My MM6 Review (WARNING: VERY LONG)

[Philip W.Stanley]

I finally finished MM6 this weekend. This was one of the longest
CRPGs that I can remember. I have been an avid fan of the Might and
Magic series since MM3. For that reason, I would like to express some
opinions on this latest installment in the Might and Magic series. My
main reason for this is to express my likes/dislikes so that further
discussions can be started and possibly make their way to NWC. Only
in that manner can NWC know what their consumers want in the Might and
Magic game series.

Please remember that these are my opinions and I know that others will

have different views. This is submitted as a source of discussion and
not as an invitation to heated flame-mail. Thank you.

***TURN-BASED COMBAT*****************************************

PROS:

- The introduction of reaction time is a great addition. It makes
sense that a knight or paladin clad in Plate Armor swinging an
enormous meat cleaver will take longer to attack than a light-armored,
dagger-wielding Sorcerer. Additionally, some spells take more out of
the spellcaster than others, making combat more strategic. Well done,
NWC.

-Critters end up coming straight at you instead of their zig-zag,
drunken approach pattern.

CONS:

- Even though I used it extensively, allowing your party to repair
items during combat just doesn't make sense to me. It also doesn't
make sense to me that I can perform complete equipment changes with
another character not to mention that the other character's combat
round isn't affected at all. It seems like my party would call
"time-out!" and proceed to make potions, fix items, change
gear/weapons, and then jump back into the fray.

- I really disliked the fact that flying creatures could sit right
above me without my being able to see them. I found it kind of
ridiculous that I had to cast the Fly spell just to do hand-to-hand
combat with them (Plus, Fly does not work indoors!). I can see the
strategy of the critter, but please allow me to look up and give them
nasty, bloody, steel-singing death.

- Ever since Eye of the Beholder III, Ultima Underworld, and Doom, it
seems as if every game on the market is in real-time. While this may
appeal to action/adrenaline afficionados, it does not appeal to this
person who puts in a full day of work and wants to settle down to some

enjoyment when he gets home. The real-time games require the brain
and reflexes to be ultra-sharp, resulting in my feeling even more
tired after playing it. The fact that I had to stay sharp to ensure
that I hit <Enter> in time to initiate turn-based combat became the
first thing I intensely disliked about the game. With the current
engine, I am not sure what advice to give. One point of pondering
that I will present is the Microprose combat in XCom:Apocalypse. When
entering a battle situation, the game asks if the combat should be in
real-time or turn-based combat. Because of this, I didn't have to
force my eyes from not blinking just in case a critter would dart
across the screen. In a nutshell, give us old, slow-reflexed gamers
the chance to have a complete turn-based system so that we don't have
to load up on caffeine just to play the game.

- How about some more information during combat? I would like to know
if a critter is just lucky when my mega-spell seems to have no effect.
It was very frustrating trying to find what spell schools the
high-level critters were not resistant to. I would end up thinking
they were totally magic resistant and beating my worthless weapons
against their hides. Then, out of frustration, the spell was cast
again and them critter sufferred a flaming, crispy death.

- A general complaint: tell me if the target is out of range. Nothing
is more frustrating than having my Dragon Breath (the "SP drainer") go

"ka-put" two feet in front of the target and then getting nailed with
their "Turn to Goo" spell immediately afterward.

***SOUNDS*****************************************

PROS:

- Good idea to have the critter's "call" eminating when your party was

nearing upon their position. That was one thing I greatly enjoyed
when I played Daggerfall for the first time. Kudos.

- I liked the fact that critters made a specific sounds when they
attacked, took damage and died. This added more realism to combat in
my opinion. This also helped me to figure out if I was even
scratching them from range with bows and spells. I also like the fact
that the game's sounds could alert me to when items became broken or a
character was stuck with poison or disease.

- I utterly loved the "God man, that was good!" when my Paladin killed

something.

- I fell out of my chair when I killed the Devil Queen and heard the
"victory rant". I wonder if that was patterned after an NWC employee.

Very nice touch by the NWC crew.

CONS:

- I expected a little more when the Light and Dark spells were cast.
I was very disappointed with the sounds for Sun Ray, Shrapmetal, and
Hour of Power. Guess I should buy a subwoofer for more enjoyment,
huh? Just a suggestion, but Warcraft II acutally had the spellcaster
say some sort of mantra for each spell. This old D&D gamer really
liked that aspect. This would probably be a little tough to implement
since each character in M&M has their own voices.

- IMHO, a Master Cutlass of Infernos or relic weapon should make a
more menacing sound than a plain old dagger or club.

- "Greetings and Salutations!" got old quickly. Either let me turn
the character's greetings off or let me hear the homeowner's voice
instead.

- How about a sound when the party is falling like in M&M IV & V? You

know, screams to raise the dead.

***MOVEMENT*****************************************

PROS:

- Flying. Fantastic addition. However...

CONS:

- Fly next to cliff, make inadvertant contact, plunge to death! 'Nuff

said.

- Why can't I jump over an itty-bitty trickle of water without losing
300 hit points? I remember an NPC saying that the water was really
cold and that was why I couldn't wade in shallow water. However, the
fact that the trickle couldn't be more than 6 inches deep really
ticked me off when my party lost 25-33% of their hit points.

- Why is it so hard for my party to jump up a 1.5 foot step? I have
to cast a Jump spell just to go a flight of steep stairs. Needs
improvement.

- Since the real-time movement was a major part of this game, why
can't I climb? Daggerfall let you climb too many things, but I think
I should be able to climb 6 feet up a brick wall. Why not give the
party ropes and ladders as in previous M&M games?

- When moving sideways, the <Shift> key does not accelerate this
movement. This was my main mode of travel in the dungeons as I want
to see what is around the corner I am taking or up the infinite spiral
staircase.

- Why was it that I would sometimes take damage when running on a
bridge over water?

***USER INTERFACE*****************************************

PROS:

- Overall, I liked it. I liked the HP/SP meters, screen buttons, and
time of day indicator.

CONS:

- I am a keyboard junkie. One reason why I loved the previous M&M
games was that I could lean back with the keyboard in my lap and have
full control. The keyboard control seemed partially implemented in
MM6. I couldn't select spells, inventory items, make potions, select
targets, view critter health, or select conversation topics. I hope
that NWC implements this type of control in MM7.

- The overhead map in the upper-right of the screen should be a square
or circle for evened viewing. The triangle-type view was restricting
and frustrating.

- Why did each character have the proximity gem next to their
portrait? Since they are virtually occupying the same space, it
doesn't make sense to have four separate ones as they are always
giving the same indication.

- After applying patch v1.1, the message box would sometimes display
damage as "MT".

- I liked that MM III-V would display a spell affect or blood splat to
let you know how effective you were. Granted, there was some of that
in MM6, but not like previous games where it filled the screen. It's
picky, but it is just a preference I have.

- Whatever happened to "Use Item". I really miss this.

- Bring back "Recharge Item". If I can enchant an item, it should be
easier to simply pour mana into an object.

***DIFFICULTY INCREASE*****************************************

PROS:

I'm thinking! I'm thinking!

CONS:

- In regards to critter levels, this game was tough starting out, got
easy, and then became impossible. There were many misplaced critters
in my opinion: Oozes in Dragoons' Cavern, Gold Dragon in the "Medusa
dungeon", Cuisinarts and Doom Knights with Swordsmen (Silver Helm, I
think...), and F$%#ing Eyes with Ogres. There were probably some
others, but I don't want to try to recall all of them.

- Darkmoor Castle: I have one point of advice for NWC: DO NOT put
level 80 critters (4 million Eyes) in a dungeon where you know the
characters are only going to be level 20!!!!!!! The surrounding
critters outside generally gave some sort of hint as to how difficult
the dungeons on that map area were going to be. This was one that was
totally out-of-place.

- Dragonsand: See next topic

- Hermit's Isle: See next topic

***HORDES UPON HORDES*****************************************

PROS:

- When fighting low-level critters, having an enormous number of
critters results in fantastic effects for spells like Meteor Shower,
Starburst, and Dragon Breath. However...

CONS:

- Dragonsand was waaaay too overpopulated. I didn't even end up
finishing this section out and I got sick and tired of "1. run in, 2.
get pumelled by 400 dragons, lizards and wyrms, 3. crawl out in a
bloody, broken, and battered mess".

- Some people like the respawning critters. I don't. It didn't make
sense that I rid New Sorpigal from the Goblin Hordes just to have them

waltz right back in one year later. This seemed to nullify my past
accomplishment and also go against the story. I also wanted to feel
that I was saving the land of Enroth (cleaning up the trash). Since
they all came back, what good was I doing? I know that many will
argue that it makes sense, but I think that it diminishes the feeling
of accomplishment.

- I like combat like the next guy, but having to slay hordes upon
hordes of critters got very boring. Masses upon masses of spiders in
the Abandoned Temple, the skeleton of every person who has ever died
in the Temple of Baa, the 6 billion f#$%ing Eyes in Castle Darkmoor,
the Dwarven over-population boom in Snergle's Cavern...Need I say
more? I would rather see 3 or 4 super-tough critters in a group than
waves upon waves of semi-tough critters. It got to the point where
instead of feeling victorious, I felt like, "Thank God, I'm finally
done!" The endless hordes ended up taking way too much time in
dealing with them. It made me want to stop playing the game as I
didn't want to go through another hour of A-A-A-A-S-A-A-S-A-A-S-A.
The majority of time spent on this game was not due to puzzle and
quest solving, but rather hitting the "A" and "S" keys. Combat is
great, but it should not be the domineering crux of a CRPG.

- The respawning critters in Werewolf Cavern really pissed me off.

***CHARACTER
CLASSES/RACES/PORTRAITS*****************************************

PROS:

- I have seen all of the posts complaining the quality of the
character portraits, but compared to MM5, they are much better in
quality.

- I liked the facial expressions each character would have: missed
attack, spell blows up party, taking damage, poised/diseased, drunk,
weak, making potions, identifying items, etc...

- Thanks to NWC for giving a full view of the character adorned in
their equipment. Good start.

CONS:

- Being an old RPG gamer, the main focus of the RPG is to use the
imagination to exist as a different character. The RPG is not just a
"roll-hit" experience. A true gamer uses their imagination to "see"
the character going through the steps. Being said, I sorely miss the
ability to have different races (Orc, Dwarf, Elf, Gnome, etc...).
Rarely are there multi-character fantasy RPGs that do not contain this
feature. Limiting us to human characters takes away from that
"fantasy" aspect. I like to imagine a 7-foot, butt-ugly Half-Orc,
clad in his Plate Armor from Hell, carrying his Apocalyptic Meat
Cleaver, and smiling when he rounds the corner into a bunch of
ill-intent dwarves. He then exclaims, "Breakfast!" I know that this
requires NWC to create all of these species portraits and their
expressions, but it would make the game 100 times more enjoyable to
me. Having the choice of races also allows for
advantages/disadvantages to be weighed in when creating a party. The
Dwarves go into berserker frenzies which increase in damage but reduce

their defense. Dwarves also have high resistences/hit points. Elves
have intelligence bonuses and are resistant to magic. They also have
lower endurance (hit points) and are not as strong as others.
Half-Orcs: stupid, immensely strong, dispensers of bloody, sushi
death. Hell, they can even eat less party food by dining on their
victims. Gnomes: ingenious, resistant little boogers. Great for
THEIVES!!! PLEASE, PLEASE BRING BACK THE RACES!!!!

- I miss having 6 characters as in M&M III-V. This allowed for more
well-roundedness of the party.

- How about some minorities? I know that NWC only had a limited
number of people show up for character pictures, but I would rather
have diversity than image quality portraits.

- Bring back the other character classes! (Thieves, Ninjas)

- Maybe allow for character class customization. This was one of the
things I enjoyed most about Daggerfall. This could also allow for the
advantage/disadvantage feature.

***MIGHT VS. MAGIC*****************************************

PROS:

NONE

CONS:

- I was sorely disappointed to see how magic was greatly overpowering
compared to weapons. This wasn't always so. In previous M&M games,
certain classes gained significant increases to number of attacks per
round. This resulted in fighters being able to dish out as much
damage as magic tossers. As my game in MM6 progressed, I felt that I
should have made my party with 2 sorcerers and 2 clerics/paladins. My
archer seemed absolutely worthless. If a creature was magic-resistant
in other games, you could rely on your steel-swingers to bail you out.
Not so in MM6.

- Stats were insignificant. When my Paladin had 300+ might, he should

have been cleaving buildings in half. Instead, he inflicts
mosquito-level damage. A sorcerer with 200+ intelligence should have
an enormous boost to their spell points and/or increased damage. In
defense of NWC, luck really seemed to affect whether an enemy spell
hit or not. Strength should have a significance in determining the
amount of damage done as well as recovery time.

***WEAPONS************************************************

PROS:

- Relics and artifacts are a fantastic idea. However...

CONS:

- Weapons with enchantments should not be more powerful than
relics/artifacts. I had two Excalibur swords but sold them quickly as
my characters were doing more damage with Master Cutlasses of <insert
major affect here>.

- Spears that were used two-handed provided a boost to damage. That
was logical. However, two-handed swords and axes really didn't do
much more damage than their one-handed counterparts. If I hit you
with a 7-foot Scottish claymore, you will have a much more serious
wound than if I hit you with a 2.5-foot rapier.

- Ancient Weapons were discarded after first use. I heard that they
really make a difference in real-time, but since I never use
real-time, they were of no use to me (save destroying the Reactor).

***INEFFECTIVE/USELESS SPELLS*****************************************

PROS:

- Didn't have to consider which spells to launch! :)

CONS:

- Many Body/Spirit/Mind spells appeared worthless. How come there
aren't many area-effect damage spells? I know they are healers, but
they should have more combat ability. Maybe change a spell to
area-effect when they reach Master/Grand Master (see below) skill
levels? Without this ability, Clerics are nothing but medics you try
to keep alive during combat. If I ever play MM6 again, I will NOT
have a cleric in the party.

- To save time, a list of ineffective/useless spells:

1) Flame Arrow - no damage/level increase.

2) Haste - I never wanted to cast it as it made my party weak during a
big fight.

3) Static Charge - no damage/level increase.

4) Shield - I just never used it. Might have been helpful with lizard

archers in beginning. Not much else.

5) Cold Beam - no damage/level increase.

6) Enchant Item - While this spell is great starting out, not being
able to make bad-ass enchantments was frustrating. This should be
made available in MM7 by requiring some major sacrifice/commitment.
Require 10 days for a major enchantment. The caster suffers an age
increase of XX years depending on the enchantment. The caster suffers

attribute loss. In addition, I was perturbed when trying to make
decent items and getting a +1 to luck on a Scarab ring. The level of
the enchantment should have something to do with the quality of the
item. BTW, "of the Gods" really changed meaning from the previous M&M

games. It should be changed back to its original benefit. Another
point of consideration: Give us some factor in determining the
outcome of this spell. I would like to see an Enchant Item spell
under each discipline of magic. The Enchant Item spell under the Fire
discipline would do some sort of fire-based resistance, damage, or "of
the Phoenix" enchantment. The same goes for Water, Air, and Earth,
respectively. This would also allow for the Light and Dark schools to
have some kick-ass enchantments (Vampiric, of Life, etc...) but with
higher sacrifices required.

7) Stun - never could justify using it. Probably ignorance on my
part.

8) Magic Arrow - no damage/level increase.

9) Death Blossom - I never got this to do any damage.

10) Turn to Stone - What do you mean, "temporary"? Stone is stone is
stone.

11) Spirit Arrow - Great at beginning levels but useless afterwards.

12) Healing Touch/First Aid - Open these slots up as healing spells
should be level-based.

13) Guardian Angel - "Load Game" works better. The angel should
provide some protection or help you fight in your "heavenly and just"
cause.

14) Turn Undead - Doesn't work in turn-based combat. Thanks alot.
Whatever happened to this spell doing damage? There is also a lack
of undead in this game compared to previous M&Ms. Where are the
Zombies, Vampires, Ghouls?

15) Meditation - Only useful when standing next to spell-point
well/fountain.

16) Charm - Does this work?

17) Mass Fear - Doesn't work

18) Feeblemind - Doesn't work

19) Psychic Shock - Has a dragon on the spell picture but doesn't do
squat against them. False advertising.

20) Golden Touch - I never had a problem with money in the game
(except maybe level 1). Never had to use this. I guess that you
could have instant returns on your loot without having to leave the
dungeon and sell it.

21) Dispel Magic - How can I tell if a critter has an enchantment or
not? Why waste the spell points and not even know if it worked?

22) Destroy Undead - Only ONE target. Come on guys.

23) Prismatic Light - Got it to work once.

24) Reanimate - XP generator. Useless otherwise. No need to use this
spell, just return one year later (outside). I read one very humorous
post where one guy kept reanimating one of the f@#$ing Eyes just so he
could finish taking out his frustration of there being so many of
those bastards.

25) Mass Curse - Didn't see much of a difference. Still got my clock
cleaned.

26) Shrinking Ray - Halves their physical damage, not magical. A
general belief in magic systems is that the body of the caster is a
conduit of the forces of magic. If this is the case, shouldn't
something 1-foot tall only deal out corresponding damage? Either that
or they cause themselves damage because the force is too great for the
vessel.

27) Finger of Death - I have a better chance of yelling "BOO" and
having the critter die of a heart attack. Maybe my party shouldn't
brush their teeth, then they could use the "Breath of Death".

28) Moon Ray - Useless before. Useless now.

29) Dragon Breath - Don't get me wrong. I used this spell
extensively. However, I got nearly the same results from two Fireball
spells with just 16 SPs spent compared to 100.

30) Armageddon - Other than serving as a reputation destroyer, this
was useless.

31) Dark Containment - With all of the hype seen through the game, I
was expecting more. I expected a hell of a lot more when I saw how
much it cost in spell points. Cute results but it virutally has the
same effect as Turn to Stone.

In conclusion about spells, I thought that the Light and Dark
disciplines cost waaaaay too many points for some of their spells. I
could justify spending those SPs if the effects were better.

***PLOT/STORY*****************************************

PROS:

- I have seen posts saying that it follows the plot from Heroes of
Might & Magic. I am happy for them. There were a few references to
the previous M&M games with "VARN" and references made by the Oracle.
They put a nostalgic grin on my face.

CONS:

- The plot had the movement of a elderly snail with hemorroids.
Despite a decent start, you were really led along at a slow pace with
very few main plot developments. I enjoyed the Snergle side-story,
but it really didn't make up for the main story. I heard King Roland
only a couple times and found his journal in Kriegspire. More
information about him or trying to find more things regarding him
could have helped the plot along. The Oracle idea was good and having
to complete specific quests before admittance was granted was logical.
However, I was hoping for some sort of movie when I finally got to the
Oracle as I had put in alot of hard work and time to get there. I
don't count the short movie of Slicker Slacktongue, er...Slacker
Silvertongue, uh...Silver Shavehistongue, oh whatever; telling me that
he is pissed (Oooh, scary! Never saw him again). Instead, the Oracle
tells me that more quests need to be performed before it can help me.
Thanks alot. Back to the same-ol' "kill things, get stuff, put it
here" quests. I pretty much knew what the outcome was going to be
from the beginning: Find the Devils' Lair, kill them all, and you will
be a hero. In order to get there, you had to get and place items. If
this is what the plot is reduced to, at least give us some eye-candy.
I would have liked to seen a short movie when talking to the Oracle
for the first time. Maybe a short movie when placing the last memory
crystal. Just a few goodies here and there would have given me a
better sense of accomplishment.

- Puzzles. MMIII had lots with tombstones, treasure chests, and
dungeon/secret entrances. Not so with MM6. There was Castle Alamos,
the Goblinwatch code, the VARN codes, and the blasted Temple of Baa
riddle, but I really can't remember others apart from those.

- How about those bounty quests? It was sort of like "If you can kill

an Ungodly Critter of Ultimate Death (given your current level), I'll
give you a pittance and an 'Attaboy!'. By the way, you got two days
left to do it in." Just take these bounty hunts out and give me some
more puzzles/riddles/significant plot developments.

***INVENTORY SPACE*****************************************

PROS:

- I liked seeing a large, detailed representation of items.
Previously, an obsidian great axe was the same 2 cm icon as a regular
two-handed axe. Good improvement.

CONS:

- MM7 should have the rings, amulets, gauntlets displayed in the same
window as the other equipment. I really, really hated having to click
the little button to find out if the critter's "no damage but break
shit" attack had rendered one of those items useless (More about that
later). I would gladly reduce the size of the character full-view
picture in order to include the accessories in the same view.

- Give me some sort of indication that when two identically looking
items are exchanged. I always ended up clicking multiple times
because I thought I missed clicking directly on the item.

- Does this make sense? A 200+ strength character can only carry a
specific volume of items equal to that of a character with a strength
of 10. It really struck me odd that I was limited to a restrictive
inventory grid for my "items no longer having an owner". Take a hint
from Ultima VII. You can throw as many things into your backpack/bag
as long as you are strong enough to carry it. Granted, the 200+
strength character will have tons of items upon items that it will be
difficult to find what you are looking for, but it only makes logical
sense. When a powerful knight can only carry 40 potion bottles, but a
weakling sorcerer can carry three sets of plate armor and 7 helms,
something is wrong in the world.

***NPCs*****************************************

PROS:

- Finally, wandering people to talk to. In previous games, NPCs were
doing one of the following:
1) Selling something
2) Quest information
3) Sitting invisibly at a table or bench and giving a little useless
info.
This is much better.

- Innocent bystanders in the village can get cacked. The result is an

ensuing riot by the rest of the village. Not much fun for my party,
but it is a perfect example of "mob mentality". Good job. However,
if it was me and I saw one of my fellow townspeople split in half with
one attack, I would have tremendous reservations about attacking that
motley looking crew with a pointed stick.

- Although I didn't use them except for once (only for a short time),
the idea of followers is good. I miss the mercenaries you could hire
in previous M&M games, but I can live with it.

- Wandering NPCs will actually refuse to talk to you. Good idea, but
only dealt with reputation, not diplomacy. Should have incorporated
both.

CONS:

- My party must look like royalty or a popular music group because I
attracted those wandering NPCs like flies to a dung heap. This
wouldn't have been bad except that they block you from moving except
back the way you came. Too bad there wasn't a "No bathing" option for
the party. I bet I wouldn't have had that problem at that point. I
know that you could yell to get them out of the way, but that got
bothersome when trying to run to a castle/shop/house. I liked the
wandering NPCs in Daggerfall where you could walk right through them.

***SHOPS*****************************************

PROS:

- Variety of shops: differing prices, weapons shops specialized in
specific types of weapons, pissed-off shopkeepers for non-paying
customers. More realistic than Fen's Fineries. Multiple schools of
magic. Makes sense.

CONS:

- Couldn't have I just had one superstore (Wal-Mart) someplace? "We
sell every type of weapon at wholesale!"

- Would have liked to have seen some shops getting their hands on some

major items. Maybe even relics/artifacts. "Yeah, you can get that
but it will cost you a kidney."

***TRAVEL*****************************************

PROS:

- Nice touch adding the coach companies.

- Travel schedules for coaches/ships. Makes sense. Good idea.

CONS:

- Five days travel for what? I can understand the need to load map
sections just as was done for the previous games, but why charge me
the 5 days? It you are going to do that, make the cloth map
correspond with a large forest or desert between sections. I could
also accept a charge of one day if the cloth map doesn't change from
its current appearance.

- Due to five-day travel cost, could not fly from map section to map
section. Really bummed me out when I was fleeing for my life through
the air and ran into the map border. Death quickly followed as deemed
necessary by the pursuing critters.

- If I cast Lloyd's Beacon to recall my party to a location set when I
was flying, please put me on the ground. Currently, I get put on the
ground, but it is in the form of a red, pasty goo after I have plunged
to my demise.

- Why is it that when I enter a map section, I am placed in the middle
of blood-thirsty critters? Wouldn't I have seen them from a distance
sometime during my 5-day travel?

***SKILLS
(USEFULNESS/MASTERY)*****************************************

PROS:

- Addition of weapon/armor skills is a nice improvement.

CONS:

- Sword skill...Why can't it also have a damage increase? I realize
that allowing Master level swordsman the ability to wield two swords
is a bonus, but that really doesn't help in the damage department past
level 20 or so.

- Diplomacy...How do we know when or if it works?

- Perception...This is really aggravating. This skill can only be
used if I click on every little thing. Previous M&M games (Spot
Secret Doors skill) had the little gargoyle dude whose arm would go
into spasms when near a secret door. For MM7, how about the character
with the high level of perception saying, "What's that?" Then I will
gladly click on everything in the immediate area. Instead of
Perception keeping the character from taking damage from an exploding
chest, how about a "Danger Sense" skill? Makes more sense to me.

- Merchant skill. I have to be an extremely high-level to get close
to the value of an object. If NWC decides not to change this, how
about just not showing the value of an object so that I don't know
what I should get for it? That way, I will be content with the price
I get for an item no matter what skill level my character is at.
Additionally, wouldn't it make sense that when I am selling items that
my merchant character would be doing the "deal"? A very monotonous
task was transferring everything to my merchant to get the best price.

***SP/HP REGENERATION ITEMS*****************************************

PROS:

- They exist. Thank you NWC.

CONS:

- These are rendered useless when attaining higher levels. MM7 should

have these items restore a certain percentage of the character's total

points per a defined period. For example, a Ring of SP Regeneration
could restore 2% of a character's total SP every 5 minutes. Do the
same thing with the HP regen items and I will be a happy camper. I
hate resting for no reason but to recharge my spell points.

***POTIONS*****************************************

PROS:

- Black and White potions are very useful early in the game.

- Fun to try and experiment with mixing potions.

CONS:

- As with SP/HP regeneration items. These should restore a percentage
of total SP or HP.

- How about an Alchemy skill and the ability to make offensive potions

that can be thrown/used: explosion, corrosion, sleep, blinding, gender

conversion. Hehehe...make those all-male Orc and Dwarf bands freak
out. Don't forget the all-female Archers and Druids. BTW, I am just
kidding about the gender conversion stuff. Now that I think about it,
you could have an alchemist character class. Now that would be cool.

***MONSTERS*****************************************

PROS:

- New critters. I like to be surprised with something I never heard
of. It's also nice to see some familiar ones as well. Good job.

- Great graphics for many of them. I like the damage reactions,
attacks, and death animations. Some of the top character depictions
in my book were: (in no particular order)

1) Titans
2) Dragons
3) Goblins
4) Fire Elementals, Beasts, Spirits
5) Agar's critters
6) Minotaurs (nice and menacing)
7) Thunder, Fire, and Lightning Lizards
8) Suckers (Vampire, Blood, Brain)
9) Spiders
10) Cobras
11) Veterans
12) Cuisinart, Doom Knight, Death Knight (one of my favorites)
13) Harpies (God I hate those ugly things-That means good job)

CONS:

- Attacks: instant kill, full health/mana drain, and "break at will".

These are definitely a dislike on my part. The "break at will" attack
should only occur if a tremendous amount of damage was done or if the
attack caused the character to reach 0 HP. The instant kill should be

used very sparingly. If they get an Eradication spell, why can't I?
That is much different than the Finger of Death spell. The full
health/mana drain can stay if it is used sparingly. Maybe only used
by a ONE specific, super-tough critter.

- Why do they get unlimited spell points? I realize that critters
might be magical in nature, but come on, the same argument could me
made for spellcasters.

- Devils looked pretty cartoonish except for the queen. She was done
well.

- Werewolves looked ridiculous. For as tough as they are, they should

have a more menacing look. To me, they look like a German Shepard
walking on its hind legs with pants and bad costume jewelry. Make it
all black with red eyes and dripping saliva and I will take them more
seriously.

- As seen in this newsgroup, there have been some posts about
slaughtering monsters that pertain to minority groups. This did stike
me before seeing it in the newsgroup and it bothered me (especially
considering my party looked like a bunch of aryans). Then, I thought
to myself, these guys wouldn't be so dumb as to do this on purpose. I
do think that it should be addressed in MM7 after seeing the responses
in the newsgroup.

***INDOOR MOVEMENT*****************************************

PROS:

- I got rather perturbed with the sliding downhill, especially when it
was not a steep slope and it was made from a rough textured material,
i.e.: wood.

CONS:

- At least give me a levitate/fly spell indoors. If flight spells are

air-based, is that to say that there is no air in dungeons?

***MUSIC***********************************************

Seemed OK to me. However, I usually end up turning the music off and
turning on the radio or playing CDs. Since I didn't have the music on

during game play, I really can't give a valid assessment of it. The
one thing that I do know, I am extremely grateful for the ability of
turning it down where it can't be heard. If anyone remembers the
legendary game, Darklands, the one thing that still haunts me to this
day is the same damn music that you couldn't do anything about. I
majored in music at Indiana University so I tend to criticize music
very harshly. I will however make the statement that I think
MechWarrior II has the greatest music ever (Ooh, get ready for the
flame-mail). BTW, if anyone has a full-time job opening for a
composer, arranger, performer, voice-overs, and/or fantasy/SF artist,
give me a call.

***DUNGEONS***********************************************

PROS:

- All very different. Thin or grand passages, different sized rooms,
elevators, symmetrical, unsymmetrical, small things, large things .
All of these made dungeon delving a delight in this game. I was
constantly surprised with the unique appearance and construction of
each dungeon. Never did I have the feeling of "Well, I've been in
here for an hour, I am probably close to being done." It was great
that when I thought the dungeon was winding to a close, a whole new
section would be stumbled upon. I consider this to be the best game
for dungeon design that I have ever seen. Mind you, not all of them
were enjoyable, but these, by far, outweigh any other dungeons in any
other game that I have ever played before. Daggerfall had about 5
different dungeon designs and are so complex that one can get lost
very easily. I guess the land of Daggerfall had an extreme shortage
of dungeon architects. Either that or there was a booming business in
the modular dungeon industry.

CONS:

- Hall of the Fire Lord. That damned door on the left! I am one of
those gamers who explore every nook and cranny, so you can guess how
frustrating this was.

- Riddle for accessing the treasure room of the Temple of Baa was
ridiculous. If I didn't have this newsgroup, I probably would have
stopped playing the game right there and then. I like riddles and
puzzles, but only those that actually have a chance of
decyphering/solution.

***CONCLUSION*************************

MM6 was a fantastic addition to the M&M series. However, it got to
the point where it became a laborious endeavor. I download a saved
game editor so that I could get it over with. I abandoned the
Dragonsand map as I grew tired of getting slaughtered (before saved
game editor). I was disappointed to find out that the obelisk quest
only lead to a treasure chest. There should have been some sort of
quest in the main storyline addressed through solving that puzzle. As
it was, I didn't want to wade through the hundreds of dragons just to
get to a treasure chest that would probably contain items less
powerful than what I already had. All in all, this game was worth
every penny, but monotony really hit after 2/3 of the game was done.

If you have differing opinions regarding my review, please post them
to the group so that discussions can follow and we can make MM7 more
enjoyable for all of us.

[confused]

nospam_...@rmii.com (Philip W.Stanley) conjured up this insight:

Nice post with several good thoughts. I have a few sprinkled comments
but I have one all encompassing critical comment-- you take much to
much liberty with the "realism" thing. Some things you either like or
dislike. If you can use the "realism" argument to your benefit you
do, if it would work against you you either ignore it or explicitly
disparage it.

Personally, I fall squarely and resolutely in the "screw realism this
is a game and it is FUN that I want, not a "realistic simulator of
some fantasy world." But once I do this then I have to resist the
temptation to use the "that's not realistic" argument about things I
don't care for. You want to use it or lose it depending on how it
fits with your feeling about something.

>CONS:

>- Even though I used it extensively, allowing your party to repair
>items during combat just doesn't make sense to me. It also doesn't
>make sense to me that I can perform complete equipment changes with
>another character not to mention that the other character's combat
>round isn't affected at all. It seems like my party would call
>"time-out!" and proceed to make potions, fix items, change
>gear/weapons, and then jump back into the fray.

A perfect example of "this is NOT realistic."

>CONS:

>- Fly next to cliff, make inadvertant contact, plunge to death! 'Nuff
>said.

Hmm, seems pretty realistic to me; also, one should *never* fly
without a feather fall active.

>- Why can't I jump over an itty-bitty trickle of water without losing
>300 hit points? I remember an NPC saying that the water was really
>cold and that was why I couldn't wade in shallow water. However, the
>fact that the trickle couldn't be more than 6 inches deep really
>ticked me off when my party lost 25-33% of their hit points.

Ah, not realistic enough.

>- Why is it so hard for my party to jump up a 1.5 foot step? I have
>to cast a Jump spell just to go a flight of steep stairs. Needs
>improvement.

Ah, not realistic enough.

>- Why was it that I would sometimes take damage when running on a
>bridge over water?

Sounds like a bug, never happened to me.

>- The overhead map in the upper-right of the screen should be a square
>or circle for evened viewing. The triangle-type view was restricting
>and frustrating.

Agreed.

>- Bring back "Recharge Item". If I can enchant an item, it should be
>easier to simply pour mana into an object.

Ah, realism you would like.

>CONS:

>- In regards to critter levels, this game was tough starting out, got
>easy, and then became impossible. There were many misplaced critters
>in my opinion: Oozes in Dragoons' Cavern, Gold Dragon in the "Medusa
>dungeon", Cuisinarts and Doom Knights with Swordsmen (Silver Helm, I
>think...), and F$%#ing Eyes with Ogres. There were probably some
>others, but I don't want to try to recall all of them.

>- Darkmoor Castle: I have one point of advice for NWC: DO NOT put
>level 80 critters (4 million Eyes) in a dungeon where you know the
>characters are only going to be level 20!!!!!!! The surrounding
>critters outside generally gave some sort of hint as to how difficult
>the dungeons on that map area were going to be. This was one that was
>totally out-of-place.

Hmm, would it be "more realistic" that tough monsters never teamed
with weak ones or just something you'd rather have?

>CONS:

>- Dragonsand was waaaay too overpopulated. I didn't even end up
>finishing this section out and I got sick and tired of "1. run in, 2.
>get pumelled by 400 dragons, lizards and wyrms, 3. crawl out in a
>bloody, broken, and battered mess".

Once you get strong enough, Dragonsand is as easy as everywhere else.

>- Some people like the respawning critters. I don't. It didn't make
>sense that I rid New Sorpigal from the Goblin Hordes just to have them

I'm still ambivalent about that. Sometimes I liked it, sometimes I
didn't.

>- I liked the facial expressions each character would have: missed
>attack, spell blows up party, taking damage, poised/diseased, drunk,
>weak, making potions, identifying items, etc...

Argggggghhh. Our tastes could not be more different. I literally
came "that close" to returning the game when I saw the "real life"
portraits in use. It was one of the three WORST parts of the game to
me. It took a couple of days before I could quit griping about it and
even begin to ignore it. And those expressions- puullleeeasse! I
wanted to smack my own party upside the head just for looking so
inane.

>- Thanks to NWC for giving a full view of the character adorned in
>their equipment. Good start.

Yes, good start, now, PLEASE GET RID OF ALL RED EQUIPMENT AND CLOTHING
OF ANY KIND OR PICK A DIFFERENT COLOR FOR BROKEN. Thank you.

>- I was sorely disappointed to see how magic was greatly overpowering
>compared to weapons. This wasn't always so. In previous M&M games,
>certain classes gained significant increases to number of attacks per
>round. This resulted in fighters being able to dish out as much
>damage as magic tossers. As my game in MM6 progressed, I felt that I
>should have made my party with 2 sorcerers and 2 clerics/paladins. My
>archer seemed absolutely worthless. If a creature was magic-resistant
>in other games, you could rely on your steel-swingers to bail you out.
>Not so in MM6.

>- Stats were insignificant. When my Paladin had 300+ might, he should

>have been cleaving buildings in half. Instead, he inflicts
>mosquito-level damage. A sorcerer with 200+ intelligence should have
>an enormous boost to their spell points and/or increased damage. In
>defense of NWC, luck really seemed to affect whether an enemy spell
>hit or not. Strength should have a significance in determining the
>amount of damage done as well as recovery time.

Since you stayed in turn based (something I would normally, and
preferably do) you saw only half the picture. In realtime, everything
was reversed. Weapon combat in real time was way too powerful. You
could run around and carve up really tough monsters. I've posted too
much on this topic in other threads so I refer you to those for
details.

>- Weapons with enchantments should not be more powerful than
>relics/artifacts. I had two Excalibur swords but sold them quickly as
>my characters were doing more damage with Master Cutlasses of <insert
>major affect here>.

This always happens with these special items in games. Desiginers are
always afraid of making something too powerful so they end up being
pretty useless.

>- Spears that were used two-handed provided a boost to damage. That
>was logical. However, two-handed swords and axes really didn't do
>much more damage than their one-handed counterparts. If I hit you
>with a 7-foot Scottish claymore, you will have a much more serious
>wound than if I hit you with a 2.5-foot rapier.

You've hit on one of my pet peeves in games. Two handed weapons NEVER
do enough extra damage to make them worth it. Forget about the 7 vs.
2.5 foot realism argument, it's just a matter of "why bother having
two handed weapons when they NEVER are worth using?"

>- To save time, a list of ineffective/useless spells:

Mostly agree, but not all.

>6) Enchant Item - While this spell is great starting out, not being
>able to make bad-ass enchantments was frustrating. This should be
>made available in MM7 by requiring some major sacrifice/commitment.
>Require 10 days for a major enchantment. The caster suffers an age
>increase of XX years depending on the enchantment. The caster suffers
>attribute loss. In addition, I was perturbed when trying to make
>decent items and getting a +1 to luck on a Scarab ring. The level of
>the enchantment should have something to do with the quality of the
>item. BTW, "of the Gods" really changed meaning from the previous M&M
>games. It should be changed back to its original benefit. Another
>point of consideration: Give us some factor in determining the
>outcome of this spell. I would like to see an Enchant Item spell
>under each discipline of magic. The Enchant Item spell under the Fire
>discipline would do some sort of fire-based resistance, damage, or "of
>the Phoenix" enchantment. The same goes for Water, Air, and Earth,
>respectively. This would also allow for the Light and Dark schools to
>have some kick-ass enchantments (Vampiric, of Life, etc...) but with
>higher sacrifices required.

Mostly agreed. I too would like some mechanism of choice. I would
have been willing to pay big bucks at one point to be able to do "of
dragon slayer" and "of demon slayer" on command so I didn't have to
haul two weapons and a bow of each in addition to regular stuff.

>9) Death Blossom - I never got this to do any damage.

It barely worked in some situations, never worthwhile.

>10) Turn to Stone - What do you mean, "temporary"? Stone is stone is
>stone.

Hmm, realism eh?

>16) Charm - Does this work?

It worked, but why bother? Only worked on monsters you could just as
easily kill. Ditto for most other of these types.

>17) Mass Fear - Doesn't work

It worked, see above.

>18) Feeblemind - Doesn't work

It worked, see above.

>
>20) Golden Touch - I never had a problem with money in the game
>(except maybe level 1). Never had to use this. I guess that you
>could have instant returns on your loot without having to leave the
>dungeon and sell it.

Yea, I guess it could be useful if I didn't know portal/lloyds so I
could make pack space by converting to gold. But what's the chance of
that by the time I know Golden Touch?

>23) Prismatic Light - Got it to work once.

Actually one of the only light/dark combat spells I found useful.

>24) Reanimate - XP generator. Useless otherwise. No need to use this
>spell, just return one year later (outside). I read one very humorous
>post where one guy kept reanimating one of the f@#$ing Eyes just so he
>could finish taking out his frustration of there being so many of
>those bastards.

It was very lame. I remember using that spell in moria a lot on those
slime-blob things that sucked up loose treasure. If I ever found a
really nice one I'd reanimate it quite a few times to multiply the
loot.

>27) Finger of Death - I have a better chance of yelling "BOO" and
>having the critter die of a heart attack. Maybe my party shouldn't
>brush their teeth, then they could use the "Breath of Death".
>

Agreed.

>28) Moon Ray - Useless before. Useless now.

Actually, it worked pretty good. Best part about it was it got me
outside for some night fighting just so i could use it.

>
>30) Armageddon - Other than serving as a reputation destroyer, this
>was useless.

NO, this was one of my most used spells in the end game. It was the
only way to easily rid the towns of those obnoxious NPCs that
aggrevated me to no end.

>
>31) Dark Containment - With all of the hype seen through the game, I
>was expecting more. I expected a hell of a lot more when I saw how
>much it cost in spell points. Cute results but it virutally has the
>same effect as Turn to Stone.

Another great entertainment spell. Especially useful in the NWC
dungeon.

>In conclusion about spells, I thought that the Light and Dark
>disciplines cost waaaaay too many points for some of their spells. I
>could justify spending those SPs if the effects were better.

Agreed. Actually the lameness of light and dark made Sorcerers pretty
sad. Druids are actually much more useful.

>- MM7 should have the rings, amulets, gauntlets displayed in the same
>window as the other equipment. I really, really hated having to click
>the little button to find out if the critter's "no damage but break
>shit" attack had rendered one of those items useless (More about that
>later). I would gladly reduce the size of the character full-view
>picture in order to include the accessories in the same view.

Agreed!

>- Give me some sort of indication that when two identically looking
>items are exchanged. I always ended up clicking multiple times
>because I thought I missed clicking directly on the item.

Agreed. Trick for now- you can right click on something while
something is in the cursor, so you can id the equipped one after the
first click.

>- Does this make sense? A 200+ strength character can only carry a
>specific volume of items equal to that of a character with a strength
>of 10. It really struck me odd that I was limited to a restrictive
>inventory grid for my "items no longer having an owner". Take a hint
>from Ultima VII. You can throw as many things into your backpack/bag
>as long as you are strong enough to carry it. Granted, the 200+
>strength character will have tons of items upon items that it will be
>difficult to find what you are looking for, but it only makes logical
>sense. When a powerful knight can only carry 40 potion bottles, but a
>weakling sorcerer can carry three sets of plate armor and 7 helms,
>something is wrong in the world.

Ah, the old realism argument again.

>***NPCs*****************************************

>PROS:

NONE- well ok, the only pro was that they were easily killed off.

>CONS:

>- My party must look like royalty or a popular music group because I
>attracted those wandering NPCs like flies to a dung heap. This
>wouldn't have been bad except that they block you from moving except
>back the way you came. Too bad there wasn't a "No bathing" option for
>the party. I bet I wouldn't have had that problem at that point. I
>know that you could yell to get them out of the way, but that got
>bothersome when trying to run to a castle/shop/house. I liked the
>wandering NPCs in Daggerfall where you could walk right through them.

AGREED!!!!!! The NPCs almost ruined the game for me.

>- Five days travel for what? I can understand the need to load map
>sections just as was done for the previous games, but why charge me
>the 5 days? It you are going to do that, make the cloth map
>correspond with a large forest or desert between sections. I could
>also accept a charge of one day if the cloth map doesn't change from
>its current appearance.

Argh, the "realism" argument carried to the Nth degree.

>- If I cast Lloyd's Beacon to recall my party to a location set when I
>was flying, please put me on the ground. Currently, I get put on the
>ground, but it is in the form of a red, pasty goo after I have plunged
>to my demise.

Seems realistic to me that you should end up at the same place in the
Z axis as where you cast it.

>- Why is it that when I enter a map section, I am placed in the middle
>of blood-thirsty critters? Wouldn't I have seen them from a distance
>sometime during my 5-day travel?

Ah, that would be more realistic.

>***SKILLS
>(USEFULNESS/MASTERY)*****************************************

>PROS:

>- Addition of weapon/armor skills is a nice improvement.

>CONS:

>- Sword skill...Why can't it also have a damage increase? I realize
>that allowing Master level swordsman the ability to wield two swords
>is a bonus, but that really doesn't help in the damage department past
>level 20 or so.

I disagree.

>- Diplomacy...How do we know when or if it works?

As far as I could tell, it never did work.

>- Perception...This is really aggravating. This skill can only be
>used if I click on every little thing. Previous M&M games (Spot
>Secret Doors skill) had the little gargoyle dude whose arm would go
>into spasms when near a secret door. For MM7, how about the character
>with the high level of perception saying, "What's that?" Then I will
>gladly click on everything in the immediate area. Instead of
>Perception keeping the character from taking damage from an exploding
>chest, how about a "Danger Sense" skill? Makes more sense to me.

I never had the skill so I wouldn't know. This would be a major
manual gripe of mine. If they are going to give info about what a
skill does than make it COMPLETE AND ACCURATE or just forget about it.

>- Merchant skill. I have to be an extremely high-level to get close
>to the value of an object. If NWC decides not to change this, how
>about just not showing the value of an object so that I don't know
>what I should get for it? That way, I will be content with the price
>I get for an item no matter what skill level my character is at.
>Additionally, wouldn't it make sense that when I am selling items that
>my merchant character would be doing the "deal"? A very monotonous
>task was transferring everything to my merchant to get the best price.

You needed to hire NPCs more. All you needed was a master level 7 in
your party to get full value in both directions. Agreed about the
monotony of transfering. Same can be said for repairing.

>***SP/HP REGENERATION ITEMS*****************************************

>PROS:

>- They exist. Thank you NWC.

>CONS:

>- These are rendered useless when attaining higher levels. MM7 should

>have these items restore a certain percentage of the character's total

>points per a defined period. For example, a Ring of SP Regeneration
>could restore 2% of a character's total SP every 5 minutes. Do the
>same thing with the HP regen items and I will be a happy camper. I
>hate resting for no reason but to recharge my spell points.

They weren't nearly as useless if you used real time combat more. I
agree they were pretty useless if you stuck with turn based.

>- Why do they get unlimited spell points? I realize that critters
>might be magical in nature, but come on, the same argument could me
>made for spellcasters.

Realism revisited.

>- As seen in this newsgroup, there have been some posts about
>slaughtering monsters that pertain to minority groups. This did stike
>me before seeing it in the newsgroup and it bothered me (especially
>considering my party looked like a bunch of aryans). Then, I thought
>to myself, these guys wouldn't be so dumb as to do this on purpose. I
>do think that it should be addressed in MM7 after seeing the responses
>in the newsgroup.

I didn't see these posts but the only gripe I would have is about the
all milk-toast party chars. The eclectic nature of the bad guys was
just fine.

>- I got rather perturbed with the sliding downhill, especially when it
>was not a steep slope and it was made from a rough textured material,
>i.e.: wood.

Not realistic enough?

>CONS:

>- At least give me a levitate/fly spell indoors. If flight spells are

>air-based, is that to say that there is no air in dungeons?

Not realistic enough?

>***MUSIC***********************************************

Probably the first game ever, of any genre, where I didn't turn the
music off forever after three minutes of game play.

>If you have differing opinions regarding my review, please post them
>to the group so that discussions can follow and we can make MM7 more
>enjoyable for all of us.

Ok, I'll do that. (:

confused.

[JLee862009]

>nospam_...@rmii.com (Philip W.Stanley)

wrote:

>- Fly next to cliff, make inadvertant contact, plunge to death! 'Nuff
>
>said.
>
>

Just press pageup when that happens...you will stop falling. Either that or
cast feather fall right after you cast fly,

>When a powerful knight can only carry 40 potion bottles, but a
>weakling sorcerer can carry three sets of plate armor and 7 helms,
>something is wrong in the world.
>
>

I guess you won't like the FF series where your party can carry about 4842983
items...

>know that you could yell to get them out of the way, but that got
>bothersome when trying to run to a castle/shop/house.

Agreed,,,I would shout "get out of the f*&$ing way!!" when it happened.

>Additionally, wouldn't it make sense that when I am selling items that
>my merchant character would be doing the "deal"? A very monotonous
>task was transferring everything to my merchant to get the best price.
>
>

Yes...also you couldn't take off armor or weapons during a sale and you had to
leave the shop and then come back in which led to some "see you later
cheapskate"s which was ridiculous since I was coming back in 1 second later
anyway...

>- As with SP/HP regeneration items. These should restore a percentage
>of total SP or HP.
>
>

Speaking of potions: yes, and then to add insult you can get 700+ hp or sp back
at New Sorpigal for 10 gp...

[T.J. Nijweide]

confused (confused@now_totally_bewildered.com) wrote:
: >- Why was it that I would sometimes take damage when running on a
: >bridge over water?

: Sounds like a bug, never happened to me.

No bug, when you run you fall off the end of the bridge and hurt yourself.
Just use feather thingie.

Tob

[John M Reynolds]

In article <6n8216$q8q$1...@camel15.mindspring.com>, confused <confused@now
_totally_bewildered.com> writes

>>- Why was it that I would sometimes take damage when running on a
>>bridge over water?
>
>Sounds like a bug, never happened to me.

Actually this happened to me once, causing the instant death of all
of my party members. ;(

What I think happened was that when running over the bridge you
slightly leave the ground. At this point windows decided to
swap like crazy (it seems to do so on my system about 1 minute
into the game, and is fine from then on). This caused MM6 to stall
for a few seconds. When I started again I think it must have noticed
that I had been falling for several seconds, and so inflicted
massive damage on my party.

It does seem to be a bit of a bug (the clock system should notice
if a frame has taken a VERY long time and not advance the game
time quite as much), but not a serious one. Another time when
windows swapped I ended half way across a big cavern in one step.
I've learned to watch out for this and have not suffered any
great problems with it.

This is a problem I've seen with quite a few games. I really
wish windows had a better virtual memory system. When it goes
into swap frenzy it completely stalls things (including
processes at RealTime priority, which I consider to be a bug).

Cheers,

--
John M Reynolds

[confused]

John M Reynolds <jo...@thehorizon.demon.co.uk> conjured up this
insight:

>This is a problem I've seen with quite a few games. I really
>wish windows had a better virtual memory system. When it goes
>into swap frenzy it completely stalls things (including
>processes at RealTime priority, which I consider to be a bug).

Ah. Well at least there's a cheap (at current prices) work around.
Add another 64 or 128 MB of RAM. "Throw more RAM at it" is my
favorite solution to software problems anyway. At current prices,
having less than 128MB of RAM on a PC makes no sense at all.

confused

[Warren A. Smith Jr.]

On 29 Jun 1998 13:40:23 GMT, tob...@socrates.et.tudelft.nl (T.J.
Nijweide) wrote:

>confused (confused@now_totally_bewildered.com) wrote:
>: >- Why was it that I would sometimes take damage when running on a

>: >bridge over water?
>
>: Sounds like a bug, never happened to me.
>

>No bug, when you run you fall off the end of the bridge and hurt yourself.
>Just use feather thingie.

Actually, it is a "feature". It's happened to me. Sometimes the game
gets confused and thinks you are on the water when you are actually on
land. It has happened to me 3 or 4 times. One on a pier when I was
running up the pier and the computer thought I fell into the water but
I didn't really. Another time was when I jumped into water to cross a
small section. I continued to take damage even when stopped on the
shore until I moved a bit further to "remind" the game that I was now
actually on land. :) (And, yes, I'm certain I was actually on
land.) All in all, it's not a big deal if you run into it.
--
Live Long & Prosper!

Warren A. Smith Jr.
Pearl River, NY

[John M Clancy]

Philip W.Stanley wrote:
>

>
> ***INEFFECTIVE/USELESS SPELLS*****************************************
>
> PROS:
>
> - Didn't have to consider which spells to launch! :)
>
> CONS:
>
> - Many Body/Spirit/Mind spells appeared worthless. How come there
> aren't many area-effect damage spells? I know they are healers, but
> they should have more combat ability. Maybe change a spell to
> area-effect when they reach Master/Grand Master (see below) skill
> levels? Without this ability, Clerics are nothing but medics you try
> to keep alive during combat. If I ever play MM6 again, I will NOT
> have a cleric in the party.
>
> - To save time, a list of ineffective/useless spells:
>
> 1) Flame Arrow - no damage/level increase.

Agreed.

> 2) Haste - I never wanted to cast it as it made my party weak during a
> big fight.

That's what Cure weakness was for. :)
I used it all the time.

> 3) Static Charge - no damage/level increase.

Agreed.

> 4) Shield - I just never used it. Might have been helpful with lizard

Only used it with Day of Protection. But otherwise Agreed.

> 5) Cold Beam - no damage/level increase.

Agreed.

> 6) Enchant Item - While this spell is great starting out, not being
> able to make bad-ass enchantments was frustrating.

Agreed.

> 7) Stun - never could justify using it. Probably ignorance on my
> part.

Agreed. Never worked.

> 8) Magic Arrow - no damage/level increase.

Agreed.

> 9) Death Blossom - I never got this to do any damage.

Agreed. Too hard to aim.

> 10) Turn to Stone - What do you mean, "temporary"? Stone is stone is
> stone.

Didn't work near enough for me anyway.

> 11) Spirit Arrow - Great at beginning levels but useless afterwards.

Agreed.

> 12) Healing Touch/First Aid - Open these slots up as healing spells
> should be level-based.

Agreed.

> 13) Guardian Angel - "Load Game" works better. The angel should
> provide some protection or help you fight in your "heavenly and just"
> cause.

Agreed. Very useless spell. A better Idea would have been to
ressurrect an instant killed party member.

> 14) Turn Undead - Doesn't work in turn-based combat. Thanks alot.
> Whatever happened to this spell doing damage? There is also a lack
> of undead in this game compared to previous M&Ms. Where are the
> Zombies, Vampires, Ghouls?

Agreed.

> 15) Meditation - Only useful when standing next to spell-point
> well/fountain.

Agreed.

> 16) Charm - Does this work?

Only in real-time mode. Just as easy to kill the creatures. Useless
spell.

> 17) Mass Fear - Doesn't work

Only in real-time mode. See above.

> 18) Feeblemind - Doesn't work

True.

> 19) Psychic Shock - Has a dragon on the spell picture but doesn't do
> squat against them. False advertising.

What? It worked great on Red and Blue Dragons, Gold were immune.

> 20) Golden Touch - I never had a problem with money in the game
> (except maybe level 1). Never had to use this. I guess that you
> could have instant returns on your loot without having to leave the
> dungeon and sell it.

It was OK for a minor spell.

> 21) Dispel Magic - How can I tell if a critter has an enchantment or
> not? Why waste the spell points and not even know if it worked?

Very much agreed here. The spell seemed to work on some
monsters but it was hit or miss and no sure-fire way to
tell.

> 22) Destroy Undead - Only ONE target. Come on guys.

Plenty of other spells to kill undead with. Redundant spell.

> 23) Prismatic Light - Got it to work once.

Really? I used this spell all the time. Granted some of the
later more powerful foes were immune. I cleared out the Superior
Temple of Baa with those hundreds of priests and Druids in record
time With inferno and Pris light.

> 24) Reanimate - XP generator. Useless otherwise.

Agreed Completely useless. A better Idea would be to use
this on some quests to ressurect some towns people.

> 25) Mass Curse - Didn't see much of a difference. Still got my clock
> cleaned.

I never got it to do anything.

> 26) Shrinking Ray - Halves damage

Much easier just to kill the monster then it has no damage! :)

> 27) Finger of Death - I have a better chance of yelling "BOO" and
> having the critter die of a heart attack. Maybe my party shouldn't
> brush their teeth, then they could use the "Breath of Death".

Never worked for me.

> 28) Moon Ray - Useless before. Useless now.

No way! This spell was great for taking out the dragons
I just ignored the items braking and cast it a bunch of times
you can't relly die since it heals you. Made those battles
very fast.

> 29) Dragon Breath - Don't get me wrong. I used this spell
> extensively. However, I got nearly the same results from two Fireball
> spells with just 16 SPs spent compared to 100.
>
> 30) Armageddon - Other than serving as a reputation destroyer, this
> was useless.

It worked to soften up some dragons. It was great for a spell
that let you attack without getting in harms way. I wiped out
hundreds of hydras, lizards and drakes with that spell.

> 31) Dark Containment - With all of the hype seen through the game, I
> was expecting more. I expected a hell of a lot more when I saw how
> much it cost in spell points. Cute results but it virutally has the
> same effect as Turn to Stone.

Yup useless.

You forgot Divine intervention. What a waste! you can cast it
at only 2 specific times a day? WTF? I can just portal and
beacon and for 10 gold do the same thing! For less spell points
no aging and any time I want!. This along with DC were supposed
to be the most powerful spells in the game? Gimme a break!
I never needed to cast either one of them.

Other comments on spells: All the cure conditions spells
should work on the whole party at master level like the
Awaken spell. Having to cast cure insanity 4 times is a PITA!

I agreed pretty much with all your other points as well.
Good review.

--
John M Clancy aka MeleKahn aka Poison
"Where ever you are in life, that's where you
want to be"

[JLee862009]

>John M Clancy <jmcl...@MCI2000.com>
wrote:

>
>Other comments on spells: All the cure conditions spells
>should work on the whole party at master level like the
>Awaken spell. Having to cast cure insanity 4 times is a PITA!
>
>

Either that or they should have had a feature where the spellcaster could queue
up spells. Even if it meant waiting in real time for the charge up delay.

[Fe...@my-dejanews.com]

> -Critters end up coming straight at you instead of their zig-zag,
> drunken approach pattern.

Why? Do you always head straight toward them? I don't, I wouldn't expect them
too. The zig-zag technique is the best offensive maneuver you can make
especially against magic casters.

>
> CONS:
>
> - Even though I used it extensively, allowing your party to repair
> items during combat just doesn't make sense to me. It also doesn't
> make sense to me that I can perform complete equipment changes with
> another character not to mention that the other character's combat
> round isn't affected at all. It seems like my party would call
> "time-out!" and proceed to make potions, fix items, change
> gear/weapons, and then jump back into the fray.

Well, as you have four characters why wouldn't one of them take time out to
do these things. The flaw is that once a character enters inventory mode
they can manipulate all the party's inventory. But why couldn't 3 characters
ward off an enemy while one of them changes armor?

>
> - I really disliked the fact that flying creatures could sit right
> above me without my being able to see them. I found it kind of
> ridiculous that I had to cast the Fly spell just to do hand-to-hand
> combat with them (Plus, Fly does not work indoors!). I can see the
> strategy of the critter, but please allow me to look up and give them
> nasty, bloody, steel-singing death.
>

For the most part you can see them but even in real life you can look up and
it's not 360 degree peripheral vision. Besides Wizard's Eye takes care of the
complaint.

> - Ever since Eye of the Beholder III, Ultima Underworld, and Doom, it
> seems as if every game on the market is in real-time. While this may
> appeal to action/adrenaline afficionados, it does not appeal to this
> person who puts in a full day of work and wants to settle down to some
> enjoyment when he gets home. The real-time games require the brain
> and reflexes to be ultra-sharp, resulting in my feeling even more
> tired after playing it. The fact that I had to stay sharp to ensure
> that I hit <Enter> in time to initiate turn-based combat became the
> first thing I intensely disliked about the game.

You really must be joking. Hitting ENTER is a problem? I mean come on.

>With the current
> engine, I am not sure what advice to give. One point of pondering
> that I will present is the Microprose combat in XCom:Apocalypse. When
> entering a battle situation, the game asks if the combat should be in
> real-time or turn-based combat. Because of this, I didn't have to
> force my eyes from not blinking just in case a critter would dart
> across the screen. In a nutshell, give us old, slow-reflexed gamers
> the chance to have a complete turn-based system so that we don't have
> to load up on caffeine just to play the game

Yes but X-COM sux in just about every way so I hope nothing in M&M is ever
based on that silly piece of garbage. Hitting ENTER actually makes game play
a lot easier then if I had to decide on turn or real initially. With XCOM if
you selected turn you had to run all over the place looking for something and
it took forever. That got old.

> - How about some more information during combat? I would like to know
> if a critter is just lucky when my mega-spell seems to have no effect.
> It was very frustrating trying to find what spell schools the
> high-level critters were not resistant to. I would end up thinking
> they were totally magic resistant and beating my worthless weapons
> against their hides. Then, out of frustration, the spell was cast
> again and them critter sufferred a flaming, crispy death.

Man, if you get your way enemies won't stand a chance. Most enemy immunities
aren't that hard to figure out. Most of the time the logic I used was if it
casts cold then you need to cast hot etc. Actually my feeling is if the
enemy casts cold with cold immunity and you throw cold at him then he gets
back hit points. That would make you think about what you are doing when
casting spells.

>
> - A general complaint: tell me if the target is out of range. Nothing
> is more frustrating than having my Dragon Breath (the "SP drainer") go
>
> "ka-put" two feet in front of the target and then getting nailed with
> their "Turn to Goo" spell immediately afterward.
>

Naw, leave it. If this happens it only means that the player is a coward and
is afraid to step up!

> ***SOUNDS*****************************************
>
> PROS:
>
> - Good idea to have the critter's "call" eminating when your party was
> nearing upon their position. That was one thing I greatly enjoyed
> when I played Daggerfall for the first time. Kudos.

This isn't a bad idea but unfortunately Daggerfall's sound intelligence was
horrible. Sounds popping up when you walked by a wall with a critter on the
other side. Totally annoying and unrealistic.

>
> - I liked the fact that critters made a specific sounds when they
> attacked, took damage and died. This added more realism to combat in
> my opinion. This also helped me to figure out if I was even
> scratching them from range with bows and spells. I also like the fact
> that the game's sounds could alert me to when items became broken or a
> character was stuck with poison or disease.
>

We agree on this.

> - I utterly loved the "God man, that was good!" when my Paladin killed
> something.

Probably my favorite.

>
> CONS:
>
> - I expected a little more when the Light and Dark spells were cast.
> I was very disappointed with the sounds for Sun Ray, Shrapmetal, and
> Hour of Power. Guess I should buy a subwoofer for more enjoyment,
> huh? Just a suggestion, but Warcraft II acutally had the spellcaster
> say some sort of mantra for each spell. This old D&D gamer really
> liked that aspect. This would probably be a little tough to implement
> since each character in M&M has their own voices.

How is it a CON just because they don't make the sound you would prefer.

> - IMHO, a Master Cutlass of Infernos or relic weapon should make a
> more menacing sound than a plain old dagger or club.
>

The only thing I want to hear is the sound of the weapon thudding on a body.

> - "Greetings and Salutations!" got old quickly. Either let me turn
> the character's greetings off or let me hear the homeowner's voice
> instead.
>

Please....

> - How about a sound when the party is falling like in M&M IV & V? You
> know, screams to raise the dead.

Yeah, I think that should be included rather than just a surprised look on
their face.

>
>
> CONS:
>
> - Fly next to cliff, make inadvertant contact, plunge to death! 'Nuff
>
> said.

Makes sense to me. Fact is if you fly into a cliff the games gives you a
break by not deducting hit points which it should. I mean fly into cliff,
plunge, hit Page Up, dont' die.....

>
> - Why can't I jump over an itty-bitty trickle of water without losing
> 300 hit points? I remember an NPC saying that the water was really
> cold and that was why I couldn't wade in shallow water. However, the
> fact that the trickle couldn't be more than 6 inches deep really
> ticked me off when my party lost 25-33% of their hit points.

Hey, water walk is there for a reason and the game makes you use it. If the
NPC tells you the water is freezing and you jump in then you should lose 25%
of your hit points because you used only 25% of your common sense.

> - Why is it so hard for my party to jump up a 1.5 foot step? I have
> to cast a Jump spell just to go a flight of steep stairs. Needs
> improvement.

Nope, makes sense. Tell me why you should be able to jump over a 1.5 foot
step when you are wearing 100 lbs. of armor, weaponry, supplies etc.

>
> - Since the real-time movement was a major part of this game, why
> can't I climb? Daggerfall let you climb too many things, but I think
> I should be able to climb 6 feet up a brick wall. Why not give the
> party ropes and ladders as in previous M&M games?

Well it's climbing straight up that you want. Varn proves that you can climb
inclined surfaces. It's not a bad idea but the interface for throwing a rope
etc. would be daunting. I don't think armor laden characters are going to be
able to climb that easy.

>
> - When moving sideways, the <Shift> key does not accelerate this
> movement. This was my main mode of travel in the dungeons as I want
> to see what is around the corner I am taking or up the infinite spiral
> staircase.

True.

> - Why was it that I would sometimes take damage when running on a
> bridge over water?
>

Got me. Never had it happen.

> CONS:
>
> - I am a keyboard junkie. One reason why I loved the previous M&M
> games was that I could lean back with the keyboard in my lap and have
> full control. The keyboard control seemed partially implemented in
> MM6. I couldn't select spells, inventory items, make potions, select
> targets, view critter health, or select conversation topics. I hope
> that NWC implements this type of control in MM7.

To be honest what you want wouldn't be worth the trouble it would take to give
it to you. Personally I would like to see programmable joystick/gamepad
support.

> - The overhead map in the upper-right of the screen should be a square
> or circle for evened viewing. The triangle-type view was restricting
> and frustrating.
>

Yeah, wouldn't be a bad idea.

> - Why did each character have the proximity gem next to their
> portrait? Since they are virtually occupying the same space, it
> doesn't make sense to have four separate ones as they are always
> giving the same indication.
>

Huh? It tells you different things at different times. I like the easy to
see lights. Red helped a lot.

>
> - I liked that MM III-V would display a spell affect or blood splat to
> let you know how effective you were. Granted, there was some of that
> in MM6, but not like previous games where it filled the screen. It's
> picky, but it is just a preference I have.

Yeah , it's picky considering that if you know how many points a monster has
then counting the points you take from it seems relatively easy to me.

> - Bring back "Recharge Item". If I can enchant an item, it should be
> easier to simply pour mana into an object.
>
> ***DIFFICULTY INCREASE*****************************************

I opt for no recharge item but you should be able to randomly enchant it.

>
> CONS:
>
> - In regards to critter levels, this game was tough starting out, got
> easy, and then became impossible. There were many misplaced critters
> in my opinion: Oozes in Dragoons' Cavern, Gold Dragon in the "Medusa
> dungeon", Cuisinarts and Doom Knights with Swordsmen (Silver Helm, I
> think...), and F$%#ing Eyes with Ogres. There were probably some
> others, but I don't want to try to recall all of them.

I thought Gold Dragon was a stroke of genius. Totally blew me away. No level
was ever impossible. Everything depends on when you decide to take it out. I
didn't deal with Darkmore until I was in the level 80's and when I did finally
go in there I smeared 'em. Made a completely frustrating quest a piece of
cake. I can't imagine doing it in the level 20s. That would suck.

> - Darkmoor Castle: I have one point of advice for NWC: DO NOT put
> level 80 critters (4 million Eyes) in a dungeon where you know the
> characters are only going to be level 20!!!!!!! The surrounding
> critters outside generally gave some sort of hint as to how difficult
> the dungeons on that map area were going to be. This was one that was
> totally out-of-place.
>

NAWWWWWWW!!! Darkmore crushed all hopes of things being "predictable". My
hats off to the maniac who thought this one up. After all it is called Mire
of the Damned for a reason.

> CONS:
>
> - Dragonsand was waaaay too overpopulated. I didn't even end up
> finishing this section out and I got sick and tired of "1. run in, 2.
> get pumelled by 400 dragons, lizards and wyrms, 3. crawl out in a
> bloody, broken, and battered mess".

Yeah Dragonsand was ridiculous.

> - Some people like the respawning critters. I don't. It didn't make
> sense that I rid New Sorpigal from the Goblin Hordes just to have them
> waltz right back in one year later. This seemed to nullify my past
> accomplishment and also go against the story. I also wanted to feel
> that I was saving the land of Enroth (cleaning up the trash). Since
> they all came back, what good was I doing? I know that many will
> argue that it makes sense, but I think that it diminishes the feeling
> of accomplishment.
>

You missed the whole point. What if you need some a good amount of gold and
there aren't any gold giving quests left? Besides, respawn gives you a
chance to see your progress. What took a long time to clear out can come a
lot easier the stronger you get. I loved crushing mages, goblins and archers
with just two flicks of a meteor shower and a starburst. I mean after all
just because you "cleaned up the trash" doesn't mean that trash won't ever
come back.

> - I like combat like the next guy, but having to slay hordes upon
> hordes of critters got very boring. Masses upon masses of spiders in
> the Abandoned Temple, the skeleton of every person who has ever died
> in the Temple of Baa, the 6 billion f#$%ing Eyes in Castle Darkmoor,
> the Dwarven over-population boom in Snergle's Cavern...Need I say
> more? I would rather see 3 or 4 super-tough critters in a group than
> waves upon waves of semi-tough critters. It got to the point where
> instead of feeling victorious, I felt like, "Thank God, I'm finally
> done!" The endless hordes ended up taking way too much time in
> dealing with them. It made me want to stop playing the game as I
> didn't want to go through another hour of A-A-A-A-S-A-A-S-A-A-S-A.
> The majority of time spent on this game was not due to puzzle and
> quest solving, but rather hitting the "A" and "S" keys. Combat is
> great, but it should not be the domineering crux of a CRPG.

It depends on how you attack them. For example, in Temple of Baa instead of
standing on the balcony and running around firing bows, I jumped down ran out
of the temple (didn't have Lloyd's or TP), come back and meet them head on.
Now that was fun. I think combat is the cornerstone of any RPG but I agree,
some hordes did get boring.

> - The respawning critters in Werewolf Cavern really pissed me off.

Well, I can't say I was in love with the idea.

> PROS:
>
> - I have seen all of the posts complaining the quality of the
> character portraits, but compared to MM5, they are much better in
> quality.
>

This REALLY is something I could care less about. It has nothing to do with
game play so to me it's a silly thing to argue about.

> - I liked the facial expressions each character would have: missed
> attack, spell blows up party, taking damage, poised/diseased, drunk,
> weak, making potions, identifying items, etc...

I found this to be highly creative.

> - Thanks to NWC for giving a full view of the character adorned in
> their equipment. Good start.

Good start? What the hell more do you want? The view of their underwear?

>
> CONS:
>
> - Being an old RPG gamer, the main focus of the RPG is to use the
> imagination to exist as a different character. The RPG is not just a
> "roll-hit" experience. A true gamer uses their imagination to "see"
> the character going through the steps. Being said, I sorely miss the
> ability to have different races (Orc, Dwarf, Elf, Gnome, etc...).

Would make the game more interesting.

>
> - How about some minorities? I know that NWC only had a limited
> number of people show up for character pictures, but I would rather
> have diversity than image quality portraits.

Screw diversity! One thing I can't stand is when people want to impose their
politically correct views on a PC game. Ok, so there weren't a lot of black
guys on MM6. Big F^#%ING deal.

>
> ***MIGHT VS. MAGIC*****************************************
>
> PROS:
>
> NONE

GIMME A BREAK!!!

> CONS:
>
> - I was sorely disappointed to see how magic was greatly overpowering
> compared to weapons. This wasn't always so. In previous M&M games,
> certain classes gained significant increases to number of attacks per
> round. This resulted in fighters being able to dish out as much
> damage as magic tossers. As my game in MM6 progressed, I felt that I
> should have made my party with 2 sorcerers and 2 clerics/paladins. My
> archer seemed absolutely worthless. If a creature was magic-resistant
> in other games, you could rely on your steel-swingers to bail you out.
> Not so in MM6.

Depends on how you attack and where you are at. My spell slingers can kick
ass but if you get to close to my knight you'd be sorry. By the way my
archer had air magic and she'd kick your arse!

>
> - Stats were insignificant. When my Paladin had 300+ might, he should
> have been cleaving buildings in half. Instead, he inflicts
> mosquito-level damage. A sorcerer with 200+ intelligence should have
> an enormous boost to their spell points and/or increased damage. In
> defense of NWC, luck really seemed to affect whether an enemy spell
> hit or not. Strength should have a significance in determining the
> amount of damage done as well as recovery time.
>

Strength without accuacy means you have a big fat clod hopper who can swing a
heavy sword and not hit the broad sid of a barn.

>
> - Relics and artifacts are a fantastic idea. However...
>
> CONS:
>
> - Weapons with enchantments should not be more powerful than
> relics/artifacts. I had two Excalibur swords but sold them quickly as
> my characters were doing more damage with Master Cutlasses of <insert
> major affect here>.

Then you got a problem, my Excalibur kicked booty.

>
> - Spears that were used two-handed provided a boost to damage. That
> was logical. However, two-handed swords and axes really didn't do
> much more damage than their one-handed counterparts. If I hit you
> with a 7-foot Scottish claymore, you will have a much more serious
> wound than if I hit you with a 2.5-foot rapier.
>

Not if it was a glancing blow. You seem to think that every swing should give
maximum contact. Everyone knows that the enemy defends itself and you can't
make every hit perfectly.

> - Ancient Weapons were discarded after first use. I heard that they
> really make a difference in real-time, but since I never use
> real-time, they were of no use to me (save destroying the Reactor).

Too bad. Real time can really be fun and it can be quick. Playing strictly
turn based means ya got no guts!

> PROS:
>
> - Didn't have to consider which spells to launch! :)
>
> CONS:
>
> - Many Body/Spirit/Mind spells appeared worthless. How come there
> aren't many area-effect damage spells? I know they are healers, but
> they should have more combat ability. Maybe change a spell to
> area-effect when they reach Master/Grand Master (see below) skill
> levels? Without this ability, Clerics are nothing but medics you try
> to keep alive during combat. If I ever play MM6 again, I will NOT
> have a cleric in the party.

Yeah until you get a high level Flying Fist in your face! I don't know how
many times Power Cure saved my butt and in the right circumstances Harm and
Mind Blast can do some good damage. Boost the bow and hand weapon strength
of the cleric and then see what happens. My cleric is also invaluable for
curing diseases, poisons, insanity etc.

> - To save time, a list of ineffective/useless spells:
>
> 1) Flame Arrow - no damage/level increase.

Are you sure you understand this game? It's becoming more difficult not to
FLAME ARROW you! Flame Arrow is meant to be an opening game spell. They
have to give you something to start off. In fact all spells are of a certain
class meaning that they all have different levels of maximum damages. Flame
Arrow is low.

>
> 2) Haste - I never wanted to cast it as it made my party weak during a
> big fight.

Well by the time the weakness occurs you should either be finished fighting or
bailing out for heal time anyway. Works great under most circumstances.

>
> 3) Static Charge - no damage/level increase.

Sigh...see FLAME ARROW above.

> 4) Shield - I just never used it. Might have been helpful with lizard
>
> archers in beginning. Not much else.

Wrong. Any archers, especially in White Cap and Free Haven.

>
> 5) Cold Beam - no damage/level increase.

So what, use Ice Bolt!

> 6) Enchant Item - While this spell is great starting out, not being
> able to make bad-ass enchantments was frustrating. This should be
> made available in MM7 by requiring some major sacrifice/commitment.
> Require 10 days for a major enchantment. The caster suffers an age
> increase of XX years depending on the enchantment. The caster suffers
> attribute loss. In addition, I was perturbed when trying to make
> decent items and getting a +1 to luck on a Scarab ring. The level of
> the enchantment should have something to do with the quality of the
> item. BTW, "of the Gods" really changed meaning from the previous M&M
>

This is just a plain dumb idea. Enchanting has it's uses like when you need
gold.

> games. It should be changed back to its original benefit. Another
> point of consideration: Give us some factor in determining the
> outcome of this spell.

They do. Check the diff from normal to master!

I would like to see an Enchant Item spell
> under each discipline of magic. The Enchant Item spell under the Fire
> discipline would do some sort of fire-based resistance, damage, or "of
> the Phoenix" enchantment. The same goes for Water, Air, and Earth,
> respectively. This would also allow for the Light and Dark schools to
> have some kick-ass enchantments (Vampiric, of Life, etc...) but with
> higher sacrifices required.
>

And then you wouldn't have to work so hard!

> 7) Stun - never could justify using it. Probably ignorance on my
> part.

Well I wouldn't argue there. Works if you are almost dead and need to make an
escape.

> 8) Magic Arrow - no damage/level increase.

Quit listing the low level spells!

> 9) Death Blossom - I never got this to do any damage.

Require either good aim or a really huge group of baddies.

>
> 10) Turn to Stone - What do you mean, "temporary"? Stone is stone is
> stone.

IT'S A SPELL! You are not MEDUSA!

>
> 11) Spirit Arrow - Great at beginning levels but useless afterwards.
>

Warning you for the last time!

> 12) Healing Touch/First Aid - Open these slots up as healing spells
> should be level-based.

Agreed, now try Power Cure and then complain.

>
> 13) Guardian Angel - "Load Game" works better. The angel should
> provide some protection or help you fight in your "heavenly and just"
> cause.

Wrong LOAD GAME is not a feature, it's a way to avert playing the game.

>
> 14) Turn Undead - Doesn't work in turn-based combat. Thanks alot.
> Whatever happened to this spell doing damage? There is also a lack
> of undead in this game compared to previous M&Ms. Where are the
> Zombies, Vampires, Ghouls?
>

OK, so a few dead guys didn't make the cut....

> 15) Meditation - Only useful when standing next to spell-point
> well/fountain.

Duhhhh...take a look at your intelligence after using it.

>
> 16) Charm - Does this work?

Yep until you do damage on the one you cast it on. I tested it to great affect
in the Shadow Guild and the Dragoons and the Silver Helms in Mist.

>
> 17) Mass Fear - Doesn't work

Wrong! Does work depends on who you cast it on. Worked great against human
characters.

> 18) Feeblemind - Doesn't work

Damn man, not all mind spells work against every single enemy.

>
> 19) Psychic Shock - Has a dragon on the spell picture but doesn't do
> squat against them. False advertising.

Never tried it.

>
> 20) Golden Touch - I never had a problem with money in the game
> (except maybe level 1). Never had to use this. I guess that you
> could have instant returns on your loot without having to leave the
> dungeon and sell it.

OK, so why list it then?

>
> 21) Dispel Magic - How can I tell if a critter has an enchantment or
> not? Why waste the spell points and not even know if it worked?

Up to you.

>
> 22) Destroy Undead - Only ONE target. Come on guys.

Gimme a break. You want too much. So what's the matta you can' take a little
Armageodon?

>
> 23) Prismatic Light - Got it to work once.

Well, there ya go then.

> 24) Reanimate - XP generator. Useless otherwise. No need to use this
> spell, just return one year later (outside). I read one very humorous
> post where one guy kept reanimating one of the f@#$ing Eyes just so he
> could finish taking out his frustration of there being so many of
> those bastards.

No, what if you were training and you needed a couple of points for a level?
Makes sense to me, just reanimate him and kill him.

>
> 25) Mass Curse - Didn't see much of a difference. Still got my clock
> cleaned.
>

It doesn't do damage! It's used to lower combat stats.

> 26) Shrinking Ray - Halves their physical damage, not magical. A
> general belief in magic systems is that the body of the caster is a
> conduit of the forces of magic. If this is the case, shouldn't
> something 1-foot tall only deal out corresponding damage? Either that
> or they cause themselves damage because the force is too great for the
> vessel.
>

Maybe, but if it is half the size you should be able to melee their ass too.

> 27) Finger of Death - I have a better chance of yelling "BOO" and
> having the critter die of a heart attack. Maybe my party shouldn't
> brush their teeth, then they could use the "Breath of Death".
>

Well, I used it a couple of time for some pretty good damage.

> 28) Moon Ray - Useless before. Useless now.

Can't argue much with this...FINALLY!

> 29) Dragon Breath - Don't get me wrong. I used this spell
> extensively. However, I got nearly the same results from two Fireball
> spells with just 16 SPs spent compared to 100.
>

Shaaa...if you are lucky. My Dragon doled out some hurt. Much more than some
silly Fireballs.

> 30) Armageddon - Other than serving as a reputation destroyer, this
> was useless.

Not toward the end game when you're willing to do anything to wrap things up!

>
> 31) Dark Containment - With all of the hype seen through the game, I
> was expecting more. I expected a hell of a lot more when I saw how
> much it cost in spell points. Cute results but it virutally has the
> same effect as Turn to Stone.

Complain, complain, complain....

>
> In conclusion about spells, I thought that the Light and Dark
> disciplines cost waaaaay too many points for some of their spells. I
> could justify spending those SPs if the effects were better.

Jeez....maybe that was the intent...ya think?
>

>
> CONS:

> I would have liked to seen a short movie when talking to the Oracle
> for the first time. Maybe a short movie when placing the last memory
> crystal. Just a few goodies here and there would have given me a
> better sense of accomplishment.

AS this game came only on one disk for play I would have appreciated a lot
more FMV if it were possible. You know what I would have loved? After you
kill Witherhide, a FMV pops up showing an epic dragon battle!

>
> - Puzzles. MMIII had lots with tombstones, treasure chests, and
> dungeon/secret entrances. Not so with MM6. There was Castle Alamos,
> the Goblinwatch code, the VARN codes, and the blasted Temple of Baa
> riddle, but I really can't remember others apart from those.

Thank GOD! I hate adventure games that decide to be puzzle games.

> - How about those bounty quests? It was sort of like "If you can kill
>
> an Ungodly Critter of Ultimate Death (given your current level), I'll
> give you a pittance and an 'Attaboy!'. By the way, you got two days
> left to do it in." Just take these bounty hunts out and give me some
> more puzzles/riddles/significant plot developments.
>

Hey, it makes for a good side quest.

>
> CONS:
>
> - MM7 should have the rings, amulets, gauntlets displayed in the same
> window as the other equipment. I really, really hated having to click
> the little button to find out if the critter's "no damage but break
> shit" attack had rendered one of those items useless (More about that
> later). I would gladly reduce the size of the character full-view
> picture in order to include the accessories in the same view.

Yeah, this is a big deal...<rolling eyes>

>
> - Give me some sort of indication that when two identically looking
> items are exchanged. I always ended up clicking multiple times
> because I thought I missed clicking directly on the item.
>

Like I said....

> - Does this make sense? A 200+ strength character can only carry a
> specific volume of items equal to that of a character with a strength
> of 10. It really struck me odd that I was limited to a restrictive
> inventory grid for my "items no longer having an owner". Take a hint
> from Ultima VII. You can throw as many things into your backpack/bag
> as long as you are strong enough to carry it. Granted, the 200+
> strength character will have tons of items upon items that it will be
> difficult to find what you are looking for, but it only makes logical
> sense. When a powerful knight can only carry 40 potion bottles, but a
> weakling sorcerer can carry three sets of plate armor and 7 helms,
> something is wrong in the world.
>

It's not a matter of weight but a matter of room. Just because a knight could
pull an oversized cart doesn't mean you want him doing that.

> ***NPCs*****************************************

> - Innocent bystanders in the village can get cacked. The result is an
> ensuing riot by the rest of the village. Not much fun for my party,
> but it is a perfect example of "mob mentality". Good job. However,
> if it was me and I saw one of my fellow townspeople split in half with
> one attack, I would have tremendous reservations about attacking that
> motley looking crew with a pointed stick.

Hey, the peasants are revolting and they are stupid too....that's why they are
peasants.

> - Wandering NPCs will actually refuse to talk to you. Good idea, but
> only dealt with reputation, not diplomacy. Should have incorporated
> both.

No, if your reputation sux who gives a crap how well you present yourself!

> CONS:
>
> - My party must look like royalty or a popular music group because I
> attracted those wandering NPCs like flies to a dung heap. This
> wouldn't have been bad except that they block you from moving except
> back the way you came. Too bad there wasn't a "No bathing" option for
> the party. I bet I wouldn't have had that problem at that point. I
> know that you could yell to get them out of the way, but that got
> bothersome when trying to run to a castle/shop/house. I liked the
> wandering NPCs in Daggerfall where you could walk right through them.
>

Hey what's with this Y key!

>
> CONS:
>
> - Couldn't have I just had one superstore (Wal-Mart) someplace? "We
> sell every type of weapon at wholesale!"
>
> - Would have liked to have seen some shops getting their hands on some
> major items. Maybe even relics/artifacts. "Yeah, you can get that
> but it will cost you a kidney."
>

Yeah , just what the world needs...one more Walmart. I would have liked to
have seen some of the weapons upgrade as you advanced in levels.

>
> CONS:
>
> - Five days travel for what? I can understand the need to load map
> sections just as was done for the previous games, but why charge me
> the 5 days? It you are going to do that, make the cloth map
> correspond with a large forest or desert between sections. I could
> also accept a charge of one day if the cloth map doesn't change from
> its current appearance.

You know you think of some of the most ridiculous things to complain about.

> - Due to five-day travel cost, could not fly from map section to map
> section. Really bummed me out when I was fleeing for my life through
> the air and ran into the map border. Death quickly followed as deemed
> necessary by the pursuing critters.

Sheez...any player who dies in the air when running away could possibly be
very lame.

> - If I cast Lloyd's Beacon to recall my party to a location set when I
> was flying, please put me on the ground. Currently, I get put on the
> ground, but it is in the form of a red, pasty goo after I have plunged
> to my demise.
>

Uh...you cast the spell when flying didn't you ? Well then who's fault is
that !!!! Uhhh...PageUp key seemed pretty logical to me.

> - Why is it that when I enter a map section, I am placed in the middle
> of blood-thirsty critters? Wouldn't I have seen them from a distance
> sometime during my 5-day travel?
>

Not necessarily. If they are hiding behind a mountain such as Blackshire to
Paradise Valley road then you wouldn't. Besides, that's part of the
adventure.

>
> CONS:
>
> - Sword skill...Why can't it also have a damage increase? I realize
> that allowing Master level swordsman the ability to wield two swords
> is a bonus, but that really doesn't help in the damage department past
> level 20 or so.

God you sure put a lot of stock in sword swinging. Even in medievel times a
swordsman weren't that big of a deal.

>
> - Diplomacy...How do we know when or if it works?

Easy, compare interactions between your characters with low or no diplomacy
against those who have high diplomacy.

>
> - Perception...This is really aggravating. This skill can only be
> used if I click on every little thing. Previous M&M games (Spot
> Secret Doors skill) had the little gargoyle dude whose arm would go
> into spasms when near a secret door. For MM7, how about the character
> with the high level of perception saying, "What's that?" Then I will
> gladly click on everything in the immediate area. Instead of
> Perception keeping the character from taking damage from an exploding
> chest, how about a "Danger Sense" skill? Makes more sense to me.

Well, as most dungeons had hidden areas that were strategically located where
you would expect a secret area to be I found it no trouble at all. After all
if you see a lump of blue then gee whiz...guess what....

>
> - Merchant skill. I have to be an extremely high-level to get close
> to the value of an object. If NWC decides not to change this, how
> about just not showing the value of an object so that I don't know
> what I should get for it? That way, I will be content with the price
> I get for an item no matter what skill level my character is at.
> Additionally, wouldn't it make sense that when I am selling items that
> my merchant character would be doing the "deal"? A very monotonous
> task was transferring everything to my merchant to get the best price.
>
>

You know you are down right pissy about everything. Value is what you have
to pay for it. The real world works on retailer sells it for full price and
gives you a cut rate to buy it back. THAT'S the way it is. If you had to
transfer items to a merchant then it means that you wanted to spend your
points on something other than merchant for your other characters. Don't
expect the game to be changed because someone was too cheap to buy merchant
skills.

> CONS:

>
For example, a Ring of SP Regeneration
> could restore 2% of a character's total SP every 5 minutes. Do the
> same thing with the HP regen items and I will be a happy camper. I
> hate resting for no reason but to recharge my spell points.

NOPE! WRONG! Rings etc. are what they are and shouldn't be based on some
clown's attributes.

>
> CONS:
>
> - As with SP/HP regeneration items. These should restore a percentage
> of total SP or HP.

WRONGOMUNDO, they are potions not magic spells!

>
> - How about an Alchemy skill and the ability to make offensive potions
> that can be thrown/used: explosion, corrosion, sleep, blinding, gender

No but I am all for potions that can be used on weaponry to give it special
attributes.

>

> - Great graphics for many of them. I like the damage reactions,
> attacks, and death animations. Some of the top character depictions
> in my book were: (in no particular order)
>
> 1) Titans

Looked better dead then alive.
> 2) Dragons
Totally cool.
> 3) Goblins
Really dumb looking.

> 4) Fire Elementals, Beasts, Spirits

Totally cool looking
> 5) Agar's critters
Really dumb looking.

> 6) Minotaurs (nice and menacing)

Not bad.

> 7) Thunder, Fire, and Lightning Lizards

Totally cool looking.
> 8) Suckers (Vampire, Blood, Brain
Totally cool looking.
> 9) Spiders
A pain in the ass but not bad.
> 10) Cobras
Yeah! The coolest.
> 11) Veterans
Looked like wusses

> 12) Cuisinart, Doom Knight, Death Knight (one of my favorites)

Not bad could have been better.

> 13) Harpies (God I hate those ugly things-That means good job)

Yeah not bad.

> CONS:

> These are definitely a dislike on my part. The "break at will" attack
> should only occur if a tremendous amount of damage was done or if the
> attack caused the character to reach 0 HP. The instant kill should be
> used very sparingly.

Naw, armor can be "wore down".

> - Why do they get unlimited spell points? I realize that critters
> might be magical in nature, but come on, the same argument could me
> made for spellcasters.

Yeah, finally something we agree on.

> - Devils looked pretty cartoonish except for the queen. She was done
> well.

Yeah, stupid looking. Looked like rabid Barneys on acid.

>
> - Werewolves looked ridiculous. For as tough as they are, they should
> have a more menacing look. To me, they look like a German Shepard
> walking on its hind legs with pants and bad costume jewelry. Make it
> all black with red eyes and dripping saliva and I will take them more
> seriously.

I agree up until the point where they started to pound the shit out of my low
level characters.

> - As seen in this newsgroup, there have been some posts about
> slaughtering monsters that pertain to minority groups. This did stike
> me before seeing it in the newsgroup and it bothered me (especially
> considering my party looked like a bunch of aryans). Then, I thought
> to myself, these guys wouldn't be so dumb as to do this on purpose. I
> do think that it should be addressed in MM7 after seeing the responses
> in the newsgroup.

I think that the bigger idiots are the people who waste time coming up with
stupid ass politically correct policing in everything that Americans do. I
am sick of it and as a result I want more minorities to slaughter in MM6.
Just to piss those people off. There were more white guys in here then any
other race. Brigands, thieves, ruffians, swordsmen, lieutinents, elves (they
looked white to me) are all as white as mayonaisse so all you race baiters
shut your fat holes!

> ***INDOOR MOVEMENT*****************************************
>
> PROS:
>
> - I got rather perturbed with the sliding downhill, especially when it
> was not a steep slope and it was made from a rough textured material,
> i.e.: wood.

Yeah and you the programmer would know why that is.

>
> CONS:
>
> - At least give me a levitate/fly spell indoors. If flight spells are
>
> air-based, is that to say that there is no air in dungeons?

Agreed. Meteor and Starburst I can understand as they require weather
conditions but fly? Should be able to fly indoors.

> ***MUSIC***********************************************
>
> Seemed OK to me. However, I usually end up turning the music off and
> turning on the radio or playing CDs. Since I didn't have the music on
> during game play, I really can't give a valid assessment of it.

I loved it and my family loved it.

> ***DUNGEONS***********************************************
>
> PROS:
>
> - All very different. Thin or grand passages, different sized rooms,
> elevators, symmetrical, unsymmetrical, small things, large things .
> All of these made dungeon delving a delight in this game. I was
> constantly surprised with the unique appearance and construction of
> each dungeon. Never did I have the feeling of "Well, I've been in
> here for an hour, I am probably close to being done." It was great
> that when I thought the dungeon was winding to a close, a whole new
> section would be stumbled upon. I consider this to be the best game
> for dungeon design that I have ever seen. Mind you, not all of them
> were enjoyable, but these, by far, outweigh any other dungeons in any
> other game that I have ever played before. Daggerfall had about 5
> different dungeon designs and are so complex that one can get lost
> very easily. I guess the land of Daggerfall had an extreme shortage
> of dungeon architects. Either that or there was a booming business in
> the modular dungeon industry.

NO, Daggerfall had a bunch of lazy asses who didn't want to do the work. I
think in terms of complexity Daggerfall's dungeons were much more difficult
even in terms of programming than MM6. I think the designers at Bethesda
just got lazy and decided there wasn't that much strength in dungeon design.

>
> CONS:
>
> - Hall of the Fire Lord. That damned door on the left! I am one of
> those gamers who explore every nook and cranny, so you can guess how
> frustrating this was.
>

I know DON'T YOU JUST LOVE IT!!!! DON'T FORGET THE WARLORD DOOR!!
YAWWWHOOOOO!!

> - Riddle for accessing the treasure room of the Temple of Baa was
> ridiculous. If I didn't have this newsgroup, I probably would have
> stopped playing the game right there and then. I like riddles and
> puzzles, but only those that actually have a chance of
> decyphering/solution.

CRAP,it was easy. Doesn't even qualify as a riddle.

> ***CONCLUSION*************************
>
> MM6 was a fantastic addition to the M&M series. However, it got to
> the point where it became a laborious endeavor. I download a saved
> game editor so that I could get it over with. I abandoned the
> Dragonsand map as I grew tired of getting slaughtered (before saved
> game editor). I was disappointed to find out that the obelisk quest
> only lead to a treasure chest. There should have been some sort of
> quest in the main storyline addressed through solving that puzzle. As
> it was, I didn't want to wade through the hundreds of dragons just to
> get to a treasure chest that would probably contain items less
> powerful than what I already had. All in all, this game was worth
> every penny, but monotony really hit after 2/3 of the game was done.
>

I agree somewhat. I think there should be larger maps, more quests without
the armies you have to face sometimes. I also think that there should be a
real boss to each band of bad guys. Not all of them seemed to have really
tough bosses.

> If you have differing opinions regarding my review, please post them
> to the group so that discussions can follow and we can make MM7 more
> enjoyable for all of us.

Yeah, I only wished you would have been more creative. Most of your post
concerns criticisms and things that you didn't like rather than logically
thought out solutions. But at least you posted...

-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum

[Philip W.Stanley]

On 29 Jun 1998 13:21:46 GMT, jlee8...@aol.com (JLee862009) wrote:

>>- Fly next to cliff, make inadvertant contact, plunge to death! 'Nuff
>>said.
>

>Just press pageup when that happens...you will stop falling. Either that or
>cast feather fall right after you cast fly,

I think that some sort of indicator should allow you to know when you
are nearing contact with a mountain or building. Maybe some sort of
red jewel when you are within 3 feet of touching down? Thoughts?

>>When a powerful knight can only carry 40 potion bottles, but a
>>weakling sorcerer can carry three sets of plate armor and 7 helms,
>>something is wrong in the world.
>

>I guess you won't like the FF series where your party can carry about 4842983
>items...

On the contrary, I think that I would like it. I think that
encumberance should be determined by the character's strength. What
can I say? I'm an old D&D player. The restriction of the inventory
grid and what items could fit where was aggravating to me.

>>know that you could yell to get them out of the way, but that got
>>bothersome when trying to run to a castle/shop/house.
>

>Agreed,,,I would shout "get out of the f*&$ing way!!" when it happened.

I liked it in Daggerfall where townspeople would not stop to talk to
you if your weapon was equipped. It was a very nice touch. Something
like that could have eased the NPC magnet problem.

>>Additionally, wouldn't it make sense that when I am selling items that
>>my merchant character would be doing the "deal"? A very monotonous
>>task was transferring everything to my merchant to get the best price.
>

>Yes...also you couldn't take off armor or weapons during a sale and you had to
>leave the shop and then come back in which led to some "see you later
>cheapskate"s which was ridiculous since I was coming back in 1 second later
>anyway...

You actually could remove your equipped items. Click on Special from
the shop menu and then click on a character portrait. You could then
do whatever you wanted with your inventory.

>>- As with SP/HP regeneration items. These should restore a percentage
>>of total SP or HP.
>

>Speaking of potions: yes, and then to add insult you can get 700+ hp or sp back
>at New Sorpigal for 10 gp...

I would have liked to have filled some of my empty potion bottles with
the water from some of those wells/fountains. What do you think?

[Philip W.Stanley]

On Mon, 29 Jun 1998 12:57:32 GMT, confused@now_totally_bewildered.com
(confused) wrote:

>Nice post with several good thoughts. I have a few sprinkled comments
>but I have one all encompassing critical comment-- you take much to
>much liberty with the "realism" thing. Some things you either like or
>dislike.

Thanks for the response to my LENGTHY review. It is appreciated.

>If you can use the "realism" argument to your benefit you
>do, if it would work against you you either ignore it or explicitly
>disparage it.

Sorry if you think that I use "realism" as I see fit. These were
simply the changes I would like to see to give myself a more enjoyable
game. Please go back over your response and change responses like,
"Ah, more realism", to your actual viewpoint on the item in question.
I would like to know if you think the item is fine the way it is or if
it should be changed differently than what I think. In this manner,
viewpoints and opinions can be discussed instead of just criticizing
my opinions. Just restating over and over that I am flawed in my
opinion does nothing for the sake of discussion.

>Personally, I fall squarely and resolutely in the "screw realism this
>is a game and it is FUN that I want, not a "realistic simulator of
>some fantasy world." But once I do this then I have to resist the
>temptation to use the "that's not realistic" argument about things I
>don't care for. You want to use it or lose it depending on how it
>fits with your feeling about something.

To each their own. You just stated in the previous paragraph that you
fall to the "that's not realistic" argument as well. I simply want
changes to make the game more fun for me. If you disagree, don't
criticize my viewpoint but rather give me your insight or opinions on
the topic.

>>- Even though I used it extensively, allowing your party to repair
>>items during combat just doesn't make sense to me. It also doesn't
>>make sense to me that I can perform complete equipment changes with
>>another character not to mention that the other character's combat
>>round isn't affected at all. It seems like my party would call
>>"time-out!" and proceed to make potions, fix items, change
>>gear/weapons, and then jump back into the fray.
>
>A perfect example of "this is NOT realistic."

INSERT YOUR VIEWPOINT HERE

>>- Fly next to cliff, make inadvertant contact, plunge to death! 'Nuff
>>said.
>
>Hmm, seems pretty realistic to me; also, one should *never* fly
>without a feather fall active.

Sorry, I failed to really justify my viewpoint on this topic.
If I have a Fly spell activated why should contact with a mountain or
cliff suddenly negate the altitude I achieve. If I cast a Fly spell
while standing on top of a building, I would like to see my party stay
at the same elevation when they move off of the roof.

Since I really can't tell when I am going to make contact with a
mountain or structure I am approaching and I am only allowed to
elevate to a specific height limit, I would like some sort of
indicator so that I can be ready for it.

>>- Why can't I jump over an itty-bitty trickle of water without losing
>>300 hit points? I remember an NPC saying that the water was really
>>cold and that was why I couldn't wade in shallow water. However, the
>>fact that the trickle couldn't be more than 6 inches deep really
>>ticked me off when my party lost 25-33% of their hit points.
>
>Ah, not realistic enough.

INSERT YOUR VIEWPOINT HERE

>>- Why is it so hard for my party to jump up a 1.5 foot step? I have
>>to cast a Jump spell just to go a flight of steep stairs. Needs
>>improvement.
>
>Ah, not realistic enough.

INSERT YOUR VIEWPOINT HERE

>>- Why was it that I would sometimes take damage when running on a
>>bridge over water?
>
>Sounds like a bug, never happened to me.

It might be. It would never happen when walking across the bridge,
but only during running. Even then, it would not happen consistently.

>>- Bring back "Recharge Item". If I can enchant an item, it should be
>>easier to simply pour mana into an object.
>
>Ah, realism you would like.

INSERT YOUR VIEWPOINT HERE

>>- Darkmoor Castle: I have one point of advice for NWC: DO NOT put
>>level 80 critters (4 million Eyes) in a dungeon where you know the
>>characters are only going to be level 20!!!!!!! The surrounding
>>critters outside generally gave some sort of hint as to how difficult
>>the dungeons on that map area were going to be. This was one that was
>>totally out-of-place.
>
>Hmm, would it be "more realistic" that tough monsters never teamed
>with weak ones or just something you'd rather have?

I submit to your argument about strong critters teaming up with weaker
ones. However, I failed to correctly convey my gripe. My argument is
that these dungeons were made to appear to be the next logical place
for the party to go to. The "weaker" critters were just the right
difficulty level for my characters to take on, but having hordes of
"stronger" critters made my party's death imminent. I would like the
paradigm of outside critter to inside critter difficulty ratio to
remain fairly consistent. I know that this game is labelled
"non-linear" but you have to admit that there is some sort of logical
progression that is gone through.

>>- Dragonsand was waaaay too overpopulated. I didn't even end up
>>finishing this section out and I got sick and tired of "1. run in, 2.
>>get pumelled by 400 dragons, lizards and wyrms, 3. crawl out in a
>>bloody, broken, and battered mess".
>Once you get strong enough, Dragonsand is as easy as everywhere else.

Once I had fought, retreated, gone up in levels over and over again I
finally got to the point where I could take on more than one group.
My argument is about the overpopulation. I simply would have like
fewer and stronger critters so that battle didn't become so tedious.

>>- Some people like the respawning critters. I don't. It didn't make
>>sense that I rid New Sorpigal from the Goblin Hordes just to have them
>
>I'm still ambivalent about that. Sometimes I liked it, sometimes I
>didn't.

It certainly was convenient when you needed to go up a few levels and
didn't want to wade through a new dungeon, wasn't it? I was guilty of
that on more than one occasion. :)

>>- I liked the facial expressions each character would have: missed
>>attack, spell blows up party, taking damage, poised/diseased, drunk,
>>weak, making potions, identifying items, etc...
>
>Argggggghhh. Our tastes could not be more different. I literally
>came "that close" to returning the game when I saw the "real life"
>portraits in use. It was one of the three WORST parts of the game to
>me. It took a couple of days before I could quit griping about it and
>even begin to ignore it. And those expressions- puullleeeasse! I
>wanted to smack my own party upside the head just for looking so
>inane.

That's the kind of discussion I was hoping for! Thank you! I thought
this was an improvement over the previous M&M games as they only had
about 5 facial expressions which were only used to represent their
state of health (cursed, asleep, drunk, etc...). The characters in
this game would sometimes have more than one expression for an action.
I do agree that the MM7 characters appeared goofy. I just liked the
feature of so many more expressions alerting the player to health,
actions, etc...

>>- Thanks to NWC for giving a full view of the character adorned in
>>their equipment. Good start.
>
>Yes, good start, now, PLEASE GET RID OF ALL RED EQUIPMENT AND CLOTHING
>OF ANY KIND OR PICK A DIFFERENT COLOR FOR BROKEN. Thank you.

Amen brother!!!! I could never tell when that Cardinal Cloak was
broken or not!!!!

>>- I was sorely disappointed to see how magic was greatly overpowering
>>compared to weapons. This wasn't always so. In previous M&M games,
>>certain classes gained significant increases to number of attacks per
>>round. This resulted in fighters being able to dish out as much
>>damage as magic tossers. As my game in MM6 progressed, I felt that I
>>should have made my party with 2 sorcerers and 2 clerics/paladins. My
>>archer seemed absolutely worthless. If a creature was magic-resistant
>>in other games, you could rely on your steel-swingers to bail you out.
>>Not so in MM6.
>
>>- Stats were insignificant. When my Paladin had 300+ might, he should
>>have been cleaving buildings in half. Instead, he inflicts
>>mosquito-level damage. A sorcerer with 200+ intelligence should have
>>an enormous boost to their spell points and/or increased damage. In
>>defense of NWC, luck really seemed to affect whether an enemy spell
>>hit or not. Strength should have a significance in determining the
>>amount of damage done as well as recovery time.
>
>Since you stayed in turn based (something I would normally, and
>preferably do) you saw only half the picture. In realtime, everything
>was reversed. Weapon combat in real time was way too powerful. You
>could run around and carve up really tough monsters. I've posted too
>much on this topic in other threads so I refer you to those for
>details.

I never really tried real-time weapon combat and I thank you greatly
for the information. Does it seem like the real-time and turn-based
combat modes out of proportion to you? The way I figure, if multiple
modes of combat are going to be provided, care should be taken in
making sure that they are proportionate in their effects.

>>- Weapons with enchantments should not be more powerful than
>>relics/artifacts. I had two Excalibur swords but sold them quickly as
>>my characters were doing more damage with Master Cutlasses of <insert
>>major affect here>.
>
>This always happens with these special items in games. Desiginers are
>always afraid of making something too powerful so they end up being
>pretty useless.

Good point. Being a software engineer, I know how easy it is to
overlook many things in code. Either you just don't think of them or
you think that no one will ever try to use the software in a
particular manner. Unfortunately, people always come up with ways of
using your software in a manner you never thought of. I just got
excited when I picked up my first relic weapon and was so disappointed
when it did less damage than the "normal" weapon I was using.

>>- Spears that were used two-handed provided a boost to damage. That
>>was logical. However, two-handed swords and axes really didn't do
>>much more damage than their one-handed counterparts. If I hit you
>>with a 7-foot Scottish claymore, you will have a much more serious
>>wound than if I hit you with a 2.5-foot rapier.
>
>You've hit on one of my pet peeves in games. Two handed weapons NEVER
>do enough extra damage to make them worth it. Forget about the 7 vs.
>2.5 foot realism argument, it's just a matter of "why bother having
>two handed weapons when they NEVER are worth using?"

You see, even when two people see things differently, they can agree
on some things. For character appearance purposes, I liked the big,
two-handed weapons. But just as you said, if they don't give you an
advantage over two one-handed weapons or enough damage to validate
giving up your shield, they just shouldn't be used.

>>10) Turn to Stone - What do you mean, "temporary"? Stone is stone is
>>stone.
>Hmm, realism eh?

INSERT YOUR VIEWPOINT HERE

My point is that if the critter's Turn to Stone is permanent, why
can't mine be? Either that, or make my Stoned condition temporary as
well. I guess I just want more fairness for my own "realism" reasons.
:)

>>16) Charm - Does this work?
>It worked, but why bother? Only worked on monsters you could just as
>easily kill. Ditto for most other of these types.

Would you have liked to have a charmed critter attack their own team
on behalf of your party?

>>17) Mass Fear - Doesn't work
>It worked, see above.

I read a few posts about this not working in turn-based mode. Even
though the critter portrait would state that they were scared, they
still advanced and attacked.

>>18) Feeblemind - Doesn't work
>It worked, see above.

Just like Mass Fear, Feebleminded critters still launched their spells
at the party.

>>20) Golden Touch - I never had a problem with money in the game
>>(except maybe level 1). Never had to use this. I guess that you
>>could have instant returns on your loot without having to leave the
>>dungeon and sell it.
>Yea, I guess it could be useful if I didn't know portal/lloyds so I
>could make pack space by converting to gold. But what's the chance of
>that by the time I know Golden Touch?

Good point. I didn't think of that. The only time you wouldn't have
Portal/Lloyd's would be in a party without Archers or Sorcerers.

>>23) Prismatic Light - Got it to work once.
>
>Actually one of the only light/dark combat spells I found useful.

I always heard it go off, but I rarely had it work. I usually only
used it in big fights with tough critters. I just thought that
critters would have resistance to my elemental spells before
resistance to the Light/Dark disciplines. It seemed like the
elemental spells were more effective for me. I guess it could come
down to combat style as well.

>>24) Reanimate - XP generator. Useless otherwise. No need to use this
>>spell, just return one year later (outside). I read one very humorous
>>post where one guy kept reanimating one of the f@#$ing Eyes just so he
>>could finish taking out his frustration of there being so many of
>>those bastards.
>
>It was very lame. I remember using that spell in moria a lot on those
>slime-blob things that sucked up loose treasure. If I ever found a
>really nice one I'd reanimate it quite a few times to multiply the
>loot.

Always fun to find those little "loopholes", isn't it?

>>28) Moon Ray - Useless before. Useless now.
>
>Actually, it worked pretty good. Best part about it was it got me
>outside for some night fighting just so i could use it.

This probably can be attributed to gaming style as well. When I play,
I can't stand spending a large amount of spell points without
significant effect (lots of damage OR lots of healing). Since this
spell is subtle in doing both damage and healing, it really didn't
appeal to me.

>>30) Armageddon - Other than serving as a reputation destroyer, this
>>was useless.
>NO, this was one of my most used spells in the end game. It was the
>only way to easily rid the towns of those obnoxious NPCs that
>aggrevated me to no end.

Good point! I will have to do that!

>>31) Dark Containment - With all of the hype seen through the game, I
>>was expecting more. I expected a hell of a lot more when I saw how
>>much it cost in spell points. Cute results but it virutally has the
>>same effect as Turn to Stone.
>
>Another great entertainment spell. Especially useful in the NWC
>dungeon.

Was this useful on the Q character? I never encounted it, but I read
alot of posts about it. I will agree that it provide a laugh when I
used it. I just wanted to take the little stone statue home and put
it on the mantle! :)

>>In conclusion about spells, I thought that the Light and Dark
>>disciplines cost waaaaay too many points for some of their spells. I
>>could justify spending those SPs if the effects were better.
>
>Agreed. Actually the lameness of light and dark made Sorcerers pretty
>sad. Druids are actually much more useful.

I have read alot of posts that Druids are fantastic characters. I
will have to try using one. I just get into old habits of using
parties consisting of classes which I was successful with in the past.
Can you say anal-retentive?

>>- Does this make sense? A 200+ strength character can only carry a
>>specific volume of items equal to that of a character with a strength
>>of 10. It really struck me odd that I was limited to a restrictive
>>inventory grid for my "items no longer having an owner". Take a hint
>>from Ultima VII. You can throw as many things into your backpack/bag
>>as long as you are strong enough to carry it. Granted, the 200+
>>strength character will have tons of items upon items that it will be
>>difficult to find what you are looking for, but it only makes logical
>>sense. When a powerful knight can only carry 40 potion bottles, but a
>>weakling sorcerer can carry three sets of plate armor and 7 helms,
>>something is wrong in the world.
>
>Ah, the old realism argument again.

INSERT YOUR VIEWPOINT HERE

>>- My party must look like royalty or a popular music group because I
>>attracted those wandering NPCs like flies to a dung heap. This
>>wouldn't have been bad except that they block you from moving except
>>back the way you came. Too bad there wasn't a "No bathing" option for
>>the party. I bet I wouldn't have had that problem at that point. I
>>know that you could yell to get them out of the way, but that got
>>bothersome when trying to run to a castle/shop/house. I liked the
>>wandering NPCs in Daggerfall where you could walk right through them.
>
>AGREED!!!!!! The NPCs almost ruined the game for me.

I have heard that NWC is gong to being using multiple sprites for
their NPCs so that they appear differently, but their appearance
really didn't bother me. It made them easily identifiable. When the
NPC started congregating toward me, I would think of the Wile E.
Coyote cartoon where he builds the super-electro-magnet and attracts
everything in the universe. My party was that magnet!

>>- Five days travel for what? I can understand the need to load map
>>sections just as was done for the previous games, but why charge me
>>the 5 days? It you are going to do that, make the cloth map
>>correspond with a large forest or desert between sections. I could
>>also accept a charge of one day if the cloth map doesn't change from
>>its current appearance.
>
>Argh, the "realism" argument carried to the Nth degree.

INSERT YOUR VIEWPOINT HERE

>>- If I cast Lloyd's Beacon to recall my party to a location set when I
>>was flying, please put me on the ground. Currently, I get put on the
>>ground, but it is in the form of a red, pasty goo after I have plunged
>>to my demise.
>
>Seems realistic to me that you should end up at the same place in the
>Z axis as where you cast it.

Ok, if I have to stand by the "realist" tag, keep this game behavior
in. But could I be allowed to put the game in TB mode so that I could
cast the Fly or Feather Fall spell?

>>- Why is it that when I enter a map section, I am placed in the middle
>>of blood-thirsty critters? Wouldn't I have seen them from a distance
>>sometime during my 5-day travel?
>
>Ah, that would be more realistic.

INSERT YOUR VIEWPOINT HERE

>>- Sword skill...Why can't it also have a damage increase? I realize
>>that allowing Master level swordsman the ability to wield two swords
>>is a bonus, but that really doesn't help in the damage department past
>>level 20 or so.
>
>I disagree.

Do you refer to your previous statement regarding real-time weapon
combat? If so, I see your point.

>>- Perception...This is really aggravating. This skill can only be
>>used if I click on every little thing. Previous M&M games (Spot
>>Secret Doors skill) had the little gargoyle dude whose arm would go
>>into spasms when near a secret door. For MM7, how about the character
>>with the high level of perception saying, "What's that?" Then I will
>>gladly click on everything in the immediate area. Instead of
>>Perception keeping the character from taking damage from an exploding
>>chest, how about a "Danger Sense" skill? Makes more sense to me.
>
>I never had the skill so I wouldn't know. This would be a major
>manual gripe of mine. If they are going to give info about what a
>skill does than make it COMPLETE AND ACCURATE or just forget about it.

Agreed. I didn't want to discuss the manual in my original post as I
was greatly disappointed and would have ranted on and on.

>>- Merchant skill. I have to be an extremely high-level to get close
>>to the value of an object. If NWC decides not to change this, how
>>about just not showing the value of an object so that I don't know
>>what I should get for it? That way, I will be content with the price
>>I get for an item no matter what skill level my character is at.
>>Additionally, wouldn't it make sense that when I am selling items that
>>my merchant character would be doing the "deal"? A very monotonous
>>task was transferring everything to my merchant to get the best price.
>
>You needed to hire NPCs more. All you needed was a master level 7 in
>your party to get full value in both directions. Agreed about the
>monotony of transfering. Same can be said for repairing.

You are probably right, sir. However, I am a greedy bastard and
didn't want to share my loot with anyone who didn't help me fight! :)

>>- These are rendered useless when attaining higher levels. MM7 should
>>have these items restore a certain percentage of the character's total
>>points per a defined period. For example, a Ring of SP Regeneration
>>could restore 2% of a character's total SP every 5 minutes. Do the
>>same thing with the HP regen items and I will be a happy camper. I
>>hate resting for no reason but to recharge my spell points.
>
>They weren't nearly as useless if you used real time combat more. I
>agree they were pretty useless if you stuck with turn based.

Another point of proof for the disproportion between turn-based and
real-time.

>>- Why do they get unlimited spell points? I realize that critters
>>might be magical in nature, but come on, the same argument could me
>>made for spellcasters.
>
>Realism revisited.

INSERT YOUR VIEWPOINT HERE

>>- As seen in this newsgroup, there have been some posts about
>>slaughtering monsters that pertain to minority groups. This did stike
>>me before seeing it in the newsgroup and it bothered me (especially
>>considering my party looked like a bunch of aryans). Then, I thought
>>to myself, these guys wouldn't be so dumb as to do this on purpose. I
>>do think that it should be addressed in MM7 after seeing the responses
>>in the newsgroup.
>
>I didn't see these posts but the only gripe I would have is about the
>all milk-toast party chars. The eclectic nature of the bad guys was
>just fine.

Agreed. If I could have just had some racial or species control of my
party, I wouldn't have seen the disparagement.

>>- I got rather perturbed with the sliding downhill, especially when it
>>was not a steep slope and it was made from a rough textured material,
>>i.e.: wood.
>Not realistic enough?

If you walk up a handicapped ramp, do you slide? No, not unless it is
ice-covered or you are on rollerskates. If the grade is steep, I can
thoroughly understand sliding.

>>- At least give me a levitate/fly spell indoors. If flight spells are
>>air-based, is that to say that there is no air in dungeons?
>
>Not realistic enough?

Wouldn't you have liked to have been able to have z-axis movement
indoors?

>>If you have differing opinions regarding my review, please post them
>>to the group so that discussions can follow and we can make MM7 more
>>enjoyable for all of us.
>
>Ok, I'll do that. (:
>
>confused.

I hope that we can continue the discussions with the above items.
Please realize that the "realism" arguments used were nothing more
than the way I saw things. It is not my intention to point out every
non-realistic thing in the game. I just want some things included in
the next game to further my enjoyment. I know that not everyone will
agree with my viewpoints, but I would rather have discussions on these
items than simply see a sarcastic statement about my opinion. I look
forward to discussing more Might and Magic with you. Once again, I
greatly appreciate your responses and viewpoints.

[confused]

nospam_...@rmii.com (Philip W.Stanley) conjured up this insight:

Ok, I've made a second pass. I guess on review my "not realistic?"
comments were a bit thick. I suppose I've had so many philosophical
arguments about realism in games that I come out swinging. I'll just
ignore the whole topic and talk about "what is fun for me."

>>>- Even though I used it extensively, allowing your party to repair
>>>items during combat just doesn't make sense to me. It also doesn't
>>>make sense to me that I can perform complete equipment changes with
>>>another character not to mention that the other character's combat
>>>round isn't affected at all. It seems like my party would call
>>>"time-out!" and proceed to make potions, fix items, change
>>>gear/weapons, and then jump back into the fray.
>>

I guess, within the context of MM6, I'd like it to stay the same.
Given that there are about 1.8 times more monsters in the game than it
needs, I like anything that reduces the number of times I have to
beacon back to Sorp. If the monsters were ever reduced, I'd vote for
"fixing" it.

>>>- Why can't I jump over an itty-bitty trickle of water without losing
>>>300 hit points? I remember an NPC saying that the water was really
>>>cold and that was why I couldn't wade in shallow water. However, the
>>>fact that the trickle couldn't be more than 6 inches deep really
>>>ticked me off when my party lost 25-33% of their hit points.
>>

I guess I'd let the programmer in me go with the practical here since
it's clearly much easier/efficient to say, that space is water, can't
walk there. Yes, it aggrevates me at times. But then I got pretty
good at skipping my party like a big flat rock and healing on the
other side. On the other hand, once you get water walk (fairly soon)
it's all a moot point anyway.

>>>- Why is it so hard for my party to jump up a 1.5 foot step? I have
>>>to cast a Jump spell just to go a flight of steep stairs. Needs
>>>improvement.
>>

To be honest, on a lot of these "that's not good physics" type of
issues, I'd rather they fixed the inifinite mass of NPCs and monsters
thing first. I'd much rather be able to push things out of the way
than have these other things fixed. I posted a whole message about
that one topic not long ago.

>>>- Bring back "Recharge Item". If I can enchant an item, it should be
>>>easier to simply pour mana into an object.
>>

No, I don't want it. I ended up with a whole pack of wands anyway.
Charges werent' so much a problem as using the wands fast enough was.

>>>- Darkmoor Castle: I have one point of advice for NWC: DO NOT put
>>>level 80 critters (4 million Eyes) in a dungeon where you know the
>>>characters are only going to be level 20!!!!!!! The surrounding
>>>critters outside generally gave some sort of hint as to how difficult
>>>the dungeons on that map area were going to be. This was one that was
>>>totally out-of-place.
>>
>>Hmm, would it be "more realistic" that tough monsters never teamed
>>with weak ones or just something you'd rather have?

>I submit to your argument about strong critters teaming up with weaker
>ones. However, I failed to correctly convey my gripe. My argument is
>that these dungeons were made to appear to be the next logical place
>for the party to go to. The "weaker" critters were just the right
>difficulty level for my characters to take on, but having hordes of
>"stronger" critters made my party's death imminent. I would like the
>paradigm of outside critter to inside critter difficulty ratio to
>remain fairly consistent. I know that this game is labelled
>"non-linear" but you have to admit that there is some sort of logical
>progression that is gone through.

Yes, but I liked the few exceptions like Darkmoor and Ghariks. I say
that even though I spent way too much time in Darkmoor because I
thought, "I should be able to do this." Would have been much easier
if I'd waited until I was stronger.

>>>- Dragonsand was waaaay too overpopulated. I didn't even end up
>>>finishing this section out and I got sick and tired of "1. run in, 2.
>>>get pumelled by 400 dragons, lizards and wyrms, 3. crawl out in a
>>>bloody, broken, and battered mess".
>>Once you get strong enough, Dragonsand is as easy as everywhere else.

>Once I had fought, retreated, gone up in levels over and over again I
>finally got to the point where I could take on more than one group.
>My argument is about the overpopulation. I simply would have like
>fewer and stronger critters so that battle didn't become so tedious.

Agreed, and I'd say that about most of the map. I think there are 1.8
times too many monsters across the map.

>I never really tried real-time weapon combat and I thank you greatly
>for the information. Does it seem like the real-time and turn-based
>combat modes out of proportion to you? The way I figure, if multiple
>modes of combat are going to be provided, care should be taken in
>making sure that they are proportionate in their effects.

At first I did, but the longer I played the more sense I think it
makes as is. The only part that might be questionable is that I seem
to get an awfully high precentage of fatal blows in when I'm charging
forward at close range. Of course, at current monster levels, I
wouldn't want this changed.

The reason I'm ok with the basic concept of disparate effectiveness
in different modes is that real time is almost weapon oriented by
definition in MM6. Other than your quick spell, you won't be casting.
So it is nice that weapons are more effective. And although I'd
rather use turn based combat all the time, it would just drive me nuts
at the current monster levels. So, in the current situation, it makes
sense that turn based is mostly for spell combat, in which case,
weapons being less efficacious doesn't really bother me.

> I just got
>excited when I picked up my first relic weapon and was so disappointed
>when it did less damage than the "normal" weapon I was using.

There seemed to be a humorous acknowledgement of that when you brought
Mordred to the guy in Free Haven and he said, "is that all it is?" and
let you keep it.

>>>10) Turn to Stone - What do you mean, "temporary"? Stone is stone is
>>>stone.

I guess I'd file it under "doesn't matter" since all of the non-damage
spells end up being pretty pointless in MM6. I honestly tried to give
them all a fair chance and in the end, it was, "why waste the turn-
blast em with something." This is in STARK contrast to the spells in
battle in HOMM II where the non-damage spells can be used to huge
tactical advantage in certain circumstances.

>>>16) Charm - Does this work?
>>It worked, but why bother? Only worked on monsters you could just as
>>easily kill. Ditto for most other of these types.

>Would you have liked to have a charmed critter attack their own team
>on behalf of your party?

Ah, yes, "berserker" from HOMM. Make it a high percentage chance that
they'll attack whomever is closest to them.

>>>17) Mass Fear - Doesn't work
>>It worked, see above.

>I read a few posts about this not working in turn-based mode. Even
>though the critter portrait would state that they were scared, they
>still advanced and attacked.

I think you're probably right. I was probably so impressed when these
things *appeared* to work (based on portrait info) that I called it
good and went back to blasting.

>>Yea, I guess it could be useful if I didn't know portal/lloyds so I
>>could make pack space by converting to gold. But what's the chance of
>>that by the time I know Golden Touch?

>Good point. I didn't think of that. The only time you wouldn't have
>Portal/Lloyd's would be in a party without Archers or Sorcerers.

Or Druids.

>>>23) Prismatic Light - Got it to work once.
>>
>>Actually one of the only light/dark combat spells I found useful.

>I always heard it go off, but I rarely had it work. I usually only
>used it in big fights with tough critters. I just thought that
>critters would have resistance to my elemental spells before
>resistance to the Light/Dark disciplines. It seemed like the
>elemental spells were more effective for me. I guess it could come
>down to combat style as well.

I just said it worked, not that it was great; it was just better than
most of the other light/dark. I actually think the whole light/dark
thing was done so poorly it might as well have been left out of the
game.

>>>28) Moon Ray - Useless before. Useless now.
>>
>>Actually, it worked pretty good. Best part about it was it got me
>>outside for some night fighting just so i could use it.

>This probably can be attributed to gaming style as well. When I play,
>I can't stand spending a large amount of spell points without
>significant effect (lots of damage OR lots of healing). Since this
>spell is subtle in doing both damage and healing, it really didn't
>appeal to me.

BTW, I only used it on nights with a full moon; no idea if this helped
or not.

>>
>>Another great entertainment spell. Especially useful in the NWC
>>dungeon.

>Was this useful on the Q character? I never encounted it, but I read
>alot of posts about it. I will agree that it provide a laugh when I
>used it. I just wanted to take the little stone statue home and put
>it on the mantle! :)

Didn't try it on Q. Only place I ever used it was on some of the
programmers in the NWC dungeon.

>>>- Does this make sense? A 200+ strength character can only carry a
>>>specific volume of items equal to that of a character with a strength
>>>of 10. It really struck me odd that I was limited to a restrictive
>>>inventory grid for my "items no longer having an owner". Take a hint
>>>from Ultima VII. You can throw as many things into your backpack/bag
>>>as long as you are strong enough to carry it. Granted, the 200+
>>>strength character will have tons of items upon items that it will be
>>>difficult to find what you are looking for, but it only makes logical
>>>sense. When a powerful knight can only carry 40 potion bottles, but a
>>>weakling sorcerer can carry three sets of plate armor and 7 helms,
>>>something is wrong in the world.
>>

Well, hmm, uh, shucks. I guess I'll have to wimp out on this and say
I like it when weight is not an issue. I think the reason is that I
always play sorcerers in these types of games and it always aggrevated
me that I could hardly carry anything. The other reason is that I'm a
hopelss packrat and it's bad enough that I have to dump things because
of pack space. I guess I'd like to have a Dr. Who backpack for all my
chars. (:

>>>- Five days travel for what? I can understand the need to load map
>>>sections just as was done for the previous games, but why charge me
>>>the 5 days? It you are going to do that, make the cloth map
>>>correspond with a large forest or desert between sections. I could
>>>also accept a charge of one day if the cloth map doesn't change from
>>>its current appearance.
>>

I'd file this under "makes no sense but helps make the game
interesting." The only tactical planning that is in the game is when
you need to be some place by some certain time.

>>>- If I cast Lloyd's Beacon to recall my party to a location set when I
>>>was flying, please put me on the ground. Currently, I get put on the
>>>ground, but it is in the form of a red, pasty goo after I have plunged
>>>to my demise.
>>
>>Seems realistic to me that you should end up at the same place in the
>>Z axis as where you cast it.

>Ok, if I have to stand by the "realist" tag, keep this game behavior
>in. But could I be allowed to put the game in TB mode so that I could
>cast the Fly or Feather Fall spell?

(: Well, you can go into TB mode as your falling. Or cast any of
those spells before using beacon. Actually, by the time I'm beaconing
around (about level 20 or so) I try to keep fly/feather/waterwalk on
at all times.

>>>- Why is it that when I enter a map section, I am placed in the middle
>>>of blood-thirsty critters? Wouldn't I have seen them from a distance
>>>sometime during my 5-day travel?
>>

Aggrevated me the first few times but then it was a bit of excitement
as I came to expect it. Only time it *really* aggrevated me was
taking the stage into Darkmoor and being surrounded by skeletons and
ghosts and NPCs at one of the few times when I actually cared about my
reputation.

>>>- Sword skill...Why can't it also have a damage increase? I realize
>>>that allowing Master level swordsman the ability to wield two swords
>>>is a bonus, but that really doesn't help in the damage department past
>>>level 20 or so.
>>
>>I disagree.

>Do you refer to your previous statement regarding real-time weapon
>combat? If so, I see your point.

Yes, unlike the two handed weapons, the two weapons really did seem to
be worth giving up the shield.

>>You needed to hire NPCs more. All you needed was a master level 7 in
>>your party to get full value in both directions. Agreed about the
>>monotony of transfering. Same can be said for repairing.

>You are probably right, sir. However, I am a greedy bastard and
>didn't want to share my loot with anyone who didn't help me fight! :)

No need to share. When you're heading back to get Sorped, stop by
Free Haven and pick up the Merchant/Duper combo on your way. Once
you're done selling, dismiss them. They pay for their hire cost on
the first one or two transactions.

>>>- These are rendered useless when attaining higher levels. MM7 should
>>>have these items restore a certain percentage of the character's total
>>>points per a defined period. For example, a Ring of SP Regeneration
>>>could restore 2% of a character's total SP every 5 minutes. Do the
>>>same thing with the HP regen items and I will be a happy camper. I
>>>hate resting for no reason but to recharge my spell points.
>>
>>They weren't nearly as useless if you used real time combat more. I
>>agree they were pretty useless if you stuck with turn based.

>Another point of proof for the disproportion between turn-based and
>real-time.

Well, a *lot* more time goes by in real time battle and you cast
spells rarely.

>>>- Why do they get unlimited spell points? I realize that critters
>>>might be magical in nature, but come on, the same argument could me
>>>made for spellcasters.
>>

Drives me nuts, but probably makes game play better. What are those
wimpy magicians going to do if they run out of mana? Run up and kick
me in the shins while stroking their goatee?

>>>- At least give me a levitate/fly spell indoors. If flight spells are
>>>air-based, is that to say that there is no air in dungeons?
>>
>>Not realistic enough?

>Wouldn't you have liked to have been able to have z-axis movement
>indoors?

Yes, aggrevated me to no end. I actually got pretty good at using the
jump spell to do things, but not the same.

-------------------
A couple other topics:

* Shortage of mass damage spells in dungeons. Starburst and meteor
shower were such an aid in the overpopulation problem.

* I'd kind of like it if not every critter in the game other than NPCs
was out to kill me. I'd like a band of archers and Veterans and Monks
to join me in cleaning up the land. Add a little bit of command AI so
I could give them standing battle orders and maybe a tactical screen
for turn based combat so I could position them. Then, maybe
reputation and fame and diplomacy could actually be useful for
something like how good of a chance I had in recruiting
people/critters to my cause (alla HOMM). Actually, this would be
number one on my wish list.

* Assorted other things I posted in my "mission debrief" thread when I
finished.

confused

[Dave Richardson]

In article <35971197....@news.rmii.com>, Philip W.Stanley
<nospam_...@rmii.com> writes

>I finally finished MM6 this weekend. This was one of the longest
>CRPGs that I can remember. I have been an avid fan of the Might and
>Magic series since MM3. For that reason, I would like to express some
>opinions on this latest installment in the Might and Magic series. My
>main reason for this is to express my likes/dislikes so that further
>discussions can be started and possibly make their way to NWC. Only
>in that manner can NWC know what their consumers want in the Might and
>Magic game series.
>
>Please remember that these are my opinions and I know that others will
>
>have different views. This is submitted as a source of discussion and
>not as an invitation to heated flame-mail. Thank you.
>
>

<Gigantic Snip of Divine Power>

>If you have differing opinions regarding my review, please post them
>to the group so that discussions can follow and we can make MM7 more
>enjoyable for all of us.

Even though I am only just beginning the game - less than 30 hours into
it - I read your review, skipping quickly over anything that looked like
a spoiler.

I've read the responses up to date.

I feel a need to write in about this realism thing. It is a serious
point in RPGs.

When you go to the cinema or theatre, read a book or watch TV it is
necessary to suspend belief so that you can enter into the world of the
drama taking place. It is the same with Role playing games on the
computer.

Once belief is suspended you enter into the world of the drama by
learning its rules and applying them to the drama. It doesn't matter how
daft the drama, or how loopy the rules. Once belief is suspended,
anything goes.

Dragging this posting back towards realism now, a drama's world needs to
be *internally consistent*. It does *not* need to be realistic. Perhaps
I am playing with words a little here, but *realism* and *internal
consistency* are not the same thing. I don't care about realism, I do
care about internal consistency. I am prepared to overlook very small
fudges to internal consistency where they are demanded, for instance, by
the current limitations of the medium of the IBM Compatible Personal
Computer. I do however, really, violently, and seriously object to a
drama's world not following its own internal rules.

The original poster of this thread highlighted several points of
inconsistency which I think are valid. Other people responded somewhat
negatively, but in their response I believe they were erroneously using
*reality* to mean a mixture of both absolute reality in our own day to
day terms, and the *internal consistency* of the fantasy world of this
game.

This game should be fun, of course, but it should also aspire to be a
rock solid simulation of the fantasy world following all of the fantasy
world's own internal rules in a consistent way.

With respect to M&MVI, anything else is either AI cheating, shallow game
design, lazy programming or incomplete testing.

We should not forgive or accept any of these!

PS.

(Spoiler Follows:)

Can someone *please* explain that puzzle in the Temple of Baa in Castle
Ironfist. I saw the four signs of Wood, Copper, Lapis and Silver. I read
the riddle. I figured out that it meant that each of the doors had to be
opened at the end of a different season of the year in a certain
sequence (Wrong!!!!!). While I messed about looking for clues to the
sequence, the four doors all opened. Even knowing the answer I still can
see no relation to the message on the signs, the signs themselves, and
the doors opening. Anyone? Please? I nearly stopped playing the game
right then and there. A game like this should not rely on random testing
and frequent use of a save file. It should be an intellectual excercise.
What did I miss?

--
Dave Richardson

[confused]

Dave Richardson <Da...@curverconsumer.demon.co.uk> conjured up this
insight:

>The original poster of this thread highlighted several points of
>inconsistency which I think are valid. Other people responded somewhat
>negatively, but in their response I believe they were erroneously using
>*reality* to mean a mixture of both absolute reality in our own day to
>day terms, and the *internal consistency* of the fantasy world of this
>game.

>This game should be fun, of course, but it should also aspire to be a
>rock solid simulation of the fantasy world following all of the fantasy
>world's own internal rules in a consistent way.

>With respect to M&MVI, anything else is either AI cheating, shallow game
>design, lazy programming or incomplete testing.

>We should not forgive or accept any of these!

Well, first I apologize to Philip for the inevitable drift, but a
drifting I shall go...

Yes, it may seem logical on the surface that "internal consistency"
and "realism" are two separate things but this is just plain not true.
I completely reject your opinion that these games must be internally
consistent. In fact, I can think of few other design constraints to
really foul up the potential of a game then to impose such an
arbitrary and capricious rule as "Thou shalt be internally
consistent."

I would hold to that position if it were remotely possible for human
beings to objectively evaluate such a thing as "internal consistency"
in a "non-realistic" fantasy universe. But in fact, it is patently
impossible to do any such thing.

In order to objectively evaluate the internal consistency of a fantasy
world as a completely closed universe you would have to have a
document of several million pages which carefully outlined all of the
characteristics and operating precepts of the fantasy universe. Add
to this that you would have to develop all of the atomic principals
by which that universe operated and do so in such a way that was not
dependent upon our reality experience to convey the concepts.

For each and every little issue you can bring up about a game and say
"that is not *consistent* with other aspects of the game" I maintain
that you unconsciously apply several thousand rules and relationships
from the "real" universe that we abide in, or think that we abide in.

Even with today's very large and complex games, they are but simple
pinprick views through a dark canvas into an infinitely complex and
almost completely undefined fantasy universe. For you to sit there
and posit that you can concretely deduce whether or not any two events
or actions in a game are actually internally consistent to that
fantasy universe seems almost beligerant to me. It reminds me of that
old classic "Flatworld" with the poor two-D creature trying to make
sense out of the three-D world; the viewport is just much too small.

Again, I maintain that the compendium of data, facts and information
that would be required to define a closed system fantasy universe to
the degree that *anybody* could even claim to make judgements about
internal consistency within that universe is beyond anybody's ability
to develop.

Even if you take some of the large fantasy universes from the
literature (e.g., Asimov, Herbert, Tolkien) you find that all of these
are more than 90% reliant upon the so called "real universe" to make
the writing possible and to save the author the impossible task of
starting a universe from scratch.

For my part, I will continue to argue strenuously against any and all
who try to impose either "realism" or "internal consistency" on
fantasy games.

confused

[Philip W.Stanley]

>Ok, I've made a second pass. I guess on review my "not realistic?"
>comments were a bit thick. I suppose I've had so many philosophical
>arguments about realism in games that I come out swinging. I'll just
>ignore the whole topic and talk about "what is fun for me."

Thank you for your re-review of the post. I too have fallen to the
anonymity of the Internet encouraging more forceful uses of language.
It is actually too easy for this to occur in the newsgroup and for
real discussions to get lost. Again, thank you for the
reconsideration.

>>- Even though I used it extensively, allowing your party to repair
>>items during combat just doesn't make sense to me. It also doesn't
>>make sense to me that I can perform complete equipment changes with
>>another character not to mention that the other character's combat
>>round isn't affected at all. It seems like my party would call
>>"time-out!" and proceed to make potions, fix items, change
>>gear/weapons, and then jump back into the fray.
>
>I guess, within the context of MM6, I'd like it to stay the same.
>Given that there are about 1.8 times more monsters in the game than it
>needs, I like anything that reduces the number of times I have to
>beacon back to Sorp. If the monsters were ever reduced, I'd vote for
>"fixing" it.

There is another post in this thread that brings up a good point about
this. The three other characters in the party are defending the one
changing their armor or fixing a weapon. To make this a viable
viewpoint for MM7, interaction between characters would cause both of
them to lose their combat turn. Thoughts?

>>- Why can't I jump over an itty-bitty trickle of water without losing
>>300 hit points? I remember an NPC saying that the water was really
>>cold and that was why I couldn't wade in shallow water. However, the
>>fact that the trickle couldn't be more than 6 inches deep really
>>ticked me off when my party lost 25-33% of their hit points.
>
>I guess I'd let the programmer in me go with the practical here since
>it's clearly much easier/efficient to say, that space is water, can't
>walk there. Yes, it aggrevates me at times. But then I got pretty
>good at skipping my party like a big flat rock and healing on the
>other side. On the other hand, once you get water walk (fairly soon)
>it's all a moot point anyway.

Having done some programming myself, I certainly agree with the "water
is water is water" practicality. Upon reflection, I do think that
this gripe of mine is rather petty. I guess I shouldn't have tried to
list everything I thought of, huh? "Big, flat rock", I like that.

>>- Why is it so hard for my party to jump up a 1.5 foot step? I have
>>to cast a Jump spell just to go a flight of steep stairs. Needs
>>improvement.
>
>To be honest, on a lot of these "that's not good physics" type of
>issues, I'd rather they fixed the inifinite mass of NPCs and monsters
>thing first. I'd much rather be able to push things out of the way
>than have these other things fixed. I posted a whole message about
>that one topic not long ago.

I agree with you there. If I send my review to NWC, I should probably
rank the items so that they don't end up fixing the minor thing I
wanted but ignoring the big ones. :) I love the idea of pushing
things out of the way! I will try to find your previous post on this
article, but if I don't find it...Does this refer to moving NPCs and
critters out of the way or something else?

>>- Bring back "Recharge Item". If I can enchant an item, it should be
>>easier to simply pour mana into an object.
>
>No, I don't want it. I ended up with a whole pack of wands anyway.
>Charges werent' so much a problem as using the wands fast enough was.

I guess I let the legacy gamer in me take over. Since I could do it
in previous M&M games, I wondered why I couldn't do it in MM6. Now
that I think about it, there were alot more wands and other items to
pick up in this game, weren't there? It's amazing how clearly some
things appear when someone shows you a different way to look at it.
Thanks.

>>>>- Darkmoor Castle: I have one point of advice for NWC: DO NOT put
>>>>level 80 critters (4 million Eyes) in a dungeon where you know the
>>>>characters are only going to be level 20!!!!!!! The surrounding
>>>>critters outside generally gave some sort of hint as to how difficult
>>>>the dungeons on that map area were going to be. This was one that was
>>>>totally out-of-place.
>>>
>>>Hmm, would it be "more realistic" that tough monsters never teamed
>>>with weak ones or just something you'd rather have?
>>>
>>I submit to your argument about strong critters teaming up with weaker
>>ones. However, I failed to correctly convey my gripe. My argument is
>>that these dungeons were made to appear to be the next logical place
>>for the party to go to. The "weaker" critters were just the right
>>difficulty level for my characters to take on, but having hordes of
>>"stronger" critters made my party's death imminent. I would like the
>>paradigm of outside critter to inside critter difficulty ratio to
>>remain fairly consistent. I know that this game is labelled
>>"non-linear" but you have to admit that there is some sort of logical
>>progression that is gone through.
>
>Yes, but I liked the few exceptions like Darkmoor and Ghariks. I say
>that even though I spent way too much time in Darkmoor because I
>thought, "I should be able to do this." Would have been much easier
>if I'd waited until I was stronger.

You know, Gharik's Forge (which was greatly overpowered for its
location) really didn't bother me as my party saw the Fire Beasts or
Spritis or whatever they were, dropped their loads, exclaimed numerous
explicatives, and promptly ran for their lives. Upon further
consideration, I think that the reason I disliked Castle Darkmoor so
much is that I am an anal-retentive player. I hate leaving a
partially explored place (dungeon/castle) as I feel that I will miss
or forget something when I return (if I remember to return). It seems
like I am starting to flip-flop on many of my gripes as I wrote my
review immediately after finishing this extremely long game and am now
seeing things differently after being isolated from the game for a few
days. Now that I think back, MM6 did a good job of directing you back
to Castle Darkmoor because you had to retrieve something from there
(was it a memory crystal?). I conceed, sir.

>>>>- Dragonsand was waaaay too overpopulated. I didn't even end up
>>>>finishing this section out and I got sick and tired of "1. run in, 2.
>>>>get pumelled by 400 dragons, lizards and wyrms, 3. crawl out in a
>>>>bloody, broken, and battered mess".
>>>
>>>Once you get strong enough, Dragonsand is as easy as everywhere else.
>
>>Once I had fought, retreated, gone up in levels over and over again I
>>finally got to the point where I could take on more than one group.
>>My argument is about the overpopulation. I simply would have like
>>fewer and stronger critters so that battle didn't become so tedious.
>
>Agreed, and I'd say that about most of the map. I think there are 1.8
>times too many monsters across the map.

I completely agree.

>>I never really tried real-time weapon combat and I thank you greatly
>>for the information. Does it seem like the real-time and turn-based
>>combat modes out of proportion to you? The way I figure, if multiple
>>modes of combat are going to be provided, care should be taken in
>>making sure that they are proportionate in their effects.
>
>At first I did, but the longer I played the more sense I think it
>makes as is. The only part that might be questionable is that I seem
>to get an awfully high precentage of fatal blows in when I'm charging
>forward at close range. Of course, at current monster levels, I
>wouldn't want this changed.
>
>The reason I'm ok with the basic concept of disparate effectiveness
>in different modes is that real time is almost weapon oriented by
>definition in MM6. Other than your quick spell, you won't be casting.
>So it is nice that weapons are more effective. And although I'd
>rather use turn based combat all the time, it would just drive me nuts
>at the current monster levels. So, in the current situation, it makes
>sense that turn based is mostly for spell combat, in which case,
>weapons being less efficacious doesn't really bother me.

When given a choice, I will always choose turn-based combat as I
stated in my original review because I don't want to have to become
dependent on my reaction time to play the game. My nerves can't take
it after work. I completely agree that there is rarely an opportunity
to cast spell (other than the quick spell) in real-time combat so
naturally it leans toward the weapons. It is my opinion that the
effectiveness of weapons or spells should not be based on the
time-mode of combat. This would be the first game I have played to
follow this paradigm. If I was still in college, I would probably
love playing the real-time mode for the adrenaline junkie I used to
be. But now that I am older and have shot nerves on a consistent
basis, I like to take my sweet, old time with things. I suppose that
will never change now.

>> I just got
>>excited when I picked up my first relic weapon and was so disappointed
>>when it did less damage than the "normal" weapon I was using.
>
>There seemed to be a humorous acknowledgement of that when you brought
>Mordred to the guy in Free Haven and he said, "is that all it is?" and
>let you keep it.

You're right, there. It was really funny because when I got the
Modred dagger, I was wondering if the reward was worth more than the
weapon to me. Needless to say, I saved the game right before going to
talk to the guy in Free Haven just in case he said, "Hey you got it!
Thanks!" and then took off with it. My sorcerer really wanted that
dagger!

>>>>10) Turn to Stone - What do you mean, "temporary"? Stone is stone is
>>>>stone.
>
>I guess I'd file it under "doesn't matter" since all of the non-damage
>spells end up being pretty pointless in MM6. I honestly tried to give
>them all a fair chance and in the end, it was, "why waste the turn-
>blast em with something." This is in STARK contrast to the spells in
>battle in HOMM II where the non-damage spells can be used to huge
>tactical advantage in certain circumstances.

If my suggestion of having groups of three or four tough monsters
would be implemented, the Turn to Stone spell would be used constantly
by me so that the #1 butt-stomper in the group could be put on hold
while I dealt with his buddies. In that way, when he became
"un-stoned", I would be able to direct all my attacks at him without
getting pummled by his teammates. Thoughts?

>>>>16) Charm - Does this work?
>>>
>>>It worked, but why bother? Only worked on monsters you could just as
>>>easily kill. Ditto for most other of these types.
>
>>Would you have liked to have a charmed critter attack their own team
>>on behalf of your party?
>
>Ah, yes, "berserker" from HOMM. Make it a high percentage chance that
>they'll attack whomever is closest to them.

I didn't play the HOMM series but the Berserker spell you describe
would be fantastic!

>>>>17) Mass Fear - Doesn't work
>>>It worked, see above.
>>
>>I read a few posts about this not working in turn-based mode. Even
>>though the critter portrait would state that they were scared, they
>>still advanced and attacked.
>
>I think you're probably right. I was probably so impressed when these
>things *appeared* to work (based on portrait info) that I called it
>good and went back to blasting.

My first experience with the Mass Fear/Turn Undead ineffectiveness was
in the Temple of Baa with the battalion of skeletons and the Turn
Undead spell. When I saw a scared skeleton stepping right up and
delivering his hack I screamed at him, "You little b#st#rd! You're
supposed to be going AWAY from me!" I think that I harbor such
disdain for Turn Undead/Mass Fear because my party was reduced to one
character with 1 hit point when I finally took the last skeleton down.
I guess a good analogy of how I felt was if the passenger plane you
were on was highjacked and you were given a weapon to go in and shoot
the highjackers. Upon entering the room, full of confidence, your gun
goes "click" and the highjackers get to have a good time.

>>>>23) Prismatic Light - Got it to work once.
>>>
>>>Actually one of the only light/dark combat spells I found useful.
>
>>I always heard it go off, but I rarely had it work. I usually only
>>used it in big fights with tough critters. I just thought that
>>critters would have resistance to my elemental spells before
>>resistance to the Light/Dark disciplines. It seemed like the
>>elemental spells were more effective for me. I guess it could come
>>down to combat style as well.
>
>I just said it worked, not that it was great;

Hehehe...

>it was just better than
>most of the other light/dark. I actually think the whole light/dark
>thing was done so poorly it might as well have been left out of the
>game.

It was the only group effect spell for the Light discipline as far as
dealing damage goes. Dark magic had Shrapmetal and Dragon Breath for
group effect spells. Would you have liked another group effect spell
under Light?

>>>>28) Moon Ray - Useless before. Useless now.
>>>
>>>Actually, it worked pretty good. Best part about it was it got me
>>>outside for some night fighting just so i could use it.
>>>
>>This probably can be attributed to gaming style as well. When I play,
>>I can't stand spending a large amount of spell points without
>>significant effect (lots of damage OR lots of healing). Since this
>>spell is subtle in doing both damage and healing, it really didn't
>>appeal to me.
>
>BTW, I only used it on nights with a full moon; no idea if this helped
>or not.

I read other posts where some spells didn't cost or had greater
effects if they were cast at noon. Never tried to verify it myself.
It would make complete sense that the full moon would have a distinct
effect on, well to be blunt, the "Moon Ray" spell. :) Whenever I
cast it, it was only in the early evening and rarely at that. I never
did much map travelling at night.

>>>Another great entertainment spell. Especially useful in the NWC
>>>dungeon.
>
>>Was this useful on the Q character? I never encounted it, but I read
>>alot of posts about it. I will agree that it provide a laugh when I
>>used it. I just wanted to take the little stone statue home and put
>>it on the mantle! :)
>
>Didn't try it on Q. Only place I ever used it was on some of the
>programmers in the NWC dungeon.

Hope you spared George. He really contributes alot to this group. I
actually stopped and said "Hi" when I ran into him to thank him for
his input into the newsgroup. :)

>>- Does this make sense? A 200+ strength character can only carry a
>>specific volume of items equal to that of a character with a strength
>>of 10. It really struck me odd that I was limited to a restrictive
>>inventory grid for my "items no longer having an owner". Take a hint
>>from Ultima VII. You can throw as many things into your backpack/bag
>>as long as you are strong enough to carry it. Granted, the 200+
>>strength character will have tons of items upon items that it will be
>>difficult to find what you are looking for, but it only makes logical
>>sense. When a powerful knight can only carry 40 potion bottles, but a
>>weakling sorcerer can carry three sets of plate armor and 7 helms,
>>something is wrong in the world.
>
>Well, hmm, uh, shucks. I guess I'll have to wimp out on this and say
>I like it when weight is not an issue. I think the reason is that I
>always play sorcerers in these types of games and it always aggrevated
>me that I could hardly carry anything. The other reason is that I'm a
>hopelss packrat and it's bad enough that I have to dump things because
>of pack space. I guess I'd like to have a Dr. Who backpack for all my
>chars. (:

Or a "Bag of Holding" (D&D term). The reason for my gripe is that I
am a packrat as well. When I wanted to throw another object on my
Paladin's back and he refused, I wanted to shout, "Come on, man! Do
it for the cause!". Playing the sorcerer wouldn't impact you too
greatly if an encumberance option was put in. Your sorcerer wouldn't
have use for Enormous Battle Axes of Death or other types of big melee
weapons. He would be hauling rings, potions, scrolls, books, and
other things that he could utilize. Oops! I forgot...you have to get
money in this game, don't you? That blows my "wouldn't affect you"
argument, doesn't it?

>>- Five days travel for what? I can understand the need to load map
>>sections just as was done for the previous games, but why charge me
>>the 5 days? It you are going to do that, make the cloth map
>>correspond with a large forest or desert between sections. I could
>>also accept a charge of one day if the cloth map doesn't change from
>>its current appearance.
>
>I'd file this under "makes no sense but helps make the game
>interesting." The only tactical planning that is in the game is when
>you need to be some place by some certain time.

This was one of the very minor gripes that I probably shouldn't have
included. This was a result of being very early in the game, with no
money, and very little food, and then being presented with the 5 days
thing. Since all the travelling during that time was between New
Sorpigal and Castle Ironfist, it looked just right up the road to me
on the map. Upon further consideration, I now think that travelling
to different map sections should use different amounts of food
consumption. Travelling to Castle Ironfist from New Sorpigal could
take 1 or 2 days among green, level, fruitful fields, while travelling
across mountain ranges or deserts to other areas would take 5, 10, or
maybe even 15 days when trying to get to Sweetwater, Dragonsand, or
Hermit's Isle. This would also be proportionate in game terms as the
party was able to fill up on more food when entering the tougher
sections of the map. Thoughts?

>>>>- If I cast Lloyd's Beacon to recall my party to a location set when I
>>>>was flying, please put me on the ground. Currently, I get put on the
>>>>ground, but it is in the form of a red, pasty goo after I have plunged
>>>>to my demise.
>>>
>>>Seems realistic to me that you should end up at the same place in the
>>>Z axis as where you cast it.
>
>>Ok, if I have to stand by the "realist" tag, keep this game behavior
>>in. But could I be allowed to put the game in TB mode so that I could
>>cast the Fly or Feather Fall spell?
>
>(: Well, you can go into TB mode as your falling. Or cast any of
>those spells before using beacon. Actually, by the time I'm beaconing
>around (about level 20 or so) I try to keep fly/feather/waterwalk on
>at all times.

Probably a good habit I should have developed. I was just so anxious
to get to a new area with my party fully charged that I didn't want to
waste spell points on a spell that I would only use for a few seconds.
Guess those few seconds would have saved more in the long run anyway,
huh? Yet another point I should have not put in. :)

>>>- Why is it that when I enter a map section, I am placed in the middle
>>>of blood-thirsty critters? Wouldn't I have seen them from a distance
>>>sometime during my 5-day travel?
>>>
>
>Aggrevated me the first few times but then it was a bit of excitement
>as I came to expect it. Only time it *really* aggrevated me was
>taking the stage into Darkmoor and being surrounded by skeletons and
>ghosts and NPCs at one of the few times when I actually cared about my
>reputation.

I didn't give a rat's ass about my reputation after reaching Bootleg
Bay. :) I really didn't see what it was accomplishing except for
having NPCs get snobby with me. Boy, was I surprised when I tried to
visit a lord's castle with a "vile" reputation. Not to mention, the
Light master wanting me to be next to being God before he would give
me the time of day. Luckily, I surmised that the completion of quests
especially in quick succession boosted the reputation tremendously. I
digress. When I entered Mire of the Damned the first time, I was sent
plummeting down the side of a cliff and then having a whole mess of
Harpies jump all over me. That's when I first developed the intense
hatred for the "drop you in the middle" map change. The only other
horrible ones I remember were falling into a horde of werewolves when
getting into Kriegspire and getting dropped off by the Ironfist yacht
at Hermit's Isle in the middle of Sea Serpents, Hydras, and Titans. I
probably would not have minded this if when I first got on the map, a
message saying "AMBUSH!" appeared. This would make sense to me as the
critters were lying in wait for oblivious travellers like my party.
This would get rid of the basis of my gripe.

>>>>- Sword skill...Why can't it also have a damage increase? I realize
>>>>that allowing Master level swordsman the ability to wield two swords
>>>>is a bonus, but that really doesn't help in the damage department past
>>>>level 20 or so.
>>>
>>>I disagree.
>
>>Do you refer to your previous statement regarding real-time weapon
>>combat? If so, I see your point.
>
>Yes, unlike the two handed weapons, the two weapons really did seem to
>be worth giving up the shield.

I guess this one is covered by our previous discussion on real-time vs
turn-based weapon effectiveness, yes?

>>>You needed to hire NPCs more. All you needed was a master level 7 in
>>>your party to get full value in both directions. Agreed about the
>>>monotony of transfering. Same can be said for repairing.
>
>>You are probably right, sir. However, I am a greedy bastard and
>>didn't want to share my loot with anyone who didn't help me fight! :)
>
>No need to share. When you're heading back to get Sorped, stop by
>Free Haven and pick up the Merchant/Duper combo on your way. Once
>you're done selling, dismiss them. They pay for their hire cost on
>the first one or two transactions.

Good idea. I will have to try that if I play the game again. I think
one of the major reason for my not hiring followers was that I was not
sure if I would need loads of gold as the game progressed. Also as
the game went on, I didn't really see a need to talk to many wandering
NPCs and therefore didn't hire any followers. I was so concerned with
accomplishing quests and moving the story along that I didn't bother
with the niceties that were available. Now that I know what to expect
and that I will have more than enough gold to suit my party, I will
try to delve into the niceties if I play it again.

>>>>- These are rendered useless when attaining higher levels. MM7 should
>>>>have these items restore a certain percentage of the character's total
>>>>points per a defined period. For example, a Ring of SP Regeneration
>>>>could restore 2% of a character's total SP every 5 minutes. Do the
>>>>same thing with the HP regen items and I will be a happy camper. I
>>>>hate resting for no reason but to recharge my spell points.
>>>
>>>They weren't nearly as useless if you used real time combat more. I
>>>agree they were pretty useless if you stuck with turn based.
>
>>Another point of proof for the disproportion between turn-based and
>>real-time.
>
>Well, a *lot* more time goes by in real time battle and you cast
>spells rarely.

Only if I wandered around an empty dungeon for a long time looking for
the secret door, switch, or whatever it was would I be surprised and
look down to see HP/SP above what I remembered. As my party got to
the point where the HP/SP wouldn't really help out in the restoration
department, I got rid of the regenerators as I could put on items that
had "of <insert spell discipline> magic" enchantments. I feel that
the regen items should do more ratio-based regeneration so that I
would have a tougher time deciding whether to ditch the item for
another one with new or different benefits. If a regen item is not
going to be ratio-based in MM7, I would just as soon do without them.

>>- Why do they get unlimited spell points? I realize that critters
>>might be magical in nature, but come on, the same argument could me
>>made for spellcasters.
>
>Drives me nuts, but probably makes game play better. What are those
>wimpy magicians going to do if they run out of mana? Run up and kick
>me in the shins while stroking their goatee?

Maybe they could flee as they do when they have almost no health left.
It could cause interesting situations for the party by choosing
whether do try and hunt them down when you are nearly dead yourself or
rest and try to take them again after they have gained their HP/SP
back.

>>>>- At least give me a levitate/fly spell indoors. If flight spells are
>>>>air-based, is that to say that there is no air in dungeons?
>>>
>>>Not realistic enough?
>
>>Wouldn't you have liked to have been able to have z-axis movement
>>indoors?
>
>Yes, aggrevated me to no end. I actually got pretty good at using the
>jump spell to do things, but not the same.

There were just some instances where the jump had to be cast over and
over again because it was a little hard to control. Again, I think
that I am falling victim to the lack of reflexes.

>-------------------
>A couple other topics:
>
>* Shortage of mass damage spells in dungeons. Starburst and meteor
>shower were such an aid in the overpopulation problem.

Meteor Shower was my favorite spell! I really loved having to
characters with that spell when fighting the Titans! I really liked
the way that if the target was too close, the party was caught in it
as well. The major gripe I have with these spells was that they
assumed I wanted to target the closest enemy. One more than one
occasion, I would end up facing in a different direction so that I
could only see the one I wanted to hit, if possible.

>* I'd kind of like it if not every critter in the game other than NPCs
>was out to kill me. I'd like a band of archers and Veterans and Monks
>to join me in cleaning up the land. Add a little bit of command AI so
>I could give them standing battle orders and maybe a tactical screen
>for turn based combat so I could position them.

One thing I liked about Shadows over Riva was the ability to move
characters around strategically. I don't know where we need to draw
the line between role-playing and strategy. This could become a very
heated discussion topic in the newsgroup.

I would also like to see the roving bands of other characters as well.
MM6 was too black and white. Either the figure you saw was a
wandering NPC or a target. Sometimes the NPCs served the latter
purpose as well. I wouldn't know how it could be implemented, but
perhaps other parties could be trying to do the same thing you are.
You would have to talk to NPCs to find out if they have been seen in
the area so that you could find them and either get their information,
join together in some fashion, or battle it out if desired. What do
you think?

>Then, maybe
>reputation and fame and diplomacy could actually be useful for
>something like how good of a chance I had in recruiting
>people/critters to my cause (alla HOMM). Actually, this would be
>number one on my wish list.

I think that the personality-type skills should determine how much
information someone is going to give you. Here are some examples of
my idea:

(Low "people" skills)

PARTY: "You! Puke-face! Where is the Apocalyptic Dungeon of Joy?
Tell me or I'll reach down your throat and rip out an organ of my
choosing!"
NPC: "Um...Well, if you go over those mountains to the West, you will
find it in the swamp."

(High "people" skills)

PARTY: "Excuse me, kind sir. We are crusaders on a quest for the King
and must find the Apocalyptic Dungeon of Joy to save this land, the
home to you and I. Can you provide us any assistance?"
NPC: "Oh yes! I just told an unsavory bunch of ill-tempered
scoundrels about it just before you came up. West of the mountains is
the Swamp of the Titanic Emancipating Minotaurs where the dungeon is
located. But, there is another way other than that. Just take the
Road of Cushy Travelling for 2 days. You will then find the Shrine of
Mass Transit. Simply utter the phrase, "Klatuu Barada Nikto", at the
shrine and you will be instantly teleported inside."

This is not the best example, but this idea could also suit gamers of
differing types. The combat-fed gamer would love the first scenario,
but the story-fed gamer might be more suited to the latter. There are
also many possible levels in between. Thoughts?

>
>* Assorted other things I posted in my "mission debrief" thread when I
>finished.

I'll try to find it.

Thanks again for the re-response. The discussion of the differing
viewpoints really helped me to see some other perspectives and made me
re-consider my own opinions in a different light. Thanks again.

[confused]

nospam_...@rmii.com (Philip W.Stanley) conjured up this insight:

>>I guess, within the context of MM6, I'd like it to stay the same.

>>Given that there are about 1.8 times more monsters in the game than it
>>needs, I like anything that reduces the number of times I have to
>>beacon back to Sorp. If the monsters were ever reduced, I'd vote for
>>"fixing" it.

>There is another post in this thread that brings up a good point about
>this. The three other characters in the party are defending the one
>changing their armor or fixing a weapon. To make this a viable
>viewpoint for MM7, interaction between characters would cause both of
>them to lose their combat turn. Thoughts?

Again, I won't enter into discussions of "realism" or even "internal
consistency" and only offer my opinions based on "fun" and
"playability." If the monster level is the same I want every break I
can get. If the monster count is reduced, then I'm more open to it
being less easy than it is now.

>I agree with you there. If I send my review to NWC, I should probably
>rank the items so that they don't end up fixing the minor thing I
>wanted but ignoring the big ones. :) I love the idea of pushing
>things out of the way! I will try to find your previous post on this
>article, but if I don't find it...Does this refer to moving NPCs and
>critters out of the way or something else?

Look for "infinite masses" in the title. Also, I believe that I was
thinking of that very post when I mentioned that I too sometimes fall
prey to using the "reality thing" to bolster a position of mine when
it is convenient.

>If my suggestion of having groups of three or four tough monsters
>would be implemented, the Turn to Stone spell would be used constantly
>by me so that the #1 butt-stomper in the group could be put on hold
>while I dealt with his buddies. In that way, when he became
>"un-stoned", I would be able to direct all my attacks at him without
>getting pummled by his teammates. Thoughts?

Well, getting into the spell stuff is tricky. You can't just take a
single spell in isolation without considering the other, related
spells. Also, spells is one place I *really* don't want to see any
"realism" logic used. The game has a number of spells that deal with
movement (slow, haste, stone, fear, sleep (monsters only), paralyze,
etc.) and I would want to look at all of them together or none at all.
One thought I do have is that the movement spells in HOMM work very
well and might be a more of a model for MM than vice-versa.

For movement you can basically speed/slow it. Alter direction. Pause
it, or halt it. Then you have the question of what undoes the spell.
Elapsed time, being attacked, counter spell, etc. I think you just
work out a good system and then assign creative names to them that
don't conflict with anybody's sense of "good physics" just to be safe.

>>it was just better than
>>most of the other light/dark. I actually think the whole light/dark
>>thing was done so poorly it might as well have been left out of the
>>game.

>It was the only group effect spell for the Light discipline as far as
>dealing damage goes. Dark magic had Shrapmetal and Dragon Breath for
>group effect spells. Would you have liked another group effect spell
>under Light?

Yes, but I'd rather see them completely redesign the whole light/dark
mess. Also, speaking of group effect I wish they'd fix the one under
cold. It was pathetic compared to the fire and air one. Also, the
earth one wasn't very good either.

>>Didn't try it on Q. Only place I ever used it was on some of the
>>programmers in the NWC dungeon.

>Hope you spared George. He really contributes alot to this group. I
>actually stopped and said "Hi" when I ran into him to thank him for
>his input into the newsgroup. :)

Most certainly, he was helping me with my save game problem so I
wasn't about to zap him. (:

>This was one of the very minor gripes that I probably shouldn't have
>included. This was a result of being very early in the game, with no
>money, and very little food, and then being presented with the 5 days
>thing. Since all the travelling during that time was between New
>Sorpigal and Castle Ironfist, it looked just right up the road to me
>on the map. Upon further consideration, I now think that travelling
>to different map sections should use different amounts of food
>consumption. Travelling to Castle Ironfist from New Sorpigal could
>take 1 or 2 days among green, level, fruitful fields, while travelling
>across mountain ranges or deserts to other areas would take 5, 10, or
>maybe even 15 days when trying to get to Sweetwater, Dragonsand, or
>Hermit's Isle. This would also be proportionate in game terms as the
>party was able to fill up on more food when entering the tougher
>sections of the map. Thoughts?

Once you start doing that I wouldn't mind seeing them go all the way
and add a terrain-movement system. I say this not because it is more
realistic that you travel slower uphill or in a swamp but because it
makes the game more interesting. This would also make things like the
NPC pathfinders more useful. New attributes could also be put in
place for offsetting the slowing effects. Maybe add in snowshoes and
skis too. Hmm, I better stop there before I get too carried away.

>One thing I liked about Shadows over Riva was the ability to move
>characters around strategically. I don't know where we need to draw
>the line between role-playing and strategy. This could become a very
>heated discussion topic in the newsgroup.

Well, I don't care about genre purity so I'd like numerous
enhancements in the battle system. A switch to third person would be
a great one for turn based battles.

>I would also like to see the roving bands of other characters as well.
>MM6 was too black and white. Either the figure you saw was a
>wandering NPC or a target. Sometimes the NPCs served the latter
>purpose as well. I wouldn't know how it could be implemented, but
>perhaps other parties could be trying to do the same thing you are.
>You would have to talk to NPCs to find out if they have been seen in
>the area so that you could find them and either get their information,
>join together in some fashion, or battle it out if desired. What do
>you think?

Even a simple system like in HOMM would be a big improvement. You go
up to a group and if a number of factors are in your favor there's a
chance they'll offer to join you (either free or for a fee) . There's
a nice edge to the decision in HOMM because if you say "no" they
always get insulted and attack you. (:

They could use a different color on the radar to indicate a group
that wasn't going to try and kill you on sight. Of course, the groups
would need to be thined a bit so it was actually possible to approach
one without triggering five others.

>This is not the best example, but this idea could also suit gamers of
>differing types. The combat-fed gamer would love the first scenario,
>but the story-fed gamer might be more suited to the latter. There are
>also many possible levels in between. Thoughts?

Well, they would have to put a *lot* more work into the NPCs than they
did for MM6. If they do try to enhance them in that or any other way,
I hope they do a really good job. Right now it's a no brainer
decision just to Armageddon them so they don't bother you. I'd hate
them to be half-decent and make the decision a tough one.

confused

[Laurie Power]

> Even if you take some of the large fantasy universes from the
> literature (e.g., Asimov, Herbert, Tolkien) you find that all of these
> are more than 90% reliant upon the so called "real universe" to make
> the writing possible and to save the author the impossible task of
> starting a universe from scratch.

> For my part, I will continue to argue strenuously against any and all
> who try to impose either "realism" or "internal consistency" on
> fantasy games.

> confused

Agreed. What is required is a world convincing enough to cause the
suspension of questions about consistency and the real world. Glaring
inconsistency can get in the way of this but so can to much
consistency. The fact that you can repair armour and switch items
mid-battle in MM6 is patently ridiculous, however ( if it wasn't such
a messy process ) it's quite a good game ploy and adds to a battle
"realism" ie. you have to look after your equipment. And yet the use
of the timing delay outside battle is consistent but irritating and
gives one time to pause for thought and think whats wrong with the
game, hence returning to the real world and losing your feeling that
the game world is real.

<--LOLL-->
<--DDR**DDRRDIDRRDLDROIDR-->

[Philip W.Stanley]

On Mon, 29 Jun 1998 23:16:41 GMT, Fe...@my-dejanews.com wrote:

>> -Critters end up coming straight at you instead of their zig-zag,
>> drunken approach pattern.
>
>Why? Do you always head straight toward them? I don't, I wouldn't expect them
>too. The zig-zag technique is the best offensive maneuver you can make
>especially against magic casters.

I don't argue your point at all. I was just stating that I am glad
turn-based combat did not experience this as the zig-zag approach
pattern would not have been effective.

>> - Even though I used it extensively, allowing your party to repair
>> items during combat just doesn't make sense to me. It also doesn't
>> make sense to me that I can perform complete equipment changes with
>> another character not to mention that the other character's combat
>> round isn't affected at all. It seems like my party would call
>> "time-out!" and proceed to make potions, fix items, change
>> gear/weapons, and then jump back into the fray.
>
>Well, as you have four characters why wouldn't one of them take time out to
>do these things. The flaw is that once a character enters inventory mode
>they can manipulate all the party's inventory. But why couldn't 3 characters
>ward off an enemy while one of them changes armor?

I like your point. I just think that if the one character in question
took something off of another character or changed their items during
their combat turn that the other character should be penalized as
well. Logical?

>> - I really disliked the fact that flying creatures could sit right
>> above me without my being able to see them. I found it kind of
>> ridiculous that I had to cast the Fly spell just to do hand-to-hand
>> combat with them (Plus, Fly does not work indoors!). I can see the
>> strategy of the critter, but please allow me to look up and give them
>> nasty, bloody, steel-singing death.
>>
>
>For the most part you can see them but even in real life you can look up and
>it's not 360 degree peripheral vision. Besides Wizard's Eye takes care of the
>complaint.

I am not asking for 360 degree peripheral vision, but rather the
ability to view an enemy directly overhead. If I cannot see the enemy
I cannot attack them with melee weapons or directional spells. Only
Ring of Fire would work in that instance. Wizard Eye can show me
their location, but it does not allow me to hit them. I would end up
having to switch to real-time mode, run 15 feet, go back into
turn-based mode and then I could attack them.

>> - Ever since Eye of the Beholder III, Ultima Underworld, and Doom, it
>> seems as if every game on the market is in real-time. While this may
>> appeal to action/adrenaline afficionados, it does not appeal to this
>> person who puts in a full day of work and wants to settle down to some
>> enjoyment when he gets home. The real-time games require the brain
>> and reflexes to be ultra-sharp, resulting in my feeling even more
>> tired after playing it. The fact that I had to stay sharp to ensure
>> that I hit <Enter> in time to initiate turn-based combat became the
>> first thing I intensely disliked about the game.
>
>You really must be joking. Hitting ENTER is a problem? I mean come on.

My point is that I am not a gamer who enjoys games requiring quick
reflexes or reaction times. Just as a personal preference, I felt
like I had to be quick on the draw to hit <Enter> when I critter came
into view. I don't think that real-time combat should be taken out of
the game as I realize that many gamers really get into this aspect. I
am just airing my opinions. Whether you agree or not should not
result in insults about my viewpoints. I could just as easily
retaliate with insults about yours, but that accomplishes nothing. I
want to use this newsgroup to discuss different aspects and viewpoints
so that I can look on the game in a different light.

>>With the current
>> engine, I am not sure what advice to give. One point of pondering
>> that I will present is the Microprose combat in XCom:Apocalypse. When
>> entering a battle situation, the game asks if the combat should be in
>> real-time or turn-based combat. Because of this, I didn't have to
>> force my eyes from not blinking just in case a critter would dart
>> across the screen. In a nutshell, give us old, slow-reflexed gamers
>> the chance to have a complete turn-based system so that we don't have
>> to load up on caffeine just to play the game
>
>Yes but X-COM sux in just about every way so I hope nothing in M&M is ever
>based on that silly piece of garbage. Hitting ENTER actually makes game play
>a lot easier then if I had to decide on turn or real initially. With XCOM if
>you selected turn you had to run all over the place looking for something and
>it took forever. That got old.

As with many things, this is just a preference of mine. I certainly
appreciate your view on it and respect it. As I said earlier, I just
don't get into real-time games as I do turn-based.

>> - How about some more information during combat? I would like to know
>> if a critter is just lucky when my mega-spell seems to have no effect.
>> It was very frustrating trying to find what spell schools the
>> high-level critters were not resistant to. I would end up thinking
>> they were totally magic resistant and beating my worthless weapons
>> against their hides. Then, out of frustration, the spell was cast
>> again and them critter sufferred a flaming, crispy death.
>
>Man, if you get your way enemies won't stand a chance. Most enemy immunities
>aren't that hard to figure out. Most of the time the logic I used was if it
>casts cold then you need to cast hot etc.

I do acknowledge this point about elemental-based attacks. I used
that formula constantly. But how about the minotaurs when you really
didn't know what was happening when you threw a spell against them?
This point would probably be moot if the Identify Monster spell was
brought back. Nostalgia gets to me.

>Actually my feeling is if the
>enemy casts cold with cold immunity and you throw cold at him then he gets
>back hit points. That would make you think about what you are doing when
>casting spells.

I really, really like that idea! Sort of a spell absorption thing.
The bigger the damage would have been, the more HP they gain back.

>> - A general complaint: tell me if the target is out of range. Nothing
>> is more frustrating than having my Dragon Breath (the "SP drainer") go
>> "ka-put" two feet in front of the target and then getting nailed with
>> their "Turn to Goo" spell immediately afterward.
>
>Naw, leave it. If this happens it only means that the player is a coward and
>is afraid to step up!

Thanks for the constructive criticism. Reiterating the point, whether
the critter has longer range than I do, I would like some sort of
indication that my spell is in range. Again, since I am a turn-based
junkie, this only appeals to that mode of combat.

>> - Good idea to have the critter's "call" eminating when your party was
>> nearing upon their position. That was one thing I greatly enjoyed
>> when I played Daggerfall for the first time. Kudos.
>
>This isn't a bad idea but unfortunately Daggerfall's sound intelligence was
>horrible. Sounds popping up when you walked by a wall with a critter on the
>other side. Totally annoying and unrealistic.

I agree. As stated earlier, I am not cut out for real-time gaming,
and when the situation you describe above occurred to me, I was
wheeling all around to see where it was coming from and who was coming
to gut me. Sort of got used to it with time.

>> - I expected a little more when the Light and Dark spells were cast.
>> I was very disappointed with the sounds for Sun Ray, Shrapmetal, and
>> Hour of Power. Guess I should buy a subwoofer for more enjoyment,
>> huh? Just a suggestion, but Warcraft II acutally had the spellcaster
>> say some sort of mantra for each spell. This old D&D gamer really
>> liked that aspect. This would probably be a little tough to implement
>> since each character in M&M has their own voices.
>
>How is it a CON just because they don't make the sound you would prefer.

These are my OPINIONS. I never make the assumption that everyone
should have the same opinions as I do. As an example, your favorite
color is probably not mine, nor should you expect it to be.

>> - IMHO, a Master Cutlass of Infernos or relic weapon should make a
>> more menacing sound than a plain old dagger or club.
>
>The only thing I want to hear is the sound of the weapon thudding on a body.

That would be a nice touch that I would like to see implemented in
MM7.

>> - "Greetings and Salutations!" got old quickly. Either let me turn
>> the character's greetings off or let me hear the homeowner's voice
>> instead.
>
>Please....

If you have a differing viewpoint, please let me know what it is. It
might make me consider my own viewpoints differently.

>> - Fly next to cliff, make inadvertant contact, plunge to death! 'Nuff
>> said.
>
>Makes sense to me. Fact is if you fly into a cliff the games gives you a
>break by not deducting hit points which it should. I mean fly into cliff,
>plunge, hit Page Up, dont' die.....

This was just a nit-pick. I would just like to have some sort of
indicator when I am within 3 feet of contact. Maybe something that
turns red? Maybe a consistent elevation factor? This would mean that
you could be standing on a building, cast Fly, run off of the roof and
stay at the same elevation. Reasonable? Might also solve my cliff
nit-pick in the process.

>> - Why can't I jump over an itty-bitty trickle of water without losing
>> 300 hit points? I remember an NPC saying that the water was really
>> cold and that was why I couldn't wade in shallow water. However, the
>> fact that the trickle couldn't be more than 6 inches deep really
>> ticked me off when my party lost 25-33% of their hit points.
>
>Hey, water walk is there for a reason and the game makes you use it. If the
>NPC tells you the water is freezing and you jump in then you should lose 25%
>of your hit points because you used only 25% of your common sense.

My frustration probably comes from the previous M&M games. They had
shallow water and deep water. With a swimming skill, shallow water
could be traversed. Deep water required Walk on Water. Nostalgia
again. You know, remarks like your last sentence do not incline
someone to respond in an objective manner. I do want discussions to
take place from different viewpoints, but if all I am going to get is
insults, why should I try to respond seeing that you think of me as a
moron?

>> - Why is it so hard for my party to jump up a 1.5 foot step? I have
>> to cast a Jump spell just to go a flight of steep stairs. Needs
>> improvement.
>
>Nope, makes sense. Tell me why you should be able to jump over a 1.5 foot
>step when you are wearing 100 lbs. of armor, weaponry, supplies etc.

Because my characters had between 140-320 strength.

>> - Since the real-time movement was a major part of this game, why
>> can't I climb? Daggerfall let you climb too many things, but I think
>> I should be able to climb 6 feet up a brick wall. Why not give the
>> party ropes and ladders as in previous M&M games?
>
>Well it's climbing straight up that you want. Varn proves that you can climb
>inclined surfaces. It's not a bad idea but the interface for throwing a rope
>etc. would be daunting. I don't think armor laden characters are going to be
>able to climb that easy.

And I agree that it shouldn't be easy. However, there are mountains
and people climb those all the time. BUT, some mountains are more
treacherous than others. On those not so nice mountains there could
be avalanches, slips, or what have you. You are correct about the
interface idea. Perhaps it could be like previous M&M games when a
message would simply appear stating "You don't have a rope!".

>> - I am a keyboard junkie. One reason why I loved the previous M&M
>> games was that I could lean back with the keyboard in my lap and have
>> full control. The keyboard control seemed partially implemented in
>> MM6. I couldn't select spells, inventory items, make potions, select
>> targets, view critter health, or select conversation topics. I hope
>> that NWC implements this type of control in MM7.
>
>To be honest what you want wouldn't be worth the trouble it would take to give
>it to you. Personally I would like to see programmable joystick/gamepad
>support.

Just different tastes between us. BTW, how are gamepads for the PC?
Are there many games that write for them?

>> - Why did each character have the proximity gem next to their
>> portrait? Since they are virtually occupying the same space, it
>> doesn't make sense to have four separate ones as they are always
>> giving the same indication.
>>
>
>Huh? It tells you different things at different times. I like the easy to
>see lights. Red helped a lot.

My point is that the gem for each character was always the same as the
gems of the other characters. If they were not occupying the same
space, each character's gem would have been invaluable. I just
suggest that one would have sufficed. Again, nit-picking by me.

>> - I liked that MM III-V would display a spell affect or blood splat to
>> let you know how effective you were. Granted, there was some of that
>> in MM6, but not like previous games where it filled the screen. It's
>> picky, but it is just a preference I have.
>
>Yeah , it's picky considering that if you know how many points a monster has
>then counting the points you take from it seems relatively easy to me.

It's not just a matter of counting points, but rather eye-candy while
playing. If it was only about counting points, we could go back to
text-based games.

>> - Bring back "Recharge Item". If I can enchant an item, it should be
>> easier to simply pour mana into an object.
>>
>

>I opt for no recharge item but you should be able to randomly enchant it.

I'm not sure I understand your point. Do you mean that if an
enchanted item runs out that it does not disappear and you could then
give it a new enchantment? That would kind of be neat for weapons.
Imagine putting a crappy enchantment on a weapon and you are
constantly making that character use that weapon to wear out the
enchantment. Might be interesting.

>> - In regards to critter levels, this game was tough starting out, got
>> easy, and then became impossible. There were many misplaced critters
>> in my opinion: Oozes in Dragoons' Cavern, Gold Dragon in the "Medusa
>> dungeon", Cuisinarts and Doom Knights with Swordsmen (Silver Helm, I
>> think...), and F$%#ing Eyes with Ogres. There were probably some
>> others, but I don't want to try to recall all of them.
>
>I thought Gold Dragon was a stroke of genius. Totally blew me away. No level
>was ever impossible. Everything depends on when you decide to take it out. I
>didn't deal with Darkmore until I was in the level 80's and when I did finally
>go in there I smeared 'em. Made a completely frustrating quest a piece of
>cake. I can't imagine doing it in the level 20s. That would suck.

It really did. I am one of those gamers who doesn't like leaving a
dungeon partially explored so that I have to return later. I always
think that I will end up forgetting about it and not return.
Thankfully, the game made you return for an item (memory crystal?) and
when I returned I was around level 70. You are right in that it was
much better at that point. Upon reflection, I think that the
freshness of the frustration when I wrote the review swayed me a
little too much to one side. Now that I have been away from the game
for a little while, it doesn't seem as offensive as it did.

>> - Darkmoor Castle: I have one point of advice for NWC: DO NOT put
>> level 80 critters (4 million Eyes) in a dungeon where you know the
>> characters are only going to be level 20!!!!!!! The surrounding
>> critters outside generally gave some sort of hint as to how difficult
>> the dungeons on that map area were going to be. This was one that was
>> totally out-of-place.
>>
>
>NAWWWWWWW!!! Darkmore crushed all hopes of things being "predictable". My
>hats off to the maniac who thought this one up. After all it is called Mire
>of the Damned for a reason.

You are correct. See previous paragraph.

>> - Some people like the respawning critters. I don't. It didn't make
>> sense that I rid New Sorpigal from the Goblin Hordes just to have them
>> waltz right back in one year later. This seemed to nullify my past
>> accomplishment and also go against the story. I also wanted to feel
>> that I was saving the land of Enroth (cleaning up the trash). Since
>> they all came back, what good was I doing? I know that many will
>> argue that it makes sense, but I think that it diminishes the feeling
>> of accomplishment.
>>
>
>You missed the whole point. What if you need some a good amount of gold and
>there aren't any gold giving quests left? Besides, respawn gives you a
>chance to see your progress. What took a long time to clear out can come a
>lot easier the stronger you get. I loved crushing mages, goblins and archers
>with just two flicks of a meteor shower and a starburst. I mean after all
>just because you "cleaned up the trash" doesn't mean that trash won't ever
>come back.

Well, again, one of the New Sorpigal quests was to drive the Goblins
away and get some item so that the mayor could keep them away. When I
saw they had returned later, I went back to the mayor expecting
another problem/quest with the Goblins but the mayor was still singing
my praises about ridding New Sorpigal of their presence. Just didn't
make sense.

I never had gold become a problem in the game. After I got to about
level 20-25, I never really had a shortage.

Again, this is just a personal preference in the game so that I could
feel I was 'cleaning up the trash'.

>> - I like combat like the next guy, but having to slay hordes upon
>> hordes of critters got very boring. Masses upon masses of spiders in
>> the Abandoned Temple, the skeleton of every person who has ever died
>> in the Temple of Baa, the 6 billion f#$%ing Eyes in Castle Darkmoor,
>> the Dwarven over-population boom in Snergle's Cavern...Need I say
>> more? I would rather see 3 or 4 super-tough critters in a group than
>> waves upon waves of semi-tough critters. It got to the point where
>> instead of feeling victorious, I felt like, "Thank God, I'm finally
>> done!" The endless hordes ended up taking way too much time in
>> dealing with them. It made me want to stop playing the game as I
>> didn't want to go through another hour of A-A-A-A-S-A-A-S-A-A-S-A.
>> The majority of time spent on this game was not due to puzzle and
>> quest solving, but rather hitting the "A" and "S" keys. Combat is
>> great, but it should not be the domineering crux of a CRPG.
>
>It depends on how you attack them. For example, in Temple of Baa instead of
>standing on the balcony and running around firing bows, I jumped down ran out
>of the temple (didn't have Lloyd's or TP), come back and meet them head on.
>Now that was fun. I think combat is the cornerstone of any RPG but I agree,
>some hordes did get boring.

I agree that combat is probably the number one thrill in an RPG. I
would have rather seen a group of 4 or 5 really tough critters rather
than 30-50 critters. Combat wouldn't become tedious if you had to
fight a smaller, tougher group.

>> - The respawning critters in Werewolf Cavern really pissed me off.
>
>Well, I can't say I was in love with the idea.

I read a post from one poor soul about finishing the cavern and having
his character in really poor shape. He had no spell points and no hit
points. He couldn't cast a spell to get him out of there. To top
that off, he had no food which meant he couldn't rest to get his
points back up. If he reads this, I think we can expect a pretty
emphatic response. :)

>> - I have seen all of the posts complaining the quality of the
>> character portraits, but compared to MM5, they are much better in
>> quality.
>>
>
>This REALLY is something I could care less about. It has nothing to do with
>game play so to me it's a silly thing to argue about.

I'm really surprised at the amount of disgust some people have
expressed about this. Oh well.

>> - Thanks to NWC for giving a full view of the character adorned in
>> their equipment. Good start.
>
>Good start? What the hell more do you want? The view of their underwear?

Daggerfall did. Just joking. I was simply comparing it to the
previous M&M games where this was not present. The "good start"
comment is later discussed that the rings and accessories should be
included in the same view without having to push the small button
below the character's image. I thought the extra little click could
have been avoided.

>> - How about some minorities? I know that NWC only had a limited
>> number of people show up for character pictures, but I would rather
>> have diversity than image quality portraits.
>
>Screw diversity! One thing I can't stand is when people want to impose their
>politically correct views on a PC game. Ok, so there weren't a lot of black
>guys on MM6. Big F^#%ING deal.

This gets back to the imagination aspect that I enjoy as I was an old
RPG (pencil, paper, and dice) gamer. Different races would allow the
gamer to dream up some sort background or history that the game
doesn't provide for.

>> - I was sorely disappointed to see how magic was greatly overpowering
>> compared to weapons. This wasn't always so. In previous M&M games,
>> certain classes gained significant increases to number of attacks per
>> round. This resulted in fighters being able to dish out as much
>> damage as magic tossers. As my game in MM6 progressed, I felt that I
>> should have made my party with 2 sorcerers and 2 clerics/paladins. My
>> archer seemed absolutely worthless. If a creature was magic-resistant
>> in other games, you could rely on your steel-swingers to bail you out.
>> Not so in MM6.
>
>Depends on how you attack and where you are at. My spell slingers can kick
>ass but if you get to close to my knight you'd be sorry. By the way my
>archer had air magic and she'd kick your arse!

I have read other responses stating that real-time combat mode was
overpowered on the weapon side as magic was in turn-based. In
turn-based combat, my spellcasters could deliver 400 points of damage
with one spell, but the "relic" melee weapons (which are supposed to
be legendary) only would rarely get up to 100-115 points. I would
just like to see more equality between magic and heavy hitters.

>> - Stats were insignificant. When my Paladin had 300+ might, he should
>> have been cleaving buildings in half. Instead, he inflicts
>> mosquito-level damage. A sorcerer with 200+ intelligence should have
>> an enormous boost to their spell points and/or increased damage. In
>> defense of NWC, luck really seemed to affect whether an enemy spell
>> hit or not. Strength should have a significance in determining the
>> amount of damage done as well as recovery time.
>>
>
>Strength without accuacy means you have a big fat clod hopper who can swing a
>heavy sword and not hit the broad sid of a barn.

My previous statement about strength was an example. I agree that
lots of strength without accuracy just gives you a character with Babe
Ruth syndrome (lots of strike-outs with a few bit hits). My point is
that if strength can be upgraded from 20 to 300 points, shouldn't
there be some sort of significant increase in damage somehow?

>> - Weapons with enchantments should not be more powerful than
>> relics/artifacts. I had two Excalibur swords but sold them quickly as
>> my characters were doing more damage with Master Cutlasses of <insert
>> major affect here>.
>
>Then you got a problem, my Excalibur kicked booty.

Did you mainly use turn-based or real-time combat?

>> - Spears that were used two-handed provided a boost to damage. That
>> was logical. However, two-handed swords and axes really didn't do
>> much more damage than their one-handed counterparts. If I hit you
>> with a 7-foot Scottish claymore, you will have a much more serious
>> wound than if I hit you with a 2.5-foot rapier.
>>
>
>Not if it was a glancing blow. You seem to think that every swing should give
>maximum contact. Everyone knows that the enemy defends itself and you can't
>make every hit perfectly.

I didn't mean to imply that I think every blow should inflict maximum
damage. I would enjoy that aspect in combat at all. I refer to the
damage limits listed when right-clicking the weapons. If a two-handed
weapon doesn't provide damage to justify the loss of a shield or use
of two one-handed weapons, then they should be redone or removed.

>> - Ancient Weapons were discarded after first use. I heard that they
>> really make a difference in real-time, but since I never use
>> real-time, they were of no use to me (save destroying the Reactor).
>
>Too bad. Real time can really be fun and it can be quick. Playing strictly
>turn based means ya got no guts!

Thanks again for the constructive criticism. If I don't have the
reflexes to play it, I shouldn't play in real-time mode. If you were
overweight, should I insult you for not being able to run a marathon?

>> - Many Body/Spirit/Mind spells appeared worthless. How come there
>> aren't many area-effect damage spells? I know they are healers, but
>> they should have more combat ability. Maybe change a spell to
>> area-effect when they reach Master/Grand Master (see below) skill
>> levels? Without this ability, Clerics are nothing but medics you try
>> to keep alive during combat. If I ever play MM6 again, I will NOT
>> have a cleric in the party.
>
>
>Yeah until you get a high level Flying Fist in your face! I don't know how
>many times Power Cure saved my butt and in the right circumstances Harm and
>Mind Blast can do some good damage. Boost the bow and hand weapon strength
>of the cleric and then see what happens. My cleric is also invaluable for
>curing diseases, poisons, insanity etc.

A Paladin can accomplish the same things with even more effective
weapon and armor skills.

>> 1) Flame Arrow - no damage/level increase.
>
>Are you sure you understand this game? It's becoming more difficult not to
>FLAME ARROW you! Flame Arrow is meant to be an opening game spell. They
>have to give you something to start off. In fact all spells are of a certain
>class meaning that they all have different levels of maximum damages. Flame
>Arrow is low.

I know that it is a beginning level spell, but even a damage per level
spell would still have not been apocalyptic when just starting out.

>> 2) Haste - I never wanted to cast it as it made my party weak during a
>> big fight.
>
>Well by the time the weakness occurs you should either be finished fighting or
>bailing out for heal time anyway. Works great under most circumstances.

You liked it. I respect that. I completely understand that it is
some sort of adrenaline rush which would deplete the body and it makes
sense. I just didn't care for it.

>> 3) Static Charge - no damage/level increase.
>
>
>Sigh...see FLAME ARROW above.

See response above.

>> 4) Shield - I just never used it. Might have been helpful with lizard
>> archers in beginning. Not much else.
>
>Wrong. Any archers, especially in White Cap and Free Haven.

By the time I got to White Cap and Free Haven, I was not concerned
with the arrows, but the Fireballs launched by the Fire Archers. Did
Shield also affect these as well? Maybe the game could have used some
more ranged physical attack critters? Once I got to White Cap and the
other tougher areas, all of the ranged attacks seemed to be magical.

>> 5) Cold Beam - no damage/level increase.
>
>So what, use Ice Bolt!

Exactly my point. Why take up space with Cold Beam when the damage
per level Ice Bolt would have served both beginning and advanced
characters?

>> 6) Enchant Item - While this spell is great starting out, not being
>> able to make bad-ass enchantments was frustrating. This should be
>> made available in MM7 by requiring some major sacrifice/commitment.
>> Require 10 days for a major enchantment. The caster suffers an age
>> increase of XX years depending on the enchantment. The caster suffers
>> attribute loss. In addition, I was perturbed when trying to make
>> decent items and getting a +1 to luck on a Scarab ring. The level of
>> the enchantment should have something to do with the quality of the
>> item. BTW, "of the Gods" really changed meaning from the previous M&M
>>
>
>This is just a plain dumb idea. Enchanting has it's uses like when you need
>gold.

Thanks for being objective and trying to see it from another
viewpoint.

>> games. It should be changed back to its original benefit. Another
>> point of consideration: Give us some factor in determining the
>> outcome of this spell.
>
>They do. Check the diff from normal to master!

That still doesn't allow you to determine a specific elemental school
for the enchantment to be based on. Even when I was Master level in
Water magic, I was still cranking out Double Damage vs....
enchantments as I was doing as Expert.

> I would like to see an Enchant Item spell
>> under each discipline of magic. The Enchant Item spell under the Fire
>> discipline would do some sort of fire-based resistance, damage, or "of
>> the Phoenix" enchantment. The same goes for Water, Air, and Earth,
>> respectively. This would also allow for the Light and Dark schools to
>> have some kick-ass enchantments (Vampiric, of Life, etc...) but with
>> higher sacrifices required.
>>
>
>And then you wouldn't have to work so hard!

I think it would be fun. You don't. I can live with that.

>> 7) Stun - never could justify using it. Probably ignorance on my
>> part.
>
>
>Well I wouldn't argue there. Works if you are almost dead and need to make an
>escape.

If I am almost dead, it probably wouldn't have much effect on the
critter cleaning my clock as was the case with most tough critters.
Oh yeah...thanks for the kind words.

>> 8) Magic Arrow - no damage/level increase.
>
>Quit listing the low level spells!

I was giving a complete review. Sorry it bothered you so much.

>> 10) Turn to Stone - What do you mean, "temporary"? Stone is stone is
>> stone.
>
>IT'S A SPELL! You are not MEDUSA!

If this type of spell is going to be temporary, I think that should be
called something like Encase in Stone where I can then picture a
critter having to take some time to get out of it.

>> 11) Spirit Arrow - Great at beginning levels but useless afterwards.
>>
>
>Warning you for the last time!

Why? What are you going to do? If you don't have anything
constructive to add for discussion on an item then ignore it! If you
got perturbed by my listing these things, imagine how I feel by your
continuous insults. However, I do want to know your viewpoints on the
things you disagree with, but please do it in a manner that will spawn
discussion instead of making me resent your comments.

>> 12) Healing Touch/First Aid - Open these slots up as healing spells
>> should be level-based.
>
>Agreed, now try Power Cure and then complain.

How can you argue that I am ignorant for not liking the mage set-point
spells, but then you agree with this one?

>> 13) Guardian Angel - "Load Game" works better. The angel should
>> provide some protection or help you fight in your "heavenly and just"
>> cause.
>
>Wrong LOAD GAME is not a feature, it's a way to avert playing the game.

Did you ever reload a game after having some party members killed or a
very undesirable result?

>> 15) Meditation - Only useful when standing next to spell-point
>> well/fountain.
>
>Duhhhh...take a look at your intelligence after using it.

Of course, the gain in spell points was due to the increase of
intelligence/personality, but I really didn't see an increase in spell
effect. I still think my argument is valid that you could only take
advantage of the increased spell point capacity if you were next to a
spell-point well/fountain.

>> 16) Charm - Does this work?
>
>
>Yep until you do damage on the one you cast it on. I tested it to great affect
>in the Shadow Guild and the Dragoons and the Silver Helms in Mist.

How about making the Charm spell cause the affected creature to fight
on behalf of the party? As soon as they take damage from my party or
their own, they return to their senses.

>> 17) Mass Fear - Doesn't work
>
>Wrong! Does work depends on who you cast it on. Worked great against human
>characters.

Only in real-time mode.

>> 18) Feeblemind - Doesn't work
>
>Damn man, not all mind spells work against every single enemy.

Only worked in real-time mode.

>> 20) Golden Touch - I never had a problem with money in the game
>> (except maybe level 1). Never had to use this. I guess that you
>> could have instant returns on your loot without having to leave the
>> dungeon and sell it.
>
>OK, so why list it then?

Maybe someone else has another use for it that it not listed here.

>> 21) Dispel Magic - How can I tell if a critter has an enchantment or
>> not? Why waste the spell points and not even know if it worked?
>
>Up to you.

For this spell, I think that it would be more logical to run into
magically-locked doors/chests or perhaps other similar type things in
dungeons.

>> 22) Destroy Undead - Only ONE target. Come on guys.
>
>Gimme a break. You want too much. So what's the matta you can' take a little
>Armageodon?

Not indoors. If I want too much, why was it a group effect spell in
the 3 previous M&M games?

>> 23) Prismatic Light - Got it to work once.
>
>Well, there ya go then.

Oooh, good point.

>> 24) Reanimate - XP generator. Useless otherwise. No need to use this
>> spell, just return one year later (outside). I read one very humorous
>> post where one guy kept reanimating one of the f@#$ing Eyes just so he
>> could finish taking out his frustration of there being so many of
>> those bastards.
>
>No, what if you were training and you needed a couple of points for a level?
>Makes sense to me, just reanimate him and kill him.

Why not go to a respawned town and make some real easy XPs?

>> 25) Mass Curse - Didn't see much of a difference. Still got my clock
>> cleaned.
>>
>
>It doesn't do damage! It's used to lower combat stats.

Point being; I didn't see a difference in their hit-miss ratio.

>> 26) Shrinking Ray - Halves their physical damage, not magical. A
>> general belief in magic systems is that the body of the caster is a
>> conduit of the forces of magic. If this is the case, shouldn't
>> something 1-foot tall only deal out corresponding damage? Either that
>> or they cause themselves damage because the force is too great for the
>> vessel.
>>
>
>Maybe, but if it is half the size you should be able to melee their ass too.

Granted. Just trying to make sense of everything.

>> 27) Finger of Death - I have a better chance of yelling "BOO" and
>> having the critter die of a heart attack. Maybe my party shouldn't
>> brush their teeth, then they could use the "Breath of Death".
>>
>
>Well, I used it a couple of time for some pretty good damage.

Does the spell point cost justify the chance of it working? I didn't
think so, but others might. I sincerely would like to know your
viewpoint.

>> 28) Moon Ray - Useless before. Useless now.
>
>Can't argue much with this...FINALLY!

You seem to be one of the few to agree with me on this one.

>> 29) Dragon Breath - Don't get me wrong. I used this spell
>> extensively. However, I got nearly the same results from two Fireball
>> spells with just 16 SPs spent compared to 100.
>>
>
>Shaaa...if you are lucky. My Dragon doled out some hurt. Much more than some
>silly Fireballs.

Both my archer and sorcerer had "of Fire Magic" items equipped and it
made their Fire spells alot more powerful.

>> 30) Armageddon - Other than serving as a reputation destroyer, this
>> was useless.
>
>Not toward the end game when you're willing to do anything to wrap things up!

Good point.

>> 31) Dark Containment - With all of the hype seen through the game, I
>> was expecting more. I expected a hell of a lot more when I saw how
>> much it cost in spell points. Cute results but it virutally has the
>> same effect as Turn to Stone.
>
>Complain, complain, complain....

Wouldn't the anticipation of attaining the last Dark spell have been
served better by it allowing you to either go somewhere or perform
something that would have been related to the story?

>> In conclusion about spells, I thought that the Light and Dark
>> disciplines cost waaaaay too many points for some of their spells. I
>> could justify spending those SPs if the effects were better.
>
>
>Jeez....maybe that was the intent...ya think?

What? That the intent was that the Light/Dark spells would not deliver
damage results up to their spell point costs? If so, what is your
argument?

>> I would have liked to seen a short movie when talking to the Oracle
>> for the first time. Maybe a short movie when placing the last memory
>> crystal. Just a few goodies here and there would have given me a
>> better sense of accomplishment.
>
>
>AS this game came only on one disk for play I would have appreciated a lot
>more FMV if it were possible. You know what I would have loved? After you
>kill Witherhide, a FMV pops up showing an epic dragon battle!

Would have been very, very cool.

>> - Puzzles. MMIII had lots with tombstones, treasure chests, and
>> dungeon/secret entrances. Not so with MM6. There was Castle Alamos,
>> the Goblinwatch code, the VARN codes, and the blasted Temple of Baa
>> riddle, but I really can't remember others apart from those.
>
>Thank GOD! I hate adventure games that decide to be puzzle games.

This is a point that could lead to alot of discussion. There are lots
of different classifications of PC games. I usually see "adventure"
relating to the games where you guide a character through a static
scene such as Leisure Suit Larry, Kings Quest, Police Quest, Gabriel
Knight, and others. I have noticed that many RPGs such as Wizardry
and previous M&Ms, seem to include the puzzles described above. I am
not trying to say that you are wrong. I am just pointing out the fact
that game classification can be shades of gray at best.

>> - How about those bounty quests? It was sort of like "If you can kill
>> an Ungodly Critter of Ultimate Death (given your current level), I'll
>> give you a pittance and an 'Attaboy!'. By the way, you got two days
>> left to do it in." Just take these bounty hunts out and give me some
>> more puzzles/riddles/significant plot developments.
>>
>
>Hey, it makes for a good side quest.

I just felt that it was asking a too much when my character were at a
low level. I never went back to the towns offering the bounties after
a point as I didn't have to worry about gold.

>> - MM7 should have the rings, amulets, gauntlets displayed in the same
>> window as the other equipment. I really, really hated having to click
>> the little button to find out if the critter's "no damage but break
>> shit" attack had rendered one of those items useless (More about that
>> later). I would gladly reduce the size of the character full-view
>> picture in order to include the accessories in the same view.
>
>Yeah, this is a big deal...<rolling eyes>

Oh yes, I entirely agree with your viewpoint as your arguments made me
see things in a different light. Your alternative made much more
sense to me...<rolling eyes>

>> - Give me some sort of indication that when two identically looking
>> items are exchanged. I always ended up clicking multiple times
>> because I thought I missed clicking directly on the item.
>>
>
>Like I said....

I really enjoy discussing this item with you as you have such an open
mind about other people's viewpoints. I can't wait to have another
discussion about "Duh...".

>> - Does this make sense? A 200+ strength character can only carry a
>> specific volume of items equal to that of a character with a strength
>> of 10. It really struck me odd that I was limited to a restrictive
>> inventory grid for my "items no longer having an owner". Take a hint
>> from Ultima VII. You can throw as many things into your backpack/bag
>> as long as you are strong enough to carry it. Granted, the 200+
>> strength character will have tons of items upon items that it will be
>> difficult to find what you are looking for, but it only makes logical
>> sense. When a powerful knight can only carry 40 potion bottles, but a
>> weakling sorcerer can carry three sets of plate armor and 7 helms,
>> something is wrong in the world.
>>
>
>It's not a matter of weight but a matter of room. Just because a knight could
>pull an oversized cart doesn't mean you want him doing that.

I don't think it should get to the point where a knight pulls a
caravan behind him <grin>, but I would enjoy a little encumberance
factored in.

>> - Innocent bystanders in the village can get cacked. The result is an
>> ensuing riot by the rest of the village. Not much fun for my party,
>> but it is a perfect example of "mob mentality". Good job. However,
>> if it was me and I saw one of my fellow townspeople split in half with
>> one attack, I would have tremendous reservations about attacking that
>> motley looking crew with a pointed stick.
>
>Hey, the peasants are revolting and they are stupid too....that's why they are
>peasants.

You have a point there. If they had brain one, they wouldn't be
peasants, right? :)

>> - Wandering NPCs will actually refuse to talk to you. Good idea, but
>> only dealt with reputation, not diplomacy. Should have incorporated
>> both.
>
>No, if your reputation sux who gives a crap how well you present yourself!

Because people can be conned. The peasant might think, "This guy
isn't as bad of as a guy as I heard." Like we said in the previous
item, the peasants are pretty stupid, otherwise they wouldn't be
peasants.

>> - My party must look like royalty or a popular music group because I
>> attracted those wandering NPCs like flies to a dung heap. This
>> wouldn't have been bad except that they block you from moving except
>> back the way you came. Too bad there wasn't a "No bathing" option for
>> the party. I bet I wouldn't have had that problem at that point. I
>> know that you could yell to get them out of the way, but that got
>> bothersome when trying to run to a castle/shop/house. I liked the
>> wandering NPCs in Daggerfall where you could walk right through them.
>>
>
>Hey what's with this Y key!

I used the Y key as everybody else did, but didn't you get tired of it
too?

>> - Couldn't have I just had one superstore (Wal-Mart) someplace? "We
>> sell every type of weapon at wholesale!"
>>
>> - Would have liked to have seen some shops getting their hands on some
>> major items. Maybe even relics/artifacts. "Yeah, you can get that
>> but it will cost you a kidney."
>
>Yeah , just what the world needs...one more Walmart. I would have liked to
>have seen some of the weapons upgrade as you advanced in levels.

The Wal-mart item was a poor attempt at humor.

>> - Five days travel for what? I can understand the need to load map
>> sections just as was done for the previous games, but why charge me
>> the 5 days? It you are going to do that, make the cloth map
>> correspond with a large forest or desert between sections. I could
>> also accept a charge of one day if the cloth map doesn't change from
>> its current appearance.
>
>
>You know you think of some of the most ridiculous things to complain about.

I wanted to include all my thoughts about the game, big and small.
Sorry if that offends you deeply. As I said before, if you don't like
it, ignore it. If you think I am so stupid, why bother to lower
yourself to respond?

>> - Due to five-day travel cost, could not fly from map section to map
>> section. Really bummed me out when I was fleeing for my life through
>> the air and ran into the map border. Death quickly followed as deemed
>> necessary by the pursuing critters.
>
>Sheez...any player who dies in the air when running away could possibly be
>very lame.

Fine. Give me your complete review of the game. I imagine that you
will have some items that I find rather droll or inane as well.

>> - If I cast Lloyd's Beacon to recall my party to a location set when I
>> was flying, please put me on the ground. Currently, I get put on the
>> ground, but it is in the form of a red, pasty goo after I have plunged
>> to my demise.
>>
>
>Uh...you cast the spell when flying didn't you ? Well then who's fault is
>that !!!! Uhhh...PageUp key seemed pretty logical to me.

Of course, PageUp doesn't work if Fly isn't cast in the first place.

>> - Why is it that when I enter a map section, I am placed in the middle
>> of blood-thirsty critters? Wouldn't I have seen them from a distance
>> sometime during my 5-day travel?
>>
>
>Not necessarily. If they are hiding behind a mountain such as Blackshire to
>Paradise Valley road then you wouldn't. Besides, that's part of the
>adventure.

This brings up a point I made in another response in that I wouldn't
have had this gripe before if a message saying "Ambush" would have
appeared. It makes logical sense that critters would be lying in wait
for unsuspecting travellers.

>> - Sword skill...Why can't it also have a damage increase? I realize
>> that allowing Master level swordsman the ability to wield two swords
>> is a bonus, but that really doesn't help in the damage department past
>> level 20 or so.
>
>God you sure put a lot of stock in sword swinging. Even in medievel times a
>swordsman weren't that big of a deal.

Our medival times were not full of goblins, lizardmen, gargoyles, and
werewolves.

>> - Diplomacy...How do we know when or if it works?
>
>Easy, compare interactions between your characters with low or no diplomacy
>against those who have high diplomacy.

Shouldn't this also apply to people in houses that you wake at 3am
just to "talk"?

>> - Perception...This is really aggravating. This skill can only be
>> used if I click on every little thing. Previous M&M games (Spot
>> Secret Doors skill) had the little gargoyle dude whose arm would go
>> into spasms when near a secret door. For MM7, how about the character
>> with the high level of perception saying, "What's that?" Then I will
>> gladly click on everything in the immediate area. Instead of
>> Perception keeping the character from taking damage from an exploding
>> chest, how about a "Danger Sense" skill? Makes more sense to me.
>
>Well, as most dungeons had hidden areas that were strategically located where
>you would expect a secret area to be I found it no trouble at all. After all
>if you see a lump of blue then gee whiz...guess what....

What about the trees and rocks outside. I found a few items but got
tired of clicking on everything in order to find them. Did you find
the scrolls hidden in the torches on the wall?

>> - Merchant skill. I have to be an extremely high-level to get close
>> to the value of an object. If NWC decides not to change this, how
>> about just not showing the value of an object so that I don't know
>> what I should get for it? That way, I will be content with the price
>> I get for an item no matter what skill level my character is at.
>> Additionally, wouldn't it make sense that when I am selling items that
>> my merchant character would be doing the "deal"? A very monotonous
>> task was transferring everything to my merchant to get the best price.
>
>You know you are down right pissy about everything. Value is what you have
>to pay for it. The real world works on retailer sells it for full price and
>gives you a cut rate to buy it back. THAT'S the way it is. If you had to
>transfer items to a merchant then it means that you wanted to spend your
>points on something other than merchant for your other characters. Don't
>expect the game to be changed because someone was too cheap to buy merchant
>skills.

You are being short-sighted.

>> For example, a Ring of SP Regeneration
>> could restore 2% of a character's total SP every 5 minutes. Do the
>> same thing with the HP regen items and I will be a happy camper. I
>> hate resting for no reason but to recharge my spell points.
>
>NOPE! WRONG! Rings etc. are what they are and shouldn't be based on some
>clown's attributes.

Why don't you ever state a reason for your viewpoint? How can we
discuss this when you don't even justify your opinion?

>> - As with SP/HP regeneration items. These should restore a percentage
>> of total SP or HP.
>
>WRONGOMUNDO, they are potions not magic spells!

I am talking about rings, amulets, and other things you wear that
regenerate SP/HP.

>> - How about an Alchemy skill and the ability to make offensive potions
>> that can be thrown/used: explosion, corrosion, sleep, blinding, gender
>
>No but I am all for potions that can be used on weaponry to give it special
>attributes.

I agree with your potion idea. I would like that as well.

>> - Great graphics for many of them. I like the damage reactions,
>> attacks, and death animations. Some of the top character depictions
>> in my book were: (in no particular order)
>>
>> 1) Titans
>Looked better dead then alive.

Agreed.

>> 2) Dragons
>Totally cool.

Way cool.

>> 3) Goblins
>Really dumb looking.

How would you have made them different?

>> 4) Fire Elementals, Beasts, Spirits
>Totally cool looking

Agreed.

>> 5) Agar's critters
>Really dumb looking.

The "3-D" effects of the critter were nice, even though the game was
not coded for actual 3-D

>> 6) Minotaurs (nice and menacing)
>Not bad.

I thought that the bull head was done very well.

>> 7) Thunder, Fire, and Lightning Lizards
>Totally cool looking.

I had not seen a design of a critter such as this. That's what I
really liked.

>> 8) Suckers (Vampire, Blood, Brain
>Totally cool looking.

Same response as #7.

>> 9) Spiders
>A pain in the ass but not bad.

The shadings on the spiders probably put them in this list for me.

>> 10) Cobras
>Yeah! The coolest.

I just didn't like the pink color on the King Cobras.

>> 11) Veterans
>Looked like wusses

Not as much as many other human enemies.

>> 12) Cuisinart, Doom Knight, Death Knight (one of my favorites)
>Not bad could have been better.

What would you have added? Maybe a larger weapon or large spikes on
the shoulders? The skull-reminiscent helmet was good.

>> 13) Harpies (God I hate those ugly things-That means good job)
>Yeah not bad.

Much better than Daggerfall.

>> These are definitely a dislike on my part. The "break at will" attack
>> should only occur if a tremendous amount of damage was done or if the
>> attack caused the character to reach 0 HP. The instant kill should be
>> used very sparingly.
>
>Naw, armor can be "wore down".

How about the implementation of a "condition" of the items such as in
Daggerfall and Betrayal at Krondor? It would have made you pay much
more attention to how your equipment was holding up.

>> - Why do they get unlimited spell points? I realize that critters
>> might be magical in nature, but come on, the same argument could me
>> made for spellcasters.
>
>Yeah, finally something we agree on.

There have been responses by some others who think this opinion is
pure bunk.

>> - Devils looked pretty cartoonish except for the queen. She was done
>> well.
>
>Yeah, stupid looking. Looked like rabid Barneys on acid.

Good comparison. If I ever play MM6 again, I will never be able to
look at them without thinking of Barney.

>> - Werewolves looked ridiculous. For as tough as they are, they should
>> have a more menacing look. To me, they look like a German Shepard
>> walking on its hind legs with pants and bad costume jewelry. Make it
>> all black with red eyes and dripping saliva and I will take them more
>> seriously.
>
>I agree up until the point where they started to pound the shit out of my low
>level characters.

I didn't say I didn't respect them. I just thought they looked
stupid. If NWC had put in a Walking Daisy of Death, it might have
killed me but would have still not make me like its appearance.

>> - As seen in this newsgroup, there have been some posts about
>> slaughtering monsters that pertain to minority groups. This did stike
>> me before seeing it in the newsgroup and it bothered me (especially
>> considering my party looked like a bunch of aryans). Then, I thought
>> to myself, these guys wouldn't be so dumb as to do this on purpose. I
>> do think that it should be addressed in MM7 after seeing the responses
>> in the newsgroup.
>
>I think that the bigger idiots are the people who waste time coming up with
>stupid ass politically correct policing in everything that Americans do. I
>am sick of it and as a result I want more minorities to slaughter in MM6.
>Just to piss those people off. There were more white guys in here then any
>other race. Brigands, thieves, ruffians, swordsmen, lieutinents, elves (they
>looked white to me) are all as white as mayonaisse so all you race baiters
>shut your fat holes!

I'll let someone else get into this one. I didn't want to get into a
political correctness argument.

>> - I got rather perturbed with the sliding downhill, especially when it
>> was not a steep slope and it was made from a rough textured material,
>> i.e.: wood.
>
>Yeah and you the programmer would know why that is.

What's that mean? Point being; in reality, if I am standing on an
slight incline, I can keep myself from sliding downwards unless it is
covered in ice.

>> - At least give me a levitate/fly spell indoors. If flight spells are
>>
>> air-based, is that to say that there is no air in dungeons?
>
>Agreed. Meteor and Starburst I can understand as they require weather
>conditions but fly? Should be able to fly indoors.

Either that or I wouldn't have minded one of the Light spells to be
Levitate which would only be used for indoor use. It would have been
used much less often and therefore could have been justified with a
higher spell drain.

>> ***MUSIC***********************************************
>>
>> Seemed OK to me. However, I usually end up turning the music off and
>> turning on the radio or playing CDs. Since I didn't have the music on
>> during game play, I really can't give a valid assessment of it.
>
>I loved it and my family loved it.

Good. I am just glad that it wasn't the same over and over as seen in
so many games.

>> - All very different. Thin or grand passages, different sized rooms,
>> elevators, symmetrical, unsymmetrical, small things, large things .
>> All of these made dungeon delving a delight in this game. I was
>> constantly surprised with the unique appearance and construction of
>> each dungeon. Never did I have the feeling of "Well, I've been in
>> here for an hour, I am probably close to being done." It was great
>> that when I thought the dungeon was winding to a close, a whole new
>> section would be stumbled upon. I consider this to be the best game
>> for dungeon design that I have ever seen. Mind you, not all of them
>> were enjoyable, but these, by far, outweigh any other dungeons in any
>> other game that I have ever played before. Daggerfall had about 5
>> different dungeon designs and are so complex that one can get lost
>> very easily. I guess the land of Daggerfall had an extreme shortage
>> of dungeon architects. Either that or there was a booming business in
>> the modular dungeon industry.
>
>NO, Daggerfall had a bunch of lazy asses who didn't want to do the work. I
>think in terms of complexity Daggerfall's dungeons were much more difficult
>even in terms of programming than MM6. I think the designers at Bethesda
>just got lazy and decided there wasn't that much strength in dungeon design.

I agree completely with you there. The dungeons in Daggerfall were
very complex and I can't imagine programming them after some other guy
had put together the design. Another factor leading to the similarity
of the Daggerfall dungeons was the number of locations. I was amazed
to see such a huge map full of locations. Maybe a slight reduction in
locations could have reduced the "clone-dungeon" factor a little.

>> - Hall of the Fire Lord. That damned door on the left! I am one of
>> those gamers who explore every nook and cranny, so you can guess how
>> frustrating this was.
>>
>
>I know DON'T YOU JUST LOVE IT!!!! DON'T FORGET THE WARLORD DOOR!!
>YAWWWHOOOOO!!

What do you think of bringing back the "bash" action from previous M&M
games? I would have beat my party against the door until they were
almost dead and give up before searching the dungeon over and over
again for days.

>> - Riddle for accessing the treasure room of the Temple of Baa was
>> ridiculous. If I didn't have this newsgroup, I probably would have
>> stopped playing the game right there and then. I like riddles and
>> puzzles, but only those that actually have a chance of
>> decyphering/solution.
>
>CRAP,it was easy. Doesn't even qualify as a riddle.

I didn't think so, but to each their own.

>> MM6 was a fantastic addition to the M&M series. However, it got to
>> the point where it became a laborious endeavor. I download a saved
>> game editor so that I could get it over with. I abandoned the
>> Dragonsand map as I grew tired of getting slaughtered (before saved
>> game editor). I was disappointed to find out that the obelisk quest
>> only lead to a treasure chest. There should have been some sort of
>> quest in the main storyline addressed through solving that puzzle. As
>> it was, I didn't want to wade through the hundreds of dragons just to
>> get to a treasure chest that would probably contain items less
>> powerful than what I already had. All in all, this game was worth
>> every penny, but monotony really hit after 2/3 of the game was done.
>
>I agree somewhat. I think there should be larger maps, more quests without
>the armies you have to face sometimes. I also think that there should be a
>real boss to each band of bad guys. Not all of them seemed to have really
>tough bosses.

I agree with all of your points above.

>> If you have differing opinions regarding my review, please post them
>> to the group so that discussions can follow and we can make MM7 more
>> enjoyable for all of us.
>
>Yeah, I only wished you would have been more creative. Most of your post
>concerns criticisms and things that you didn't like rather than logically
>thought out solutions. But at least you posted...

I don't recall many of your responses being creative. Instead, many
of them were simply insults without arguments to back them up. I feel
that I gave a decent amount of alternatives regarding my review. I am
sorry that you didn't. However, if you had read the beginning
paragraphs of the review, you would have noticed my desire to have
discussions instead of receiving unsupported flames. Once in a while,
you brought up some very good viewpoints other than mine which made me
look at my own opinions in a different light. That was the reason why
this was posted. When you resorted to plain insults in your post, it
became much more difficult to look at your valid responses
objectively. I am wary to send this as I fear it may result in
further flames and insults by you which accomplishes nothing except
giving you some sort of feeling of superiority. I was dishearted that
you didn't bother to step back and try to consider where my viewpoints
were coming from. I hope that you will take this opportunity to
respond and replace the meaningless insults with valid discussion.
But I do thank you for your reply as it did contain some discussions
and furthered discussions by others.

[Philip W.Stanley]

On Mon, 29 Jun 1998 20:19:43 GMT, John M Clancy <jmcl...@MCI2000.com>
wrote:

>> 19) Psychic Shock - Has a dragon on the spell picture but doesn't do

>> squat against them. False advertising.
>
>What? It worked great on Red and Blue Dragons, Gold were immune.

I figured out that since Red and Blue Dragons were elemental based,
different elemental based spells would work against them. I also
found that Mass Distortion was the bane of Red and Blue Dragons. The
Gold Dragons were another story. Since they were not based in a
specific element (as far as I could tell), many spells did not work
very well at all against them. This is how I based my assessment on
Psychic Shock. If a Psychic Shock did do damage it was such a low
amount that I would resort to another spell or a physical attack.

>> 23) Prismatic Light - Got it to work once.
>
>Really? I used this spell all the time. Granted some of the
>later more powerful foes were immune. I cleared out the Superior
>Temple of Baa with those hundreds of priests and Druids in record
>time With inferno and Pris light.

Probably most attributed to my combat style. Because of its spell
point drain, I would only use it when I was in a real pinch. Of
course, at that time, the critters were immune to the spell.

>> 28) Moon Ray - Useless before. Useless now.
>
>No way! This spell was great for taking out the dragons
>I just ignored the items braking and cast it a bunch of times
>you can't relly die since it heals you. Made those battles
>very fast.

After reading other posts, I may had been premature in my invasion on
Dragonsand. As hard of a time as I was having, I definitely didn't
want to try it at night. I wanted to see where the pain was coming
from! :) As I responsed to another post, I am the type of gamer who
tries to get the most of out of everything. I think that fact that it
didn't do a great amount of damage OR healing but rather did a modest
job of both is why this spell is not particularly liked by me. I'm
not suggesting that the entire spell repetoire be written to fit my
tastes. That would be entirely self-absorbed. It's just a personal
preference. If I ever play again, I'll try to remember that this
spell works on the Dragons.

>> 30) Armageddon - Other than serving as a reputation destroyer, this
>> was useless.
>
>It worked to soften up some dragons. It was great for a spell
>that let you attack without getting in harms way. I wiped out
>hundreds of hydras, lizards and drakes with that spell.

Just as a personal preference, I like to see what I am hitting. I
don't argue that it probably works great in the scenario you used it
in. I'm glad you found it useful.

>You forgot Divine intervention. What a waste! you can cast it
>at only 2 specific times a day? WTF? I can just portal and
>beacon and for 10 gold do the same thing! For less spell points
>no aging and any time I want!. This along with DC were supposed
>to be the most powerful spells in the game? Gimme a break!
>I never needed to cast either one of them.

When I finally got the spell, I really didn't have to worry about
needing it and therefore never cast it! Dark Containment was good for
entertainment value, though. I wouldn't dream of casting it in a
heated battle, but making little statuettes out of low-level respawned
critters was humorous.

>Other comments on spells: All the cure conditions spells
>should work on the whole party at master level like the
>Awaken spell. Having to cast cure insanity 4 times is a PITA!

I agree.

>I agreed pretty much with all your other points as well.
>Good review.

Thank you and thanks to you for your response. I am finding that
discussing my opinions in the newsgroup is making me look at things
from different viewpoints and making me look back at my gripes in a
different light. Thanks again.

[Runestar]

In article <3597a62d...@news.mindspring.com>, WSmi...@mindspring.com
says...

>
>On 29 Jun 1998 13:40:23 GMT, tob...@socrates.et.tudelft.nl (T.J.
>Nijweide) wrote:
>
>>confused (confused@now_totally_bewildered.com) wrote:

>>: >- Why was it that I would sometimes take damage when running on a

>>: >bridge over water?
>>
>>: Sounds like a bug, never happened to me.
>>

>>No bug, when you run you fall off the end of the bridge and hurt yourself.
>>Just use feather thingie.
>
>Actually, it is a "feature". It's happened to me. Sometimes the game
>gets confused and thinks you are on the water when you are actually on
>land. It has happened to me 3 or 4 times. One on a pier when I was
>running up the pier and the computer thought I fell into the water but
>I didn't really. Another time was when I jumped into water to cross a
>small section. I continued to take damage even when stopped on the
>shore until I moved a bit further to "remind" the game that I was now
>actually on land. :) (And, yes, I'm certain I was actually on
>land.) All in all, it's not a big deal if you run into it.
>--
>Live Long & Prosper!
>
>Warren A. Smith Jr.
>Pearl River, NY

freaked me out a lot the first time..I was walking on the pier in Free Haven
and kept taking damage..I looked around frantically for monsters or some source
of the damage and found none..

[Runestar]

In article <3597a62d...@news.mindspring.com>, WSmi...@mindspring.com
says...
>
>On 29 Jun 1998 13:40:23 GMT, tob...@socrates.et.tudelft.nl (T.J.
>Nijweide) wrote:
>
>>confused (confused@now_totally_bewildered.com) wrote:

>>: >- Why was it that I would sometimes take damage when running on a

>>: >bridge over water?
>>
>>: Sounds like a bug, never happened to me.
>>

[PACE17]

Kinda makes you wish the charactors had different sounds for the different
types of damage they take. You know like "Glug! Glug!"

><HTML>In article <3597a62d...@news.mindspring.com>,
>WSmi...@mindspring.com <BR>
>says...<BR>
>><BR>
>>On 29 Jun 1998 13:40:23 GMT, tob...@socrates.et.tudelft.nl (T.J.<BR>
>>Nijweide) wrote:<BR>
>><BR>
>>>confused (confused@now_totally_bewildered.com) wrote:<BR>
>>>: >- Why was it that I would sometimes take damage when running on a<BR>
>>>: >bridge over water?<BR>
>>><BR>
>>>: Sounds like a bug, never happened to me.<BR>
>>><BR>

>>>No bug, when you run you fall off the end of the bridge and hurt

>yourself.<BR>
>>>Just use feather thingie.<BR>
>><BR>
>>Actually, it is a "feature". It's happened to me. Sometimes the game<BR>
>>gets confused and thinks you are on the water when you are actually on<BR>
>>land. It has happened to me 3 or 4 times. One on a pier when I was<BR>
>>running up the pier and the computer thought I fell into the water but<BR>
>>I didn't really. Another time was when I jumped into water to cross a<BR>
>>small section. I continued to take damage even when stopped on the<BR>
>>shore until I moved a bit further to "remind" the game that I was now<BR>
>>actually on land. :) (And, yes, I'm certain I was actually on<BR>
>>land.) All in all, it's not a big deal if you run into it.<BR>
>>--<BR>
>>Live Long & Prosper!<BR>
>><BR>
>>Warren A. Smith Jr.<BR>
>>Pearl River, NY<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>

>freaked me out a lot the first time..I was walking on the pier in Free Haven

><BR>

>and kept taking damage..I looked around frantically for monsters or some

>source <BR>
>of the damage and found none..<BR>