I would prefer if Owlcat would fix the console version of Kingmaker before they even considered making a new game.

Originally posted by Dragon Master:

I would prefer if Owlcat would fix the console version of Kingmaker before they even considered making a new game.

Why would you mix a technical issue with my topic...? Are you often asking your baker for a slice of meat?

I agree that WOTR is linear and that the revelation of where your powers came from made for a really lackluster story.

But, as much as I like Kingmaker, I don't think there's really a way to continue that story, given the finale lets you choose one of two very different fates for your kingdom. It would be pretty difficult to make a continuation of.

I think they should just leave this WOTR disappointment behind and base the next game somewhere else. Hopefully, they won't go for another "The villain was manipulating you all along!" story line.

Originally posted by TheNMan:

I agree that WOTR is linear and that the revelation of where your powers came from made for a really lackluster story.

But, as much as I like Kingmaker, I don't think there's really a way to continue that story, given the finale lets you choose one of two very different fates for your kingdom. It would be pretty difficult to make a continuation of.

I think they should just leave this WOTR disappointment behind and base the next game somewhere else. Hopefully, they won't go for another "The villain was manipulating you all along!" story line.

I totally agree with you but i probably worded my post title poorly ^^

When i said Kingmaker II, i didn't meant a sequel but rather a game similar than Kingmaker in his narrative structure.
With more freedom, a more "mercenary" squad playstyle, more adventuring type etc.
Let the player be a nobody that along the game then became someone, let the player build his own companions with a mercenary system that give personality archetype with attached stories and not imposed follower who will disapoint in majority.

Well, WOTR is an epic campaign in every sense of the word. The player is a mythic super badass because being any less would mean standing no chance whatsoever against Demon Lords or Areelu.

SPOILERS

In Kingmaker one can only beat the Lantern King ( a demigod comparable to Demon Lords) by weakening him thanks to Storyteller's help, the help of other Eldest and by turning his curse against him. Even then its implied the Lantern King was not going all out. In short: A normal (even at 20 level) mortal stands no chance against a serious demigod.

IMO both Kingmaker and WOTR do well what they were set out to be. WOTR is great for replayability with so many different mythic paths that affect the story in all sorts of ways (though it makes it likely harder to test for bugs) while Kingmaker offers a solid campaign which while not offering so many options it might be larger story wise since the resources for the game were not split for different "origins".

Both had plenty of bugs and it took Kingmaker a while to fix most of them. It will likely take a year or two before WOTR will be relatively bug free. Hopefully the Enhanced Edition expands on mythic paths (especially later ones) and maybe adds one or two more.

WOTR is getting a bad rap in some corners.

Especially from those corners where people loathe playing "the prophesied hero returneth!" and would much rather play "Dirk, the village Baker and Donkey salesman"

Fortunately I fall somewhere between these two.

And WOTR is a story in the mold of "the prophesied hero returneth!" and honestly, is pretty clear about that from the outset. I find myself at a loss, when people then complain about being cast as the vaunted and titular saviour of the world. That is pretty baked into the story and the role characters play.

Now, I can certainly get behind a discussion, on whether Owlcat was upto the task of developing the full breadth and scope of this particular module and I think Owlcat make a valiant effort but ultimately fall short of accommodating the full gamut of choices players should have available, or even of fully fleshing out the ones they do make available. But the effort is impressive none the less and show that Owlcat are improving.

Owlcat bit off slightly more than they could realistically chew. But they did alright and what we have is enjoyable, but perhaps, is more a flawed gem, rather than a perfect masterpiece.

Originally posted by Fei:

Originally posted by TheNMan:

I agree that WOTR is linear and that the revelation of where your powers came from made for a really lackluster story.

But, as much as I like Kingmaker, I don't think there's really a way to continue that story, given the finale lets you choose one of two very different fates for your kingdom. It would be pretty difficult to make a continuation of.

I think they should just leave this WOTR disappointment behind and base the next game somewhere else. Hopefully, they won't go for another "The villain was manipulating you all along!" story line.

I totally agree with you but i probably worded my post title poorly ^^

When i said Kingmaker II, i didn't meant a sequel but rather a game similar than Kingmaker in his narrative structure.
With more freedom, a more "mercenary" squad playstyle, more adventuring type etc.
Let the player be a nobody that along the game then became someone, let the player build his own companions with a mercenary system that give personality archetype with attached stories and not imposed follower who will disapoint in majority.

I love the mythic path stuff , I would love a game with WOTR mechanics and narrative choice of freedom, and more open world style gameplay where you aren't forced to do X thing and you can explore more freely.

Originally posted by CloudKira:

Well, WOTR is an epic campaign in every sense of the word. The player is a mythic super badass because being any less would mean standing no chance whatsoever against Demon Lords or Areelu.

SPOILERS

In Kingmaker one can only beat the Lantern King ( a demigod comparable to Demon Lords) by weakening him thanks to Storyteller's help, the help of other Eldest and by turning his curse against him. Even then its implied the Lantern King was not going all out. In short: A normal (even at 20 level) mortal stands no chance against a serious demigod.

IMO both Kingmaker and WOTR do well what they were set out to be. WOTR is great for replayability with so many different mythic paths that affect the story in all sorts of ways (though it makes it likely harder to test for bugs) while Kingmaker offers a solid campaign which while not offering so many options it might be larger story wise since the resources for the game were not split for different "origins".

Both had plenty of bugs and it took Kingmaker a while to fix most of them. It will likely take a year or two before WOTR will be relatively bug free. Hopefully the Enhanced Edition expands on mythic paths (especially later ones) and maybe adds one or two more.

Depends on how you roleplay it, my main character is RP wise a diety strong enough to banish the Lantern King into the realm of Oblivion after a hard fight.
Ultimately storywise one person's style of RP can differ drastically from another person's style. I see however where Wrath failed here; they essentially tried a KOTOR style plot twist only problem with doing that is the person playing a Pathfinder Adventure Path which the game is functionally is that the person playing the game either is playing blind or is playing blind but they have a character concept, backstory and in my case already established lore as my character is the same one I played in Kingmaker just with a newer build and different class as WOTR added more options.
The problem is a plot twist of that games degree can't be executed properly if someone has already thought their character's backstory and lore out: the story works if you are playing blind and without a plan. It has holes however when you are playing as an established character like say the character you played in the previous game in the series that also happens to be your standard go to character for the majority of RPGs.

Originally posted by Manlet:

Originally posted by Fei:

I totally agree with you but i probably worded my post title poorly ^^

When i said Kingmaker II, i didn't meant a sequel but rather a game similar than Kingmaker in his narrative structure.
With more freedom, a more "mercenary" squad playstyle, more adventuring type etc.
Let the player be a nobody that along the game then became someone, let the player build his own companions with a mercenary system that give personality archetype with attached stories and not imposed follower who will disapoint in majority.

I love the mythic path stuff , I would love a game with WOTR mechanics and narrative choice of freedom, and more open world style gameplay where you aren't forced to do X thing and you can explore more freely.

Same here. I'd also like all the paths to actually be- fleshed out and give you an incentive, in addition to adding a companion exclusive to each path. Those are my personal views though.

i didn't minded the plot here it was entertaining for my side, althought it was quiet obvious at some point with all the flashback, but i do agree that the " divine stuff and whoosh you are the chosen one" really kill the immersion, specialy if you are going down an evil path, but other than that i give credit to the narrative team for bringing me literally thousands of hours of good immersive stories and a lovely gameplay that the crusade is, and yeah i know many people disliked it, i didn't.

I mean the original WotR adventure path is generally considered quite weak. I actually think Owlcat did a good job with making it a game.

Also i mean with a title like Wrath of the Righteous, why would you expect it to be anything other than a "chosen one" type story? It's quite heavily implied by the title alone.

Yeah and I'd also note the game throws one important thing within the storytelling that makes you really think hard about the name. Wrath of the Righteous, what does it mean to be Righteous?
Doing so can mean differant things from one person of faith to another: a worshiper of Desna would have different views on righteousness then a follower of Iomedae and follower of Asmodeous would think both are wrong and think things that the two would consider evil are just and righteous. I'd also note an important thing to do in this game is to avoid rushing to extremes, not making judgements based purely on emotion or on the morals the game thinks you have which is another problem that being it seems to not interpret the alignments properly as the choices sometimes come off as being the choices that the choices made by the bad examples of that alignment rather then a good example, in any case make a choice you think is the right choice without thinking ahead tends to punish you rather severely, if you make a choice consider the possible outcomes do you want to set that prisoner free only to have him turn on you the moment you unbind him, do you want to let the mentally damaged and partially insane inquisitor live or do you want to put the man out of his misery and give him something that he needs a release from all his torments, is it righteous to do so? Is it righteous to be a zealot that kills without thinking? Is it righteous to be a person that wants to do the right thing but shirks the laws of the land to do it? Is it Righteous to maintain laws that are harsh and cruel as the Aeons do? Is it righteous to refuse to wait for your superior's command and strike the enemy while you still have the advantage? All these questions and more abound.
There are so many different ways you could interpret the the game and thus make choices based on that. I've logged over a thousand hours into the game and not beaten it because my mind is always agonizing about the choices and then later I realize I made a major mistake and ended playing as a character I didn't want to play, or felt I missed out on something by making another choice.
The sheer problem I have is that for me there are too many choices too many decisions to make and too many outcomes that it makes the completionist in me go crazy because it may be missing out on something important. For me that is what takes a good game and makes it a great game, to add that many options that many stories you can tell and that many adventures you can have is impressive for a Indie studio that has only developed two games with another title in development and more content to come for the second. Its ambitious and amazing at the same time. And even more amazing is that WOTR managed to make EVERY single one of its kick-starter pledges and become what I'd consider the 2021 Game of the Year. It's astonishing

Originally posted by jedi7000nathan/sevenbillionjedi:

The problem is a plot twist of that games degree can't be executed properly if someone has already thought their character's backstory and lore out: the story works if you are playing blind and without a plan. It has holes however when you are playing as an established character like say the character you played in the previous game in the series that also happens to be your standard go to character for the majority of RPGs.

So it is the game's fault you went in with your own set of rules instead of playing it's? But give another game credit because you did not do this for it? Next time you play KOTOR bring your pre established character with you, then when you play wrath, make a new character. Now you can have the opposite experience.

I tried roleplaying my Azata in KOTOR and it was pretty weird!!

On the other hand, there are those of us that didn't particularly enjoy Kingmakers convoluted story and a right slog of a start. And killing Linzi is unforgivable!