engine) used 16x16 grids for each outdoor area and some smaller indoor areas like towers and castles, and 32x32 grids for some of the larger towns and dungeons. The first two Might & Magic games used 16x16 grids for everything, but generally made more efficient use of the available space (walls were just lines between the grid squares rather than occupying space in themselves).
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 05:38
|
|
|
FuzzySlippers posted:I've been trying to google this but I can't find any numbers. Any ideas on how many distinct grid cells were in old grid based rpgs like World of Xeen or Wizardry 7? Maybe just the average for the dungeons? Someone sent me a map for Wizardry 7 and the overworld floor was enormous, like hundreds of tiles across. From what I've seen of the earlier Wizardries though, 20 x 20 is, I think, the standard size for the maps (not 100% sure about 6). But as another poster said Google should have complete maps for these games for you to measure.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 07:50
|
|
|
I wonder if they had any tools for their designers at all on those old games. Building something crazy big like Wizardry 7's overworld would be intense just in like text files or something. Thanks for those numbers. I've been working on a grid based rpg for a while and was doing some automated testing of my map editor / generator and I wanted some realistic numbers to throw at it. In the best of all possible worlds it's all modifiable so if someone feels like recreating some old dungeon good to know it's max is higher than any of that, but that's all for the future. I actually do my walls like M&M1/2 because the system supports modern environments and having walls the same size as tiles was looking weird. I hadn't realized any old games did that too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 10:04
|
|
|
For reference Ultima Underworld is 64*64 tiles max. More recently Grimrock levels are only 32*32 max.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 10:31
|
|
|
Whoever mentioned mage being the best class for Arx Fatalis wasn't kidding. I restarted and pumped all my points into Intelligence and Casting, got over the hump that had my last warrior build stumped, and beat the game in no time flat. As a mage, you get plenty of spells that make exploring and backtracking really convenient plus some really devastating combat combos (my favorite was casting implosion on an Ylside then turning invisible and watching him look around helplessly before self-destructing). The best thing is that with the Bless spell, which temporarily increases your stats, you can also do all the thieving in the game as well as use the best weapons and armor which won't unequip even after the spell wears off.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 04:20
|
|
|
I don't think I was a mage mage, but I always try to learn a bunch of spells in these types of games because they allow you to manipulate the environment and traverse in unexpected and often hilarious ways, which is half the point. Edit: ah, just remembered the moment when I was forced to become a full-time mage: those ultra-fast Terminators in full plate. Force Wall + Fire Wall, boom. woodenchicken fucked around with this message at 06:17 on Aug 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 06:09
|
|
|
FuzzySlippers posted:I've been trying to google this but I can't find any numbers. Any ideas on how many distinct grid cells were in old grid based rpgs like World of Xeen or Wizardry 7? Maybe just the average for the dungeons? This varies based on the RPG. I'm going to pull things off the top of my head here; be warned as I'm not going to actually look any of these up.  AD&D Gold Box, and Buck Rogers: overland maps vary significantly by game, if they even exist at all. Later-game overland maps fit in like 2/3 of the screen. Indoor maps are usually 16 by 16 (there are a few that are larger, the one that comes to mind is the sprawling mess that is Secret of the Silver Blades); these are often space-filling. Bard's Tale 1, 2: all maps are 22 by 22. In most later maps, these maps are space-filling; expect most of the 484 squares to actually be used. (I don't know why 22, it's not a number that's even for either humans or computers.) Bard's Tale 3: map sizes vary, but the maximum is 22 by 22 (though I don't think there are many this big until you reach the final dungeon); there are a lot of small towers with much smaller levels though. Dragon Wars: I think the maximum map size is 32 by 32, though maps are usually significantly smaller. Eye of the Beholder 1, 2, 3: I think the maximum map size is something like 32 by 32. Maps tend to use most of the space. Magic Candle 1, 2, 3: Outdoors maps: roughly 128 by 128; it isn't very space-filling in 2 and 3. 2 has kind of a rectangular map. Town maps: 32 by 32 in 1; in 2 or 3 the large maps can be 64 by 64 (Telermain is huge!) Dungeon maps: 32 by 32 in 1; 2 or 3 they can be 32 by 32, 32 by 64, or 64 by 64. Might and Magic 1, 2: all maps are 16 by 16. These maps are usually space-filling. Might and Magic 3, 4, 5, Swords: all outdoor map sectors are 16 by 16. Indoors maps may be 16 by 16 or 32 by 32; tower levels in 4 and 5 are pretty small. In either case, maps are sparse and not so space-filling compared to the first two games. Phantasie 1, 2: overworld map sectors are 16 by 16. Dungeons are ... 40 by 40, I think it's bigger than 32 by 32. Phantasie 3: overworld is a single large map, it's something like 48 by 64 (it's longer north-to-south than east-to-west). Indoors maps are I think 32 by 32. Ultima 1: overworld maps are 64 by 64. Town and castle maps are ... 32 by 32? First-person dungeon levels are 16 by 16 at most. Ultima 2, 3: overworld, town, and castle maps are 64 by 64. (If the town and castle maps feel gargantuan, it's because they are.) First-person dungeon levels are I think 16 by 16. Ultima 4, 5: overworld map is 256 by 256. (I've met more than one person who drew maps of the entire overworld, all 65535 of them, by hand, for both these games. There just weren't very many games in those days!) So is the underworld map in 5, but much of that isn't actually used. Town/castle maps are 32 by 32 (if you played these games after Ultima 1/2/3, they felt small). First-person dungeon levels are quite small; they can be more than 16 tiles on a side, but they're generally much smaller. Ultima 6: I think this is 8 1024 by 1024 levels, although only the main Britannia surface actually takes up anywhere near this much space. I think the same principle applies to Savage Empire and Martian Dreams (walking halfway around Mars in Martian Dreams takes a loooong time, and you have to walk at first!) Wizardry 1, 2, 3, and 4: all levels are exactly 20 by 20. Maps in 1 don't usually take up all 400 squares, but the maps in 2, 3, and 4 tend to. Wizardry 5: levels vary widely in size; level 7 is the closest to being square, I think it's 32 by 32. Level 4 is long and skinny, be prepared to tape together graph paper if you do that one by hand. Wizardry 6, 7: levels vary widely in size; if you use editors you can see large levels stitched together from smaller maps with bunches of silent teleporters in long rows and columns.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 08:22
|
|
|
woodenchicken posted:Edit: ah, just remembered the moment when I was forced to become a full-time mage: those ultra-fast Terminators in full plate. Force Wall + Fire Wall, boom. Longer range fireballs seem to do less damage for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 10:14
|
|
|
Also, while we're talking map dimensions, Deathlord is worth a mention since it's so weird in a lot of ways. Every map in Deathlord is 64 x 64 tiles except for the world map, where 4 tiles are shaved off of all edges so it's essentially 56 x 56 tiles. Since the overworld is 16 x 16 sectors that makes it 896 x 896 tiles. (of which slightly over 95% is water, making getting anywhere a chore) Dungeons, despite being on a 64 x 64 tile map, are carved up into four 32 x 32 sections each, though some dungeons span multiple maps. However there are some dungeon levels that "bleed" a little over the edges a little on those sections. The full four-level dungeon mapped out will still be 64 x 64, but you might have an instance where the top-left quadrant is 33 x 32 and then the top-right quadrant is 30 x 31 to make up the slack. This can make things get hairy and allow you to do fun things with the teleport level spell. The teleport level spell allows you to move directly up or down a level, so you can go from tile 10,8 on level 3 to tile 10,8 on level 4 for example. But there are a few places where you can stand on those "bleeding" spots and mess things up. If you're standing on level 1 with a tile of x-coordinate 34 and teleport one level down, you'll end up straight off the 64 x 64 map, and into a "map" populated by garbage data from whatever was in memory.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 18:40
|
|
|
Genpei Turtle posted:Haven't been following development for a while, has the ability to copy or move tiles from one layer to the other been put in yet? I hate spending time on a map only to learn I've accidentally drawn half of it on the wrong layer and have to start all over.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 18:11
|
|
|
Made it through my quest to go through Pool of Radiance -> Curse of the Azure Bonds -> Secret of the Silver Blades -> Pools of Darkness with one party. Human Fighter/Mage Human Fighter/Mage Human Cleric/Paladin Human Mage/Ranger Human Fighter/Cleric Elf Fighter/Thief/Mage The elf, as predicted, plateau'd pretty bad around the end of SotSB due to level caps but was still useful enough as a utility mage/archer to keep around through PoD. Plus this is first ed AD&D so anyone who can use a 2h sword *and* gets a backstab multiplier can occasionally make their presence felt, and "scroll/wand monkey" is a valid job besides. The Cleric/Paladin and Mage/Ranger stalled out a bit too, whereas the Fighter/Cleric was at least always a cleric who could use a bow. If I was going to change anyone it'd be the Mage/Ranger; being able to cast arcane spells in armor sounded like a better idea than it turned out to be, plus there's not as compelling reasons to keep a ranger around as a paladin. Also a lot of the stuff a Mage/Ranger would nominally do winds up better handled by the Elf anyway. Probably should've just stayed straight mage with that one and had a pure mage at a higher caster level than the two fighter/mages. Especially since even by midway through CotAB spamming status effect spells and AOE damage spells is pretty well essential. Is there a remotely sane way to try going through Wiz6-8 with a single party? Especially given the mechanics changes in those from game to game are more drastic than PoR -> CotAB.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 16:20
|
|
|
chairface posted:Made it through my quest to go through Pool of Radiance -> Curse of the Azure Bonds -> Secret of the Silver Blades -> Pools of Darkness with one party. Did you change from Mage to Ranger, and Cleric to Paladin? It's far better to change from the tank class after it gets double attack to the caster class. That way the character has tank hit points and eventually an absurd amount of spells to cast.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
chairface posted:Is there a remotely sane way to try going through Wiz6-8 with a single party? Especially given the mechanics changes in those from game to game are more drastic than PoR -> CotAB. Oh, that's really easy. I've done it twice. Because of the class change mechanics 6->7 is an absolute lark where it almost doesn't matter what your party looks like before the transfer. 7->8 is less so in that you when you finish out 7 you want your party's classes to be what you want to play the entirety of 8 as, since class changing is not viable in that game. In both cases, it's more like some items being transferred with a massive head start in terms of stats and skills, and less bringing your party over wholesale as a "snapshot." That's especially so for Wizardry 8, as even a mid-game party in Wizardry 6 or 7 would be ridiculously more powerful than any native Wizardry 8 party could ever get.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 16:53
|
|
|
Largepotato posted:Did you change from Mage to Ranger, and Cleric to Paladin? Yeah that was mostly the conclusion I came to as well. Paladin-that-has-some-better-cleric-spells was still valid, but the Mage/Ranger just wasn't that useful even compared to the Elf Fighter/Thief/Mage or the Fighter/Cleric. The Fighter/Mages wrecked poo poo consistently aside from the rough patch where they're getting their mage levels back up over the fighter ones, so they have lovely spells *and* can't whip out a sword or longbow yet either.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 16:59
|
|
|
chairface posted:Made it through my quest to go through Pool of Radiance -> Curse of the Azure Bonds -> Secret of the Silver Blades -> Pools of Darkness with one party. Unless POD works differently than the other goldbox games, I don't think you can backstab with a two-hander; or did you simply switch weapons according to the enemy? The problem with keeping the same party is that you can't have rangers or paladins in POR, which was the root cause of your dual-classing troubles.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 17:13
|
|
|
chairface posted:Is there a remotely sane way to try going through Wiz6-8 with a single party? Especially given the mechanics changes in those from game to game are more drastic than PoR -> CotAB. The ability to change class freely in Wiz 6-7 means you should worry more about not getting your rear end kicked in those games. It's Wizardry, it's going to happen unless you grind far more than even I'm willing to. Though if you finish Wiz 6 you should breeze through the first third or so of Wiz 7 with a transferred party even if you haven't played it before. Just set your party for Wizardry 8 just before you finish 7; class changing is much less of A Thing in Wiz 8, the main changes that make sense there are a dip of a few levels in a related class, or a one-level dip into a class that has Stealth so you can train it way up. If you want to know which races and classes to include, there that FAQ I wrote, except I have a newer version that I haven't bothered to upload yet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2014 21:59
|
|
|
Damnit, the teaser site for whatever the former SSI (of Gold Box fame) project was just started another teaser timer the moment it ran out. Fitting, in a way. http://tsi-games.com/
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 17:06
|
|
|
I'd kill for a modern Unlimited Adventures. The Grimrock editor was fun but super limited. Still kinda boggles how extensive that editor was for 93, especially after all those user hacks came out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2014 17:35
|
|
|
From their Facebook page:TSI Games posted:The entire team at TSI is tremendously excited about the work we're doing. So excited that in fact, we put a date on the calendar and launched a countdown for when more details could be expected. Unfortunately, we're not going to do that reveal tonight... for business reasons. We want to be clear about this so you understand the key considerations. There's been a lot of cool announcements lately (the return of the Sierra brand, Obsidian working with the Pathfinder license, etc...) and we want to make sure that our message gets heard. Business reasons! Whatever they say about not being behind, following a countdown with a new countdown feels like a stumble right out of the gates.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2014 01:11
|
|
|
Their game has a name now, Seven Dragon Saga: http://tsi-games.com/ Or at least that's the PnP ruleset it's probably going to use: http://7dragonsaga.com/who-we-are/ (Notice it lists David Shelley and Paul Murray there, who're also part of TSI.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2014 00:00
|
|
|
A question about those old school grid based RPGs, and also I suppose grimrock by extension. I'm thinking of diving back into eye of the beholder and wizardry and uh. How the heck do I map what I'm doing? Like on a super basic level I get the whole pencil + graph paper thing. Where do I start the map though? So that I don't run out of paper to draw it on, how do I know how to orient it? etc.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 05:38
|
|
|
Quantumfate posted:A question about those old school grid based RPGs, and also I suppose grimrock by extension. I'm thinking of diving back into eye of the beholder and wizardry and uh. How the heck do I map what I'm doing? Like on a super basic level I get the whole pencil + graph paper thing. Where do I start the map though? So that I don't run out of paper to draw it on, how do I know how to orient it? etc. Some games include a spell or other feature that tells you your current map coordinates and/or what direction you're facing, giving you a starting point to work from: otherwise it probably makes sense to start near the middle of your paper. Of course, some of the meaner games will also occasionally include poo poo like invisible teleporters to gently caress with your mapping, so good luck with that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 05:40
|
|
|
Quantumfate posted:A question about those old school grid based RPGs, and also I suppose grimrock by extension. I'm thinking of diving back into eye of the beholder and wizardry and uh. How the heck do I map what I'm doing? Like on a super basic level I get the whole pencil + graph paper thing. Where do I start the map though? So that I don't run out of paper to draw it on, how do I know how to orient it? etc. I don't know, good question. I guess just start it somewhere in the middle if you don't know the general layout. Or use grid cartographer on the computer: http://www.davidwaltersdevelopment.com/tools/gridcart/
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 05:41
|
|
|
I need to make a better post about my Gen-Con retro gaming haul somewhere (perhaps in THE COMPANION THREAD), but in the meantime, I bought this entirely-unknown-to-me beauty at the Gen-Con Auction Store, and while I am pretty much 100% sure I would never sell it, I have to know whether it is super-rare or just "no, you just did not know about it because you did not have an Apple II*." Oh those pictures do not even load, here are some of mine  I have literally never been more excited to see something that was spiral-bound.  Looks like somebody already did all the mapping for me   Speaking of maps, while this is not as portable as the paper map that came with my copy, it does seem cooler. *until 2012
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 05:58
|
|
|
I don't know if many people in this thread are interested in old Japanese PC RPGs and RPG ports, but I just posted an interview with ex-StarCraft Toshio Sato over at the RPG Codex. StarCraft was arguably the most important Japanese company when it came to localizing/porting prominent Western CRPGs in the 1980s/early 1990s, from Ultima to Might and Magic to The Magic Candle etc. Toshio Sato worked on many of those localizations, as well as on the Japanese-only Phantasie IV and the original Japanese version of NWC's Tunnels & Trolls: Crusaders of Khazan. Even though the interview doesn't have a lot of groundbreaking new information, I think it's still a pretty interesting insight into StarCraft's history and the Japanese PC RPG market and development at that time. CrookedB fucked around with this message at 14:00 on Aug 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 13:50
|
|
|
Quantumfate posted:How the heck do I map what I'm doing? Like on a super basic level I get the whole pencil + graph paper thing. Where do I start the map though? So that I don't run out of paper to draw it on, how do I know how to orient it? etc. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 16:42
|
|
|
The world needs more AD&D 1e computer games. The fun of those games was exploration, combat, and secrets; every modern RPG is just a character build simulator. Dungeon Craft is a good remake of Unlimited Adventures, but it needs waaay more full modules and a full Goldbox series conversion. I just don't understand how SSI's Goldbox games have failed to receive a single remake/update/re-release/hq version.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 19:06
|
|
|
Quantumfate posted:A question about those old school grid based RPGs, and also I suppose grimrock by extension. I'm thinking of diving back into eye of the beholder and wizardry and uh. How the heck do I map what I'm doing? Like on a super basic level I get the whole pencil + graph paper thing. Where do I start the map though? So that I don't run out of paper to draw it on, how do I know how to orient it? etc. My opportunity to shine! (-ish) I bought Grid Cartographer and IMHO, it doesn't make things as easy as I'd expect from a paid, specialized application. Because of that, I use Excel. There are some free graph paper templates if you want, but for me, this is more than enough: Ctrl+A to select all -> Format -> Row Height -> 24,5; Format -> Column Width -> 3,57. This makes a nice square grid and you can start in any place you want because it's easy to insert rows or columns. From that point, you decide on your symbols, add some notes to the sides and draw the grid with colored lines (the borders tool in the font group) and cells. Once you get used to it, it's quick and simple. The result? Here's a collection of Might and Magic Book One maps I made, including the world map.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 21:17
|
|
|
begedin posted:My opportunity to shine! (-ish) Did you buy Grid Cartographer 1 or 2? Because it's come a long way since version 1. Having done the Excel thing and Grid Cartographer, I'd never go back to the former now unless I absolutely had to. It's really, REALLY good now, especially with the regions and layers the custom tiles and whatnot. Edit: Specifically, it's a lot more versatile in the way you can select things and move them around, put multiple layers to show/hide, and add notes. Genpei Turtle fucked around with this message at 22:00 on Aug 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 21:57
|
|
|
Genpei Turtle posted:Did you buy Grid Cartographer 1 or 2? Because it's come a long way since version 1. Having done the Excel thing and Grid Cartographer, I'd never go back to the former now unless I absolutely had to. It's really, REALLY good now, especially with the regions and layers the custom tiles and whatnot. Maybe I've since gotten used to Excel to much, but Grid Cartographer simply doesn't fit my "workflow". It's very much possible that it's just me and not the application. Of course, now that you said it, I'm giving it another try.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
CountingWizard posted:I just don't understand how SSI's Goldbox games have failed to receive a single remake/update/re-release/hq version. My current dev project contains something of a first person turn based rpg construction kit. My initial plan was to do first person navigation and third person overhead combat like Realms of Arkania / Goldbox / BaK and I had a prototype but every person I showed it to who hadn't played those old games found it absurdly confusing to switch the view frequently like that especially without retro visuals. I always liked that style because it meant detailed combat yet fast clean navigation (no herding cats around BG style) but it might be a tough modern sell. So now my combat is loosely based on Wiz8.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 00:04
|
|
|
Quantumfate posted:A question about those old school grid based RPGs, and also I suppose grimrock by extension. I'm thinking of diving back into eye of the beholder and wizardry and uh. How the heck do I map what I'm doing? Like on a super basic level I get the whole pencil + graph paper thing. Where do I start the map though? So that I don't run out of paper to draw it on, how do I know how to orient it? etc.  This is known as All Seeing Eye. Makes your EoB have an automap. http://personal.inet.fi/koti/jhirvonen/ase/ He has links to other remakes and the like plus his Gold Box hack thingie too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 04:04
|
|
|
Captain Rufus posted:
Thank you for posting this. My love of the EoB series has always been somewhat tempered by my hatred of drawing my own maps, but this is grand.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 14:50
|
|
|
This really is something. I spent a fair amount of time reading their entire page yesterday, and I'm stoked to be able to see the Amiga ending because, yes, the PC's is lackluster to say the least. I didn't even know there was more ending to watch... Any reason this does not exist for EOB3? And this is amazing... EOB1 speedrun: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihj-wDJ3IJY Crazy that the game can be finished in ten minutes. It shows how much extraneous content there was, how much of the maps was actually skippable, and how little combat was really required. Also, insane how well this player knows the maps... BadAstronaut fucked around with this message at 15:12 on Aug 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 14:57
|
|
|
BadAstronaut posted:And this is amazing... EOB1 speedrun: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihj-wDJ3IJY That kind of speed isn't all that unusual for CRPGs; 10 minutes is fast but it isn't crazy fast. The Ultima Underworld games are also action CRPGs and either can be completed in around 20 minutes; neither game has all that much in the way of sidequests either. EOB and UU are probably faster than average because action CRPGs tend to play faster, but I'd still say probably around a third of older CRPGs can be completed in less than 30 minutes, and a large majority in less than 60. Being able to play on a modern fast system helps enormously with speed. Don't to forget to mount your game directory on a RAM disk You may be thinking of the other classic AD&D games, the Gold Box games, which are probably especially slow if you're trying to speed run them. There's no way to avoid lots of lengthy combats in those games, and no good way to tear through them quickly. You may be also thinking of speed runs for console RPGs like Final Fantasy, which can approach 10 hours in length, but in that case times are often severely bloated by cutscenes (especially), that drat fight whoosh (seriously, those mandatory combat animations take up so much time in a Final Fantasy speed run), and the slower speed of older consoles. Back to EOB1 ... doesn't Xanathar have far more hit points than that? I remember him having multiple hundreds if you can't one-shot him, which I don't think you can do in the PC version without the Wand of Silvias. (The beholders in EOB2 have normal beholder hit points.) Also, OP, you might want to put that Web page in the first post, that's a Good Resource.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 19:22
|
|
|
So, grid cartographer is pretty great. What's a good party for EoB? I'm thinking I'll grab a cleric/thief at the least
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 19:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 01:43 |
|
|
Quantumfate posted:So, grid cartographer is pretty great. What's a good party for EoB? I'm thinking I'll grab a cleric/thief at the least Make a cleric and mage for sure. Don't make more than a single front-line fighter type to start with. You'll have to have a thief or cleric do double duty on the front lines to start with, but there are more NPC fighters than you can shake a stick at, and you'll end up picking up at least one to fill out your front ranks. The non-fighter NPCs don't show up until lower levels--Exception in that there's a thief on level 1, but he's just a pile of bones and you'll have to resurrect him to get him to join, which you're not going to be able to do until you scrounge up a resurrection scroll later on.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 20:10
|
|