I've never played a cRPG in co-op in my life and even selfish people should prefer turn-based - it's more tactical, easier to read, easier to follow, can be faster than RTwP, and most importantly allows for straight porting of P&P rules.
Dont tell me what I prefer. yes, yes, yes, CAN be faster. Ok. should use a hexgrid then I guess.
The "I like automation" isn't even an argument.
You are correct, it is not. It is not even meant to be. Just wanted to say that automation is a nice thing for some people, maybe just me.
Party AI systems can be implemented in turn-based games if you like just watching people do stuff instead of actually playing out the encounters.
Yes, my agency is rarely in the fighting part of games.
Seems like the people who defend RTwP simply like to breeze past combat encounters as fast as possible, and as such prefer the system because it doesn't force them to interact with the combat mechanics. Your average joe can breeze through BG1, 2, IWD, and PoE on core rules without really knowing what the fuck is going on mechanics wise.
again: Yes, my agency is rarely in the fighting part of games. also I have had enough players at the table incapable of understanding what the fuck was going on mechanics wise. Great players most of them.
Personally, none of the defining features of Baldur's Gate II were the real-time with pause system,
true. combat mechanics make beat em ups and spectacle fighter games great (maybe some others) for a story driven RPG the fighting system should not be a liability to the story. It can even be great in and of itself, but its role is to challenge you mechanically while the game challenges you morally with its quests.
so I'd welcome a change to a system that allows more depth, better pacing and faithful recreation of the ruleset.
as i just said, i don't think the depth of a cRPG is defined by how you go about clobbering the enemy mechanically. when Swen said that part about missing a lot being frustrating - imagine it in a turn based combat. it is infuriating enough to make you savescum. I have had players at the table totally frustrated by missing twice in a row with 80% + hit chance (iirc the worst streak was 5 misses at 90% hit chance, one being critical and losing the weapon, losing horribly to an objectively weaker foe in the process) in RTwP the high miss chance is mitigated by the fact that everything is moving so quickly. that is an argument. an actual argument why it might be TB (it wouldn't have been a problem elsewise) and what is tangibly better about RTwP. this doesn't mean I am on board for RTwP > TB. I'm not. I hated it in DA and SCL. it's just a counterpoint. quote from a totally diffent discussion: "If a counterpoint exists then the original point can't unilaterally disprove the argument." (Mekronid) and my counterpoint is exactly regarding to "keep true to the rules" because TB is very tempting for savescumming, which is totally not the rules. how about every targeting effect pauses the game until the effect is resolved for the movement vs. AoE discussion. Why always talk problems and not solutions?
