That's called deflecting the argument, bud.

You never had an argument. If you did you would have noticed Bethesda games have never been balanced. Hence it's never required to be balanced. If it was required, it would be balanced. Logic 101.

Bud, sport? I'm old enough to be your dad.

Ignorance is bliss.

Stay blissful then.

Meanwhile metagaming is no argument against those that role play. Sorry.

And just who came along to appoint you god, to decide what is, or is not, role playing? Terribly sorry, your premise here rings hollow, your experience seems to be the exception, rather than the rule. I do not OCD scavenge everything in site, but, I quickly find that by about six or seventh level, money is no longer a problem.

I could argue that leaving ANYTHING that is worth a few caps just laying there, because you don't *need* it, ISN'T roleplaying..... You ARE a scavenger. If you do NOT pick up guns/ammo, whether you need them or not, you are not being 'true' to the environment. Granted, once I get to about 10th level or so, I stop bothering with things like varmint rifles, they simply aren't worth enough caps, to justify carrying the weight. ESPECIALLY when I already have MUCH better weapons.

That's a strawman, bud. I never talked about metagaming. You should try reading what people have been telling you (oh wait, that would imply practicing what one preaches).

Nobody, the definitions have been set since before cgaming.

Nope, you're attempting to say not role playing is more important than role playing and that's somehow an argument. It's not.

So again, if you role played, barter was fine. If you didn't role play I can see how someone would find every character they make being overloaded with caps. But that's no argument against role players that didn't have a problem with it. So get over it.

Denial ain't just a river in Egypt, bud.

And if you didn't?

So were you going to form an argument or not? You've been posting non sequitur and irrelevant posts since 130#.

You don't role play, we get it. Still not an argument against those that do.

Go read them above. Oh wait...

Again you've yet to form any sort of argument. Any time you try you just change your "argument" from not everybody role plays, to Bethesda games are suppose to be balanced, to random insults because the rest of your failed argument fell flat.

Nothing you say is going to change the fact that when you role played you were fine. Over 100 RPs between F3 and NV prove it.

I suggest you look them up, and re-familiarize yourself with them then. And don't limit yourself to just one, because there are MANY, and all are equally as viable.

I suggest you read and not make up things I never said. Where did I say there's only one archetype when roleplaying?

that is what you have been clearly saying this entire time.........that your way of Roleplaying is the only way and that anyone who disagrees with your view has no idea what roleplaying is........

Uh, no. So you don't know what an archetype is either?

This is starting to become pathetic.

I don't know who's trolling who anymore.

Wyrd, PKMN never said he experienced the games through YouTube. He said he doesn't roleplay and the you tubers were some examples of people who DO roleplay, and those characters were still rich. I think it was a little unfair of you to assume he doesn't play the games, man.


All three of you have good points.

My take is that barter was of less value in Fo3. The prices were much lower in Fallout 3 than they were in New Vegas and regardless of the amount of loot you sell, barter was used EXCLUSIVELY for merchant prices.

In New Vegas, Barter not only affects prices like in New Vegas, but it's the most popular speech check option behind speech itself.

This was a great way to implement Barter in a more active way, and the fact that its the second most popular check in contrast to being an entirely passive skill I feel was no coincidence.

Its ideal, because this gives me both the monetary bonuses of barter, but also helps me to roleplay a shrewd wasteland salesman negotiator. I stated earlier in the thread that there's a difference between a leader and a negotiator, so I'd like to keep the skills separate.

As for the argument:
-its easy to get rich
-its also entirely possible to avoid being rich, if you were interested in pursuing that RP.

I just can't subscribe to one extreme or the other being our only options.

Actually, it has been pathetic for a while now. You have basically implied, if not flatly stated, that there is only one way to roleplay. Yours. And everyone else is 'doing it wrong'.

Quite frankly, if I found myself in a Fallout environment, I WOULD be looting every little thing that could possibly help me. Be it by getting me a few more caps, or, helping me to survive. You can toss about ten dollar words all you want, but, that does not change the fact that there is any specific way to roleplay. Now, I think you are just trying to dig yourself out of the whole you have shoveled.

I DO roleplay, do people not read! the youtubers are examples of people who ALSO RP and still loot a lot of stuff.

all my characters have backstories, they all do their actions based on what kind of person they are, they all have personalities, etc.

Sorry if you feel insulted, but your definitions of role playing are greatly flawed. It implies that there can only be one way to role play, yours. You don't establish that definition at all because it is a purely subjective opinion on how one should and should not role play. You just snap out at people and tell them to go read, even though it points out the holes in your argument. That's just deflecting the issue and not addressing the points in an argument.

Again, it's true that not everyone role plays because the definition of role play is entirely subjective. Someone just making a character, naming him, and exploring a sand box world like TES or Fo is role-playing at it's core. You're playing another character in another world. You can take it further like people who define a backstory for their character, and reinforce motives or actions based on their character's personality is another style of role-playing. There is no right or wrong way, which is the beautiful thing about it. Truly.

Expecting balance in a singleplayer game is only natural. It makes for interesting game play which ensures that all aspects of the early and mid game remain challenging and conducive to the game, you know, the G in RPG. So, my argument falling flat? The only reason it falls flat is because the person it's directed at refuses to acknowledge the core component of it, and instead relies on straw man's (honestly where did I ever say metagaming) to "debunk" an argument.

You're right about one thing though, this is truly starting to become pathetic.

Nope, I defined role play and showed how you guys were obviously not role playing.

Classic "I'm right, you're wrong, deal with it."

Nice one.

Pretty much what you've been trying to do in a nutshell, otherwise you would have formed an argument by now. So again, nothing you say will change the definition of role play.

Role play, to create or be given a character and do what they would do, not what you would do. Acting basically. That's all role play is. Don't like it, go write a dictionary company.

I worded that incorrectly. Yes, of course you roleplay. but the main theme of what you were trying to convey, at least in my opinion, was a contrast between OCD Non-roleplay/ Sorcerer Dave heavy roleplay.

(I love sorcerer Dave BTW, good taste.)

Even though there are several folks pointing out the flaws in his arguments, and not a single, solitary soul backing his way of thinking.......

Personally, I think it's hilarious, and obviously a waste of time talking to him.