You are essentially attacking the messenger, and not addressing the actual content of my messages.

I tend reply when someone addresses me in all posts on all topics, even when they are as off topic as this one. That doesn't mean I am "worked up", just that I answer what is addressed toward me.

Subtract my posts where I am simply responding to someone addressing me, and how many are left?

Getting back to the content of the post where you originally quoted me. Was my point not valid?

I agree with PeterScott on this matter.

I think it's too great of a balance change to include full party control in NWN and I believe it'd take a lot of resources that could be spent on less controversial and more universally desired features (such as unhardcoding feats).

That said, I wouldn't mind it, provided that:
1) module builders would be able to turn it off
2) old modules would have it turned off by default (for balance reasons)

Fair enough, only your first 3 posts were not responses.

As to your point, having full party control would not prevent you playing as the all-in-one Superhero character you describe. I sometimes play this way myself in NWN2. If it was implemented you could still carry on playing your way, whilst people who do want to control their henches could now do so.

That wasn't the point you originally quoted. That was an argument about NWN 1 being a Party RPG, and justifying that stance, by claiming it was so because you needed a Rogue to open locks. Which is actually NOT true. NWN is a Hero focused RPG, and pure fighters and mages can open locks, actually anyone can open locks, anyone can take "Open locks" as a cross class skill, anyone can bash locked items, and magical Knock option is also available. Which is stark contrast to pure Party games like Dragon Age, where ONLY rogues can open locked items.

I have a philosophical objection to trying to make NWN into something it isn't. NWN 1 is not a party based RPG.

As to your point you brought up here. That is also practical problem. If enormous resources were spent to build this functionality correctly, and have it switchable off by default, in such a way, that it was 100% backward compatible when off. Then theoretically that could work, but practically it will never happen and it is a waste of resources.

Beamdog has to maintain a very light touch when mucking around with core functionality, given the HUGE amount of community content that they will NOT do Regression testing with. A light touch is required to reduce breaking community modules which are the life blood of NWN today.

If Beamdog are twiddling their thumbs looking for things to fix, they should do a better job on the "scalable UI", not simply double size the original UI and provide blurry looking resize only available at 2X original or larger. 2X size only available at higher resolutions, will likely have ZERO benefit to those on laptops who most need the scalable UI. They really need 1.5X for laptop users.

Also there aren't that much resources (2d bitmap images) in the 2D UI they are "scaling" that they couldn't at least spend a few hours of graphic artist time, doing full resolution for the 3X size assets, and scale down for 2X and 1.5X. It would looks so much better.

It would probably be better if we stayed on the topic, and left the "What should Beamdog best spend resources on?" issue for a seperate thread.

I thought your example of the Lockpicking was to demonstrate your wider point about how a single character could be all-round proficient in every game mechanic so that was how I answered it. And why do you keep using Dragon Age as an example? Surely a far more relevant comparison would be NWN2, which uses a rule set that is basically NWN1's but has a full complement of party members.

As it happens Beamdog apparently seem to favor your "very light touch to making changes on functionality" approach and have spoken against the idea of implementing FPC, so it seems that they and you are of like mind on the issue.

The lockpicking was an answer to someone else who brought it up.

Why Dragon Age? Because it is a pure from the ground up Party game. NWN2 is kind more like modded NWN which has more vestiges of the the previous game which isn't party based and the Lockpick example shows the difference between the Pure game, and DA is actually a game that has the limitation that the poster claimed that NWN 1 had (but didn't).

If FPC is something a significant slice of players don't want, and Beamdog doesn't want to do, why are we even talking about it at all?

Open lock is still stay simply by the fact that breaking chest may result in distraction of loot. So while everybody can get the chest open - not everybody has the same result

Nwn is using party based roleplaying system and translate it pretty closely to original. With all it other class dependencies. Real solo rpg made solo from ground up does not restrict players ability to finish quest or fix the problem by choice they made on lvl 1

Also I an not seeing majority being against full party control here. I just see two vocal minorities, who for some reason think FPC means interchangeable pawns. Other people including Lilura himself either totally ok, or want this feature in builder

And there we have it. It all comes down to the fact that you would find it personally offensive if other people could play NWN1 in a way that you don't like, even if you could completely ignore it. That's why it doesn't matter to you that implementing FPC wouldn't take anything away from you. I suspected this was the case.

Neither does NWN. You keep making inaccurate arguments.

Only it's not inaccurate. Everything in game is based around idea of party play. Why casters waste so much time to cast a spell and loose it so easily? Solo games like Torchlight or Test does not prevent you from casting spell while being hit. Why there are skills that only special classes can take? Why no matter how high you disable device skill you can't remove trap with DC 35 without a rogue level?.Oh, and how about existence of enemies with ohko spells, which has no player input to avoid? DnD is partybased system, no matter do you like it or not. So nwn1 is using party based system while denying actual party interaction. So it has the same feelings as playing Battlefront 2 classic solo companion. Kinda solo, but that's soooo inferior to actual online

You don`t need fully party control in that situation, simple put a function to ask for your rouge hench to disable the traps o if you are a barbarian, few traps will kill you. I agree that nwn1 need improvements in that aspect, but if fully party is implemented, should be optional. You should be able to set rules and your party follow this rules. TBH i don`t like micromanagement, this is why i loved DA:O. If you like you can take control and if you like, you can simple put "rules" in tactics and they will follow your order, then you can enjoy the good part of party based RPGs like the interactions, possible romances, dialogues and etc without the boring micro management. I an not saying that fully party control will ruin nwn1 or that i an against this be in game. Only that improvements in "IA" is more important.

About the casting time, a lot of spells for Sorcerer and Magick Archer in Dragon`s Dogma require a long time to cast. Both classes are viable to play without any pawn(sorcerer is more hard, but MA have immolation). In nwn1, you have a very powerful familiar and have a lot of defensive spells(like in pnp), so solo sorc is viable too in nwn1. Solo cleric is viable. His spells in some aspects are more powerful than sorc like Implosion, have good hit dice, AC, defensive and offensive spells. Cleric in rpgs tends to be boring as hell but in DnD based games, they managed to make a cleric interesting to be played. He is much more like a representative of a deity on Earth than a boring guy that can only "cure" To be honest, i found more hard to play Arcanum than nwn1. Because spells require a lot of "fatigue" and tech stuff require a lot of materiel.

----------------------------

Now with fully party control. A Cleric being able to cast "Create greater undead" that can create a Lich and a Mummy who can cast mid tier(tier 4~6 spells) and have undead immunities, cast aura of fear. Or a epic pale master with a "Lesser demilich" taking control of his creature. If he can equip his creature, he can make his creature invincible.

So take a Rogue level if you are worried about level 35 traps. There is no reason to be pure in this game. NWN character building is EXTREMELY flexible. You have three classes to choose from, and nearly any fighter class will only be made stronger from a few Rogue levels. The flexibility and richness in class building was one of the best things about NWN.

In fact much more flexible than VtMB which you used as example of "solo games" that didn't tie you down like NWN does.

I have VTMB, and you starting choices are MUCH more restrictive than in NWN. Each clan tilts your skill and point allocations, and you can't choose to be good at every skill.

Choose a Nosfertatu and you won't be doing seduction based quests.

And unlike NWN, you can't just mix and match clans to build your do everything hero, you are stuck with the limitations of your clan.

So again, completely inaccurate.

Nosferatu is extreme example. I also has MotB and I played game with both dialog savvy Brudha, gun trottling nospheratu, casting Tremire and gangrel. But at no point of game for any class there were situations like "Damn, I REQUIRE nospheratu to open this lock because only nospheratu has "openthislock so my only option is to ignore it or destroy"

Multiclassing by the way is also not an answer since
A)Xp penalty exist.
B)You has only three slots

So once again Nwn1 at it's core has party based mechanics.but it deny actual ability to play as a party

I don't think anyone is arguing otherwise.