In fact, i just noticed one thing i that i hadnt quite understood before. Once thomas directly said NRFTW is about “More substance and depth that doesnt just come from systems”, and initially i didnt get what he meant by systems, but after reading these posts, now i fully understand what he meant.
This idea of “adding depth” by making you spec into things for shallow bonuses, or something of the sort, in leveling/progression systems that dont actually transform the gameplay, is precisely the kind of fake, pseudo depth that he speaks against.
I don’t see much point into continuing this as you are very stuck in your own views and perspectives. So this will be my final response to this.
Narrowing down your build has been a staple in RPG’s as I have mentioned many times before. People who want to play a knight generally want to pick talents or feats related to armor, shields, great-swords and or faith if they are a religious knight. The fact that you argue that talents and feats should not narrow down builds or hamper ‘creativity’, implies to me that you don’t understand class progression in RPG’s in that regard.
You can’t have only cool mechanics as you also need passive effects and flat or percentile buffs.
Look at WoW for example. You have various talents that add cool or new abilities that look amazing. Some of those abilities ended up being niche or next to useless and is it expended combat rotations or it was too much of a hassle to manage. Therefore, players pick a simple static effect that is simple to manage with the occasional cool effect. It is about furthering your build in a efficient or fun manner. If you have too many cool mechanics you won’t use all of them or won’t manage them properly.
Furthermore, you seem to contradict yourself repeatedly as you want new and cool mechanics. But, are also against new and cool mechanics because they don’t make sense? This is especially true for your second suggestion. You still have NOT given your own suggestion, so I can’t understand what it is that you would actually want. As you have some vague opinions but don’t give meaning to them.
All of this is why I consider your ‘suggestions’ invalid as I don’t see you as a credible source to take advice from. Have a good day.
You are now on severe copium over how i simply believe that the developers are against many of the things you are suggesting. You could say “well i disagree with them” or “okay but i still think this would fit” but instead you would rather just resort to borderline ad hominem.
You are the one that cant accept the concept of specializing in a way that doesnt just directly reduce playstyle variety and interactivity, or cant accept that im informing you about how the devs said they dont want to add things akin to what you described, and then say IM the one stuck on my views.
On that topic, the main reason i wouldnt really be able to give suggestions for this idea right now because its hard to tell what would work. The current attribute system is kinda garbager and totally going to get reworked, they are adding a talent tree, and so on. I cant tell what would be fitting or quality-adding in such a feat system, let alone whether or not such a system would feel relevant instead of bloat, if i havent yet seen what they are doing to the core progression.
Not sure if that idea matters to you, because, by your own admission, you dont seem to care very much about how fitting or synergizing your examples and suggestions are within the context of the game
There is no need for this kind of behavior if a discussion is not going your way. I’m just gonna block you, since you can not handle a civil discussion.
Edit: The reply below contains more false accusations and lies as he is the one who started this argument in bad faith. I already refuted his talking points but, he refuses acknowledge that. He also refuses to acknowledge my arguments. So everything I am accused of by him, he is guilty of himself. Hence me wanting to stop the discussion since nothing meaningful would come of it - as we are seeing right now…
you were the one that went with “i dont see you as a credible source” “youre too stuck on things to debate” instead of actually debating 2/3 the points of my post
Untrue
would you not like to see the several of quotes and timestamps of the developers saying they directly dont want things such as number bloat or random projectiles/explosions? okay, you can choose to believe whatever you want then.
no counterargument given, concession accepted, etc etc