Riahuf22 said:The biggest problem i have with all these systems is that if it a small circle that changes color on how they con to me, all i see is the circle and it takes away from how I'm viewing the mob entirely, like i wouldn't care how it looks, or anything i would simply just look at the circle that is literally covering like 30% of his/her body, and the same would happen if you make an outline of his body, and a ring around his feet, it wouldn't matter i would simply be looking for the feature that tells me how dangerous it is and not the mob itself, which i think is a bad thing and even though it might make it easier it also takes you away from the world, as most people would be looking for the ring and not the mob and therefore all mobs would be similair to other mobs simply becuase you are looking for a feature and not the mob specifically.
I agree with you. I want to enjoy the world I am in and actually see the mob. I don’t want to see some assortment of ovals around a npc/mob. I agree that ovals or rings around a mob do not look appealing. Ovals/rings are bad design; they still remind me of a theme park game.
My thoughts, which I am sure will trigger some people.
1) I think the EQ1 consider system (because let's be honest, that's what it is) is archaic, outdated, and does a very poor job of actually communicating the difficulty and threat level of a targeted opponent.
2) There really is no reason to ask players to do anything more than target the opponent, unless the system is then going to provide them with additional useful information. It is a wasted keypress.
3) If the only thing we're going to ever know about a mob is whether it is higher or lower level than us, you can easily represent that color scale in the monster's nameplate or in a target ring.
4) If we're going to force the player to read some text in the chat window to effectively learn more about his target, then the text should actually tell us additional useful information.
In summary - either display it graphically (instead of via text), or evolve the system (perhaps via a set of monster Lore skills) so that players can potentially use it to learn more about their opponents than simply their relative level.
Nephele said:My thoughts, which I am sure will trigger some people.
1) I think the EQ1 consider system (because let's be honest, that's what it is) is archaic, outdated, and does a very poor job of actually communicating the difficulty and threat level of a targeted opponent.
2) There really is no reason to ask players to do anything more than target the opponent, unless the system is then going to provide them with additional useful information. It is a wasted keypress.
3) If the only thing we're going to ever know about a mob is whether it is higher or lower level than us, you can easily represent that color scale in the monster's nameplate or in a target ring.
4) If we're going to force the player to read some text in the chat window to effectively learn more about his target, then the text should actually tell us additional useful information.
In summary - either display it graphically (instead of via text), or evolve the system (perhaps via a set of monster Lore skills) so that players can potentially use it to learn more about their opponents than simply their relative level.
Honestly I'm just going to use what someone else said and say you only need to do it a few times and you can pretty much get a feel for the level range of the mobs most of the time, so why would i want a visual feature to keep telling me something i alrdy know, and simply just give me a choice on if I want to be curious enough to know what it is, as i honestly find your system completely redunant and unnesscary and takes you away from seeing the mob as a mob and instead seeing it as a feature that is covering up something it shouldn't
Nephele said:My thoughts, which I am sure will trigger some people.
1) I think the EQ1 consider system (because let's be honest, that's what it is) is archaic, outdated, and does a very poor job of actually communicating the difficulty and threat level of a targeted opponent.
2) There really is no reason to ask players to do anything more than target the opponent, unless the system is then going to provide them with additional useful information. It is a wasted keypress.
3) If the only thing we're going to ever know about a mob is whether it is higher or lower level than us, you can easily represent that color scale in the monster's nameplate or in a target ring.
4) If we're going to force the player to read some text in the chat window to effectively learn more about his target, then the text should actually tell us additional useful information.
In summary - either display it graphically (instead of via text), or evolve the system (perhaps via a set of monster Lore skills) so that players can potentially use it to learn more about their opponents than simply their relative level.
I find it quite odd that you will say EQ’s consider system is archaic, but you won’t say the ovals/rings that were shown around a npc from that old PlayStation game “OnlineAdventures” several times in this thread are archaic (Hmm..I wonder what that could be about.. lol). The fact is those ovals/rings are considered archaic as well. I would much rather the oldschool system be updated than something like a newer version of ovals or rings around the npc.
Anyway, whether Consider is visual text somewhere or just ‘regular text’ in the box is not the issue. The issue is how we see the mob. Many of us think that having graphics like glowing ovals/rings around a mob takes away from how we see the mob, and it takes away from the immersive nature of this game’s vision. It’s very much like that old Playstation game’s graphic shown several times in this thread - now why would I want something like that in an immersive mmorpg, Pantheon.
Syrif said:I find it odd that you will mention EQ’s consider system is archaic, but you won‘t say the ovals/rings that were shown around a npc from that old PlayStation game “OnlineAdventures” several times in this thread are archaic (Hmm..I wonder what that could be about.. hmm..lol). The fact is those ovals/rings are considered archaic as well. I would much rather the oldschool system be updated than something like a newer version of ovals or rings around the npc. Anyway, whether the graphic is visual text somewhere or just ‘regular text’ in the box is not the issue. The issue is how we see the mob. Many of us think that having graphics like glowing ovals/rings around a mob takes away from how we see the mob, and it takes away from the immersive nature of this game’s vision. It’s very much like that Playstation game’s graphic shown several times in this thread - now why would I want something like that in an immersive mmorpg, Pantheon.
Syrif said:The ‘rings around the npc’ you show just seem to kill that sense of immersion and higher wonder for some reason. Actually, it seems it would be at odds with perception and the gameplay that VR is going for with Pantheon.
Syrif said:I get that you may have liked that system in that PlayStation game (eqOnlineAdventures), but that system is at odds that with the immersive, mmorpg gameplay that Visionary Realms is going for with Pantheon.
Syrif said:I can see how the Rings system you mentioned worked in OnlineAdventures on PlayStation though, but that game was entirely different from an immersive mmorpg. I think you will see that as we see more streams in the future.
Syrif said:I agree with you. I want to enjoy the world I am in and actually see the mob. I don’t want to see some assortment of ovals around a npc/mob. I agree that ovals or rings around a mob do not look appealing. Ovals/rings are bad design; they still remind me of a theme park game.
Syrif said:And the ring around the mob from “eqOnlineAdventures” remind me of kindergarten! LOL no thx! Once again, thank goodness VR is designing this game. ;)
Welcome to Pantheon: Rise of the Fallen.
These colored rings already exist in the game today so all of your bloviating about how they "take away from the immersive nature of this game's vision" is just a bunch of hot air. Please stop trolling.
Nephele said:My thoughts, which I am sure will trigger some people.
1) I think the EQ1 consider system (because let's be honest, that's what it is) is archaic, outdated, and does a very poor job of actually communicating the difficulty and threat level of a targeted opponent.
2) There really is no reason to ask players to do anything more than target the opponent, unless the system is then going to provide them with additional useful information. It is a wasted keypress.
3) If the only thing we're going to ever know about a mob is whether it is higher or lower level than us, you can easily represent that color scale in the monster's nameplate or in a target ring.
4) If we're going to force the player to read some text in the chat window to effectively learn more about his target, then the text should actually tell us additional useful information.
In summary - either display it graphically (instead of via text), or evolve the system (perhaps via a set of monster Lore skills) so that players can potentially use it to learn more about their opponents than simply their relative level.
I will not agree with 1), but not denying it might be lacking something like 4).
The consider action requires a player action. Hovering mobs, just taking a round look, is not active, and if everything is told firsthand you loose that necessity of action. It is that I liked in the /con (C key), the need to manually target AND act to obtain the information you needed. But I agree it could be giving something more like rolling chances to identify a mob's disposition (based on something), or to identify it wrong.
MauvaisOeil said:Nephele said:My thoughts, which I am sure will trigger some people.
1) I think the EQ1 consider system (because let's be honest, that's what it is) is archaic, outdated, and does a very poor job of actually communicating the difficulty and threat level of a targeted opponent.
2) There really is no reason to ask players to do anything more than target the opponent, unless the system is then going to provide them with additional useful information. It is a wasted keypress.
3) If the only thing we're going to ever know about a mob is whether it is higher or lower level than us, you can easily represent that color scale in the monster's nameplate or in a target ring.
4) If we're going to force the player to read some text in the chat window to effectively learn more about his target, then the text should actually tell us additional useful information.
In summary - either display it graphically (instead of via text), or evolve the system (perhaps via a set of monster Lore skills) so that players can potentially use it to learn more about their opponents than simply their relative level.
I will not agree with 1), but not denying it might be lacking something like 4).
The consider action requires a player action. Hovering mobs, just taking a round look, is not active, and if everything is told firsthand you loose that necessity of action. It is that I liked in the /con (C key), the need to manually target AND act to obtain the information you needed. But I agree it could be giving something more like rolling chances to identify a mob's disposition (based on something), or to identify it wrong.
Right. With /c it's there when you want it and otherwise you don't have to see it, no settings needed to be fiddled with.
All I can say is my preference. As it stands I think the Pantheon UI is awful: the rings/nameplates/health bars/buffs/debuffs etc. I want less visual clutter and hand-holdy nonsense (like the rings).
disposalist said:I was not suggesting monsters have a 'facebook page' or similar, more that a hunter would come to understand a particular type of monster they have hunted and killed many times such that when they study a similar live creature in the wild they can intuit much more about it than someone who has never encountered it before. Especially one that is very perceptive, intelligent, or whatever other in-game attribute or skill might be appropriate.
I was not suggesting "all the information is provided with a glance of an eye" just something with more depth, meaning and immersion than anyone/everyone just clicking the Con button and being told the monster's power and threat level for free and for no apparent reason.
But, hey, ridicule away if you don't like the idea.
why does it need to be in depth when the mob will be slayed shortly after? does it really need a button to assess the monster's power and threat level? fight it and if it's wooping butt then you know it is.
or just observe the mob for a bit and if it's pimp slapping the other mobs, you know it's a bad boy.
there's more immersive ways to show a monster's power and threat level than a button.
like they walk around having dialogue or he's got some badge/rank insignia.
the consider button is as lazy as a red circle on the ground saying i'm about to drop a sick aoe.
another point to think about, is it worth the time to make an in game database for something that will be used only a few times? players don't need the information after they've committed it to memory. it'll be more community orientated if players talked about it, rather than the information spoon fed with a button.
better to leave it open to speculation and community talking about the wolf of amberfaet because it walks around pimp slapping other wolves and stealing candy then for me to hit a button telling me this monster is a boss.
oneADseven said:
Welcome to Pantheon: Rise of the Fallen.
These colored rings already exist in the game today so all of your bloviating about how they "take away from the immersive nature of this game's vision" is just a bunch of hot air. Please stop trolling.
This thread is about the Consider function. Again, I am referring the the Consider ovals/rings around the npc that you posted on this thread from an older PlayStation game. I realize there are target rings below the npc's in Pantheon, but they are not around the npc as you suggested them to be on the PlayStation screenshots. You also suggested them to be used in lieu of the Consider function. Myself and others have simply stated that having rings around the mobs takes away from how you physically see them. I feel like I keep stating the obvious to you when you keep quoting me, so I will stop. Thank you for the welcome - I've been here since the KS. I understand your frustration, but I am not going to call you a troll simply because I disagree with you. Stating one's opinion several times (just like you have too) in response to comments and disagreeing with someone else's opinion does not make that person a troll. So, I will stop short of saying you are "trolling" based on your definition of what you accused me of being. You seem to quote a lot. You should have quoted the part where I stated that you and I just disagree on this, and that it's ok to disagree. *shrug* I won't respond to you on this again because I do not care to engage in a senseless and silly argument about that. I've also already given my opinion about those PlayStation oval/ring things around the mob and why I don't think they look good for this game. I'll say it again: you and I disagree on this and that's totally fine. Thanks. :)
Iksar said:All I can say is my preference. As it stands I think the Pantheon UI is awful: the rings/nameplates/health bars/buffs/debuffs etc. I want less visual clutter and hand-holdy nonsense (like the rings).
I can see what you saying regarding clutter. Less clutter is usually a good thing - I hope it goes that way. I am excited to see the coming streams this new year as Panthoen progresses.
Syrif said:Iksar said:All I can say is my preference. As it stands I think the Pantheon UI is awful: the rings/nameplates/health bars/buffs/debuffs etc. I want less visual clutter and hand-holdy nonsense (like the rings).
I agree and I can see what you saying. I hope it goes that way. I am excited to see the coming streams this new year as Panthoen progresses.
btw just so i'm clear on things, is the circle a target reticle? i think that is a must for a tab/click targeting game. i know what can have 2 types of targeting, offensive and defensive, which is the blue and red rings?
oneADseven said:Syrif said:I find it odd that you will mention EQ’s consider system is archaic, but you won‘t say the ovals/rings that were shown around a npc from that old PlayStation game “OnlineAdventures” several times in this thread are archaic (Hmm..I wonder what that could be about.. hmm..lol). The fact is those ovals/rings are considered archaic as well. I would much rather the oldschool system be updated than something like a newer version of ovals or rings around the npc. Anyway, whether the graphic is visual text somewhere or just ‘regular text’ in the box is not the issue. The issue is how we see the mob. Many of us think that having graphics like glowing ovals/rings around a mob takes away from how we see the mob, and it takes away from the immersive nature of this game’s vision. It’s very much like that Playstation game’s graphic shown several times in this thread - now why would I want something like that in an immersive mmorpg, Pantheon.
Syrif said:The ‘rings around the npc’ you show just seem to kill that sense of immersion and higher wonder for some reason. Actually, it seems it would be at odds with perception and the gameplay that VR is going for with Pantheon.
Syrif said:I get that you may have liked that system in that PlayStation game (eqOnlineAdventures), but that system is at odds that with the immersive, mmorpg gameplay that Visionary Realms is going for with Pantheon.
Syrif said:I can see how the Rings system you mentioned worked in OnlineAdventures on PlayStation though, but that game was entirely different from an immersive mmorpg. I think you will see that as we see more streams in the future.
Syrif said:I agree with you. I want to enjoy the world I am in and actually see the mob. I don’t want to see some assortment of ovals around a npc/mob. I agree that ovals or rings around a mob do not look appealing. Ovals/rings are bad design; they still remind me of a theme park game.
Syrif said:And the ring around the mob from “eqOnlineAdventures” remind me of kindergarten! LOL no thx! Once again, thank goodness VR is designing this game. ;)
Welcome to Pantheon: Rise of the Fallen.
These colored rings already exist in the game today so all of your bloviating about how they "take away from the immersive nature of this game's vision" is just a bunch of hot air. Please stop trolling.
That ring obviously only shows that you have a mob targeted and not showing a consideration of how difficult a mob is, not by npc type(Bosses, Rare spawns, Raid Targets) or by level it is merely just a targetting system, and twisting the intention of what that ring is actually doing does nothing to the actual discussion as sense it is simply just a targeting system it can be easily looked over as if it isn't their which would be the opposite effect if it changed colors or decoration depending on mob type.
And i also agree with Iksar we don't need this either, and we can see if VR keeps it or not.
Syrif said:This thread is about the Consider function. Again, I am referring the the Consider ovals/rings around the npc that you posted on this thread from an older PlayStation game. I realize there are target rings below the npc's in Pantheon, but they are not around the npc as you suggested them to be on the PlayStation screenshots. You also suggested them to be used in lieu of the Consider function. Myself and others have simply stated that having rings around the mobs takes away from how you physically see them.
You can keep using bold to emphasize around but it highlights that you either weren't reading my posts or had an issue with comprehending them. I posted this on the very first page:
oneADseven said:
You can see a red circle beneath the "Bloodthirsty Forgotten Deadblade" which more likely than not represents the "offensive target." The blue ring probably represents the "defensive target." I think an ideal situation for me would be to change the dynamic of this slightly. Instead of the offensive target always having a red circle, the color would vary based on the relative con of the NPC being targeted. Instead of the defensive target always having a blue circle, it would be a different color that doesn't already belong to the "con-level matrix" -- so maybe black, pink, purple, or something else that isn't red, orange, yellow, white, blue or green.
In other words, I made it very clear that I wasn't asking for the rings to go around the NPC's. I shared a screenshot of Pantheon where the rings were already being used and suggested a "slight change" to how the intended color association could work. I explained myself very thoroughly and you assured me that you understood what I was saying. I have asked you in the past to stop quoting me or responding to my posts so that we could avoid these kinds of exchanges. I purposely ignored your first couple of comments directed at me due to the pattern of behavior you have shown over the last year. You obviously don't get the message and feel compelled to stir up discussions with me. It definitely seems like you go out of your way to troll me on this forum. It would be fantastic if you would stop trying to misrepresent what I say. It would be fantastic if I could just post my thoughts without having to hear your unwanted feedback, specifically because of your tendency to employ strawman arguments and/or unsubstantiated facts to try and downplay my intent.
At the end of the day, I can't stop you from responding/quoting. If you're going to do that, though, please be prepared to have some real dialogue. If you are inconsistent in your message (like you have been here) then I will point it out. Instead of answering the questions I asked you on page 3 you just keep bloviating about something that nobody else is talking about and call it a disagreement. Now you want to act like this entire time the disagreement was about the rings being around the NPC rather than beneath them? That is the basis for your argument for immersion, wonder, and engagement? My goodness.
After EQ I was definitely in the camp of "if it's information that *can* be given to the player, then it should be streamlined into the UI". The result of this philosophy can be seen in many games where add-ons and UI mods produce a dizzying array of panels and icons at the cost of obscuring the field of view.
If we are given a "con ring", then that will almost always be the easiest way to obtain the information. I understand this is a small thing, but I think the system being cumbersome can be an advantage. With the con ring in place I can tell you my brain will always say "target the enemy, look at the color of the ring, then decide how to react to the threat" when an enemy is in view. Without the con ring my brain would first ask "do I know what type and therefore approximate level the threat will be without being bothered to hit the consider button then read the chat log?" If yes, proceed based on the gnoll's assumed level. If no, click c and read. The point here is that making the consider action a little more cumbersome mechanically causes me to assess what's in the field of view as the first option.
Getting information from the world (mob type, movement, size, environment, well-written text, etc.) has a chance to get me more immersed in the world. Getting information from simple UI elements can only ever get me more immersed in the game.
I would even go as far as to have consider (the c button), when held, provide a new message in the chat log about the enemy every few seconds (based on perception). Pressing c would immediately give a rough relative level of the enemy in the chat log. The next message would be faction standing. Then you would get messages about their behavior, armor, weapons, lore, specific relative level, class, spells, skills, what loot they have on them, or even a randomly generated race-specific name if another enemy is within range? After a while of conning similar enemies, you would get some of this information faster or multiple bits of info in one message.
Riahuf22 said:That ring obviously only shows that you have a mob targeted and not showing a consideration of how difficult a mob is, not by npc type(Bosses, Rare spawns, Raid Targets) or by level it is merely just a targetting system, and twisting the intention of what that ring is actually doing does nothing to the actual discussion as sense it is simply just a targeting system it can be easily looked over as if it isn't their which would be the opposite effect if it changed colors or decoration depending on mob type.
I understand why the ring was there. I'm not twisting anything. I was highlighting how colored rings were already being used in-game to show that they aren't some immersion-breaking thing that goes against the vision of the game. I never said that the /con system was already incorporated into the existing colored rings. This should be pretty obvious seeing that I made a suggestion on page 1 that I would like to see that happen.
stellarmind said:
btw just so i'm clear on things, is the circle a target reticle? i think that is a must for a tab/click targeting game. i know what can have 2 types of targeting, offensive and defensive, which is the blue and red rings?
That's a good question. I don't know. My comments were in response to the other oval/rings from the "Online Adventure" Playstation screenshots wrapped around NPC's regarding the Consider function. But yeah, as for target rings, I don't know exactly what that red and blue is for. That's something different. I'm curious though!
oneADseven said:Riahuf22 said:That ring obviously only shows that you have a mob targeted and not showing a consideration of how difficult a mob is, not by npc type(Bosses, Rare spawns, Raid Targets) or by level it is merely just a targetting system, and twisting the intention of what that ring is actually doing does nothing to the actual discussion as sense it is simply just a targeting system it can be easily looked over as if it isn't their which would be the opposite effect if it changed colors or decoration depending on mob type.
I understand why the ring was there. I'm not twisting anything. I was highlighting how colored rings were already being used in-game to show that they aren't some immersion-breaking thing that goes against the vision of the game. I never said that the /con system was already incorporated into the existing colored rings. This should be pretty obvious seeing that I made a suggestion on page 1 that I would like to see that happen.
Right i understand that, as i clearly stated it is a targetting ring only, and I'm saying if the ring changes color it would distract you away from the enviroment as at that time the rings are pretty much the most important things to look at in every encounter, and i don't want to always be looking at everything feet, i want to have no clutter on my screen and if that ring starts to change color than it will become some of the clutter i don't want to see, and as I've said before once you get a feel for the mobs level in a certain area that information becomes completely redundant and unesscary so why even have it? If your curious enough just hit a button and end the curiousity, but to be reminded every single time you target an npc that he is "This" to you to me sounds kind of bad, and quite frankly unwanted in most situations, until you go to a new area, and than you become curious again and use the con system to end curiousity and than rinse and repeat until you basically have a feel for everything and than glad your not reminded everything you target something what it is when you knew the last 1000 times it hasn't changed.
Syrif said:stellarmind said:
btw just so i'm clear on things, is the circle a target reticle? i think that is a must for a tab/click targeting game. i know what can have 2 types of targeting, offensive and defensive, which is the blue and red rings?
That's a good question. I don't know. My comments were in response to the other oval/rings from the "Online Adventure" Playstation screenshots wrapped around NPC's regarding the Consider function. But yeah, as for target rings, I don't know exactly what that red and blue is for. That's something different. I'm curious though!
i would assume red is offesnive target, blue is defensive target. i'm okay with this. that is very minimal clutter. i think it's necessary to have good target indicators in a tab/click targeting system.
a consider system i think is being loosely defined here.
i'm getting that it's just threat and power level assessment to a backdrop story.
now if i want to show hate/threat %, that can be tagged on to the targetting recticle with a yellow ring filling up on the outside of the red ring. i dont' think it's neccessary for a power level indictator. it smacks your tank hard enough the healer is gonna know.
oneADseven said:
In other words, I made it very clear that I wasn't asking for the rings to go around the NPC's.
I see. So if I understand correctly, you want Consider rings to go below the NPC. Anyway, I just want to clarify that I am against Consider rings regardless if they go around the NPC or below the NPC (apologies if that is what had confused you). I think having Consider rings would be too much with the already potential target rings below the NPC.
I like the Consider system that Visionary Realms already has.
Riahuf22 said:
Right i understand that, as i clearly stated it is a targetting ring only,
No, you didn't seem to understand what I was saying. I appreciate the points you are making about why you don't like the rings and that is fine since personal preference is obviously subjective. I was specifically responding to the highlighted section below:
Riahuf22 said:That ring obviously only shows that you have a mob targeted and not showing a consideration of how difficult a mob is, not by npc type(Bosses, Rare spawns, Raid Targets) or by level it is merely just a targetting system, and twisting the intention of what that ring is actually doing does nothing to the actual discussion as sense it is simply just a targeting system it can be easily looked over as if it isn't their which would be the opposite effect if it changed colors or decoration depending on mob type.
What i say it a targetting system only and you say yes you know that so here were on the same page.
But than i go i don't want it to chnage colors basically and you say you do but somehow in the mix you think i don't understand what your saying, when i've clearly said it.
And if you think simply becuase they have a red circle targetting system that means they can simply just have it chnage colors to represent difficulty to me is twisting the intention of the system, as it is a simple targetting system and shouldn't be turned into a consideration system as it would take away from the enviroment, which i have also have stated previously.
Riahuf22 said:And if you think simply becuase they have a red circle targetting system that means they can simply just have it chnage colors to represent difficulty to me is twisting the intention of the system, as it is a simple targetting system and shouldn't be turned into a consideration system as it would take away from the enviroment, which i have also have stated previously.
There is a clear distinction between "twisting the intention of the system" and "twisting the intention of what that ring is actually doing does nothing to the actual discussion" -- either way, I wasn't "twisting" anything. I never implied that the colored rings in Pantheon were intended as part of the /con system. I gave a suggestion and it's as simple as that. You stated that I was twisting what the ring is actually doing in Pantheon. The highlighted remark implies that I was spreading misinformation rather than adding anything to the actual discussion. If that wasn't your intention, great, we can chalk it up as a misunderstanding and move on.
Since I stirred everyone up earlier let me talk about what I would actually prefer, myself :)
- I think a target ring or halo is necessary to help distinguish which mob you're targeting, but it should be as subtle as possible. So, this is probably not the right place to display "con" information.
- I would prefer for the relative level of the opponent to be displayed as part of a target "window" - basically, a small part of the UI that shows the name of your target and possibly an expanded health bar or cast bar for them. You can color the nameplate in this section to indicate relative level. That way, if I want to see if something is red or blue (or in between) I simply target it and look at the target window.
- If there is a "consider" action that is bound to a hotkey, I want it to provide additional information beyond simply the level - assuming that the character has skills at a sufficient level that would allow them to identify that information. For example, I might get text messages like the following:
A_Ratkin_Warrior looks slightly deranged. It's actions in combat may be unpredictable.
A_Ratkin_Warrior looks highly social. There is a good chance that it will try to help its fellows.
A_Ratkin_Warrior does not seem to be afraid of fire. It may have some sort of resistance.
I hope that illustrates what I'm getting at. I get the arguments people have about putting too much stuff around the target within the main game view, and I agree with those. But if we are going to force people to press a button to see information, then let's take the opportunity to make pressing that button a very meaningful thing to do, and something that can be connected to some horizontal progression as well.
This is a place where we can evolve what Pantheon does beyond any of its predecessors. Don't waste the opportunity.
