Under the Burning Suns

pqueiro · Post by **pqueiro** » July 15th, 2006, 5:37 am

doctored, first, get some commas in there

second, UTBS is more about role playing and storyline than most campaigns, I believe, so cutting on the storyline isn't that great an idea.

I'm currently playing through it myself, and so far it's been awesome

keep up the good work!

doctored · Post by **doctored** » July 15th, 2006, 6:18 pm

doctored, first, get some commas in there second, UTBS is more about role playing and storyline than most campaigns, I believe, so cutting on the storyline isn't that great an idea.

first, yeah i have a tendancy to ignore punctuation online, sorry about that,

seccond, a lot good movies could have been great movies, if they had simply cut about 30 or 40 minutes out them,

the same is true for any story telling medium including video games, all im saying here is that i found myself starting scan trough alot of the dialog around scenario 6 or so, which means to me that the story could probably use some streamlining thats all,

again, i would like to strees that i rank this campaign second only to heir to the throne as far as quality goes, and i too thank all who worked on it,

one more thing, i was never too sure what was going on with the changes to daytime/nighttime either, maybe that part could use some more explaination too (i played this scenario starting when it was added to the main line so im not sure if this has been changed since, if so, please ignore this part),

doctored

pqueiro · Post by **pqueiro** » July 15th, 2006, 7:58 pm

Heh - I think it's quite nice the way it is. Different strokes, I guess.

As for the different cycle, if I'm not mistaken this campaign takes place in the distant future, where the world somehow acquired a second sun - which explains the "First" and "Second" mornings, afternoons and such.

Dunedain · Post by **Dunedain** » July 27th, 2006, 2:22 pm

I think the dialogues are a bit too long-- difficult to read.

(Or makes people run out of patience

)

Dunedain · Post by **Dunedain** » July 27th, 2006, 2:26 pm

SPOILER ALERT

(After thought)

Wouldn't it be better if some characters don't leave the story so early
(or stay in it only for a short time), such as Garak and that female mage?

scott · Post by **scott** » July 27th, 2006, 2:54 pm

SPOILER ALERT!

Dunedain wrote:(After thought)

Wouldn't it be better if some characters don't leave the story so early
(or stay in it only for a short time), such as Garak and that female mage?

Dunedain, I think your comments reflect personal taste. UTBS is different. It's story-driven. The gameplay is not normal BFW gameplay, and it is the story that drives the player to keep exploring. The loss of the main characters is also part of that story. I too was crestfallen to learn my mage was not coming with us! However, it enhanced the story. In campaigns I write, heroes are used to enhance gameplay and are the property of the player. In UTBS, heroes are used to enhance the story and are the property of the storyteller. It's a different style that requires a different taste.

Ryorin · Post by **Ryorin** » July 29th, 2006, 2:11 am

And, in my opinion, vastly superior. I think I'll try my own hand at making a campaign soon enough.

Dunedain · Post by **Dunedain** » July 29th, 2006, 8:13 am

Well...I understand a lot now.

Elvish_Pillager · Post by **Elvish_Pillager** » July 29th, 2006, 10:43 am

Ryorin wrote:And, in my opinion, vastly superior.

It's a great story but it buys story at the expense of gameplay.

Post by **allefant** » July 30th, 2006, 2:06 pm

Elvish Pillager wrote:It's a great story but it buys story at the expense of gameplay.

Which is subjective though. I would not say it buys story at the expense of gameplay, I'd say it has different gameplay, gameplay which is more story oriented than the typical Multiplayer tactical battles. But it has not less gameplay, just different gameplay.

Post by **turin** » July 31st, 2006, 1:42 am

allefant wrote:Which is subjective though. I would not say it buys story at the expense of gameplay, I'd say it has different gameplay, gameplay which is more story oriented than the typical Multiplayer tactical battles. But it has not less gameplay, just different gameplay.

I would say that destroying something that a player has worked on (=killing off a unit in a story event) without allowing them to at least believe they have some control over it (=having the unit die in-game, but guarantee his death by surrounding him with enemy units or somesuch) is always bad for gameplay...

Post by **allefant** » July 31st, 2006, 4:33 pm

I would say that destroying something that a player has worked on (=killing off a unit in a story event) without allowing them to at least believe they have some control over it (=having the unit die in-game, but guarantee his death by surrounding him with enemy units or somesuch) is always bad for gameplay...

Not necessarily. Surrounding a unit by enemies just might give the player a false hope of being able to save it, and result in lots of boring save&reload until you finally realize there is no way to do so, like with Garak.

I preferred how the wizard disappeared, she simply wanted to stay with the trolls/dwarves. I'm quite sure having her die in a forced battle would have disappointed me much more.

Para · Post by **Para** » August 6th, 2006, 11:21 pm

One thing I hated about UttB was Blood is thicker than water.

I dislike campaigns where they suddenly spring new objectives out of the blue for you to complete without giving additional turns to complete them.

Some players may turtle and slowly gain gold before completing the objective or turtle to level up their warriors. However when they suddenly complete 1 objective and only to find another objective to complete, they're out of time which is a nuisence.

Sly · Post by **Sly** » August 7th, 2006, 9:25 am

Para wrote:One thing I hated about UttB was Blood is thicker than water.

I dislike campaigns where they suddenly spring new objectives out of the blue for you to complete without giving additional turns to complete them.

Some players may turtle and slowly gain gold before completing the objective or turtle to level up their warriors. However when they suddenly complete 1 objective and only to find another objective to complete, they're out of time which is a nuisence.

You've got a point. I think the initial turn limit should be low and increase as new objectives appear

Post by **La_vie_en_Wose** » August 9th, 2006, 12:35 am

The creator of this campaign made the mermen and water to diseapear because of the appearence of a second sun in Wesnoth, wich was long before a cool province with dwarves, Elves, Loyalists, Saurians, Friendly Undeads and fans of Tolkien and so on but no Luke Skywalker. Delfador wouldn't have tolerated it. I also.
But..
This is a GREAT campaign.