Sorry if someone posted this before

So the orcs held a strike. It seems absolutely no matter what i do or say either the quest chain breaks so that nothing happens, or the guards attack and kill the half-orc as soon as he comes out.
In this case I find my party autoattacking everything, guards, orcs and the journalist. they just go into a blood rage and kill everything it seems.

I can't find anyway for anything else to happen. It is 100% stupid.

I want to help the orcs. Either kill the guards for them, or talk it down peacefully. No way it seems for this to happen. Why can't I attack the guards without ALSO fighting the orcs? Its absolutely retarded.

This game is NOT openended. None of the quests are. There are not multiple options with similar results. This game is very linear, its a fake open-end like 99% of the 'open-ended' games out there.

People just like to think its open ended so they can convince themself they did something cool . Basically you get gimped by not completing in the straight line designed by the developers but the game is so easy you can miss half the content/botch most the quests and still finish.

Thats OKay I like linear games for what its worth. But when my half-ogre can't side with the orcs...soemthing is just broken.

Hmm you CAN side with the orcs.

You just need to go inside the factory and TALK to the orc leader instead of just attacking the guards like a moron.

And this game is open-ended, most quests have multiple solutions and ways to finish them most of them just involve something other than fighting.
It's not the game's fault if you can't find them because you don't like to talk to NPCs/have made a low-int half-ogre character who only has the stupid conversation options.

This is not true. There are always several ways through every quest, but not every character will be able to access all paths because there are often skill or stat checks. For example, you get more conversation options when you are smart and when you have high persuasion skill. That means that stupid, non-persuasive characters are often unable to avoid getting into fights.

As mystral said, it is definitely possible to side with the orcs. You need to talk to the orc leader in the factory before the fight starts, and I'm pretty sure you can do this even with low persuasion. With high persuasion you are probably able to convince the guards to back off without having to fight them. You can also try to convince the orc leader to turn himself in, which may result in him getting killed by the guards as he exits the building. But if you can also persuade the guards not to harm him, they might just arrest him.

What have you tried? We can probably help with specifics.

Also, it is possible that you've encountered a bug. If you haven't tried it yet, I recommend the Unofficial Patch (check the sticky thread in these forums). This is probably not compatible with standard saves, though, so you may want to wait until your next playthrough to try it.

(Spoiler!)
The most positive, orc-friendly outcome available doesn't involve pissing off the town by killing the city guards and throwing the first stone in a massive riot, but rather getting the idea from a journalist that this would be a great time for the half-orc leader to sneak out in the dead of night.
That can be hard to get.
Another option is to make him a martyr. I've never been quite clear on what happens if you do that, because my last few characters were very intelligent and charismatic, and always managed to get Throgg to safety.

I did the version where I recommended an escape when it was dark out, so I'd say the game is pretty open-ended in that I was able to pull that off. I read somewhere you can end up helping the riots to a point where Tarant outright hates you and everyone there attacks you.

EDIT: Yep: "Instigator of the Orc Riots: You talked Donn Throg into rioting You are now considered an enemy not only of Tarant but Caladon as well."

We must protect the reputation of our beloved games!!!!

I have 20 cha, master of persuasion, 8 Int. Maybe 8 aint enough.

When I go inside and side with the orcs, as soon as the fighting starts the orcs go red and become enemies. Even the journalist joins in the bruha.

I think its a bug.

Like I said there is a difference between an open-ended game and a game that simply gimps your character when you don't create and play in exact line of the designer's archtype gamer. I hate games where designers make the game to be perfect only when played exactly the way THEY think games shoudl be played.

Arcanum is a PRIME example of that. 8int must not be enough for that option.

maybe by starting the riot the orcs attacked me, because even though they are the rioters as well, the yare counted as Taurant citizens and thus Taurant citizens attack you? In my mind this is what I do-

I talk to the guard, who doesn7t say to me clearly that he is going to kill the orc anyway. The news guy suggests it, but I figure what the heck, give it a go.
mabye I am not smart enough to have dialogue options (or designers didn't care) to try to get the guards to promise to not kill him and/or walk out WITH him. And/or let the guards know that if they attack the orcs I will defend them.

So in my mind I go in and I was able to talk the orc into surrendering.

Now when he goes out to surrender he gets gunned down.

I should ahve the following options
#1 do nothing, sob etc.
#2 Attack the guards for attacking the orc
#3 Help the guards kill the orcs
#4 go into a bloodcrazed frenzy adn kil lanything and everything in site.

Now for ME this game only gives me option #4, as soon as the guard shoots him everything goes red and my followeres start killing everything, even the journalist.

I want to do #2. When the guards double cross and gundown the orc I talked into surrendering, my character whether dumb or smart or evil or whatever hsould have an option of attacking the guards.
At the VERY least #1 shoudl be the option.

Two things:

One, for most quests you have two sides you can choose from with no stat requirements for either. Depending on your character you might also have a diplomatic solution or a thief one.
For most quests you'll have three possible ways to solve them. Some quests will only be doable by a character focused on combat, others by diplomats and some by thieves.
That's about as open-ended in terms of ways to solve quests as a computer game can get, if you've found one that had more choice then that I'd be really interested in hearing about it.

Second, that "archetype gamer" supposedly imagined by the devs makes sense.
How can you expect your character to think of clever alternatives and subtle solutions to problems if he's dumb as a rock. Sorry but Arcanum is a game where character skill, and not player skill, matters.
And no, 8 int is not enough to access most extra conversation options, simply because it means your character has slightly below average intelligence. If you actually wanted to make a diplomatic character you needed charisma, persuasion and intelligence. Seems logical to me, but whatever.

Arcanum's main difference from other RPGs is that your character will never an efficient jack-of-all-trades, and that you can only expect to be good at a few number of things even at max level.

As for the orcs going hostile, that does sound like a bug, unfortunately Arcanum as a Troika game has plenty of those. Install the unofficial patch you can get from Terra Arcanum, see if that fixes the problem.

Whoa, whoa. If you don't like the game, that's your problem, but don't be a jerk. 8's not much. Go buy a potion of Intelligence. I hope you're not too techy, which seems unlikely at that Int. Yes. There is. Which is why so many of Arcanum's quests can be solved with thievery, low-level magic, combat, diplomacy...
Honestly, if you want the prime example of the kind of problem you're describing, you should look at the Black Mountain Clan dungeon. That's the most direct, 'you're doing it wrong' mission in the entire game, as far as I know, and is this game's Scrappy Level.
Instead, you're harping on a scene whose most happy and ideal solution you can't access, either because you're having trouble getting the right dialogue from the participants, or because your character really doesn't have the stats. Oh yes, certainly. Especially that part where you can solve the murder mystery in Qintarra by casting See Contents. Or that part where you can see the dwarf on the Isle of Despair by jimmying open a window. Or that part where there's about a half dozen ways to get to see Gilbert Bates.
Oh yeah. Arcanum's totally a prime example of linear gameplay.
Look, Arcanum has its flaws. I'll be the first to admit that. But for goodness sakes, you really should identify them accurately. Should have believed the journalist, who said he was untrustworthy. But I understand. I made the same mistake the first time.
That halting 'yeessssss' when he agrees to your solution is a sign that he's lying to you. That, and the way he quickly changes his tune. Why, knowing that he's willing to lie, would you accept his promise even if the dialogue option were available? Must you, the player, really be the only character capable of telling a lie? Admittedly, that would be an interesting and reasonable addition to the scene. Bear in mind, though, it's an armed standoff. If they're within their legal rights to shoot Don Throgg, they're within their legal rights to arrest and jail you for siding with them, and unlike Throgg you're actually right in front of them, in arms reach. You're not even a citizen of Tarant or the Unified Kingdom.
You should consider writing a mod where your character attempts to state that he'll side with Throgg and fight the guards if they shoot him, and then must either escape as a fugitive, elude immediate capture and participate in Throgg's exodus later (with even greater difficulty because you're attempting to worm your way into an already botched rescue attempt), or give yourself up on the spot and fight the courts as a foreigner. Yeah. Welcome to strike-breaking in the 1800s. ...and be a cop-killer surrounded by civilians and trigger-happy policemen who just saw you shoot/strike one of their own.
Admittedly, the number of AIs who get involved instead of running away is pretty over-the-top. I'd've tried to set up the aggro breakdown differently. Strictly speaking, they don't need the help. I can't imagine why they'd agree to it, except that you may be able to get inside by a back door or somesuch. The guard captain would agree, I'd think, if it means the union leader gets 'what he deserves,' but if the goal is to help them while they're shooting, I think they'd turn down the offer. It's police business. Well, I mean, there's always Option 4. Perhaps not in, say... Final Fantasy, I guess, but in Ultima, Arcanum, and even (as I recall) Baldur's Gate you can just slaughter indiscriminately. It just doesn't make you many friends. You did have an option of attacking the guards, though. And when you did, it was demonstrably (and very reasonably) a very bad idea.
Sure. Only the guards should have shot back. All over the city. 'Cause you're attacking the city's guards. That other people attack you instead of running away is a bug, and that the AI acts pretty dumb when they attack you is also a bug. Actually, those are some of the worst and most prevalent bugs in the game.
And then there's that awful bug where you have to actually agree to fetch the alchemist's package the first time, or it won't flag the acceptance on future agreements even though the dialogue makes clear the merchant in Dernholm should have it for you. (Dolan, I think his name is? Nolan? No matter. It's an evil quest line that wasn't thoroughly debugged.) Hmm. Another idea for the mod. Make it possible to write an editorial. It won't appear in the Tarantian, and if you buy the paper and discover this, you can continue to display your disgust with the situation. Eventually, you can bribe, threaten, bully or persuade your way to the top of a fairly small conspiracy to keep dissenting voices out of the Tarantian, which is favorable to the industrial council.

I might write that mod myself!

Anyway... Seriously. We're trying to be helpful. Don't be a dick.

A couple people said I need the patch....I did the patch. My understanding is I already ahve it. Maybe I screwed up the install. Pretty sure I ahve it.

You are being helpful to an extent. But I think one line of sarcasm is a fair response to several direct and indirect insults...like Moron and Dick for example. I suppose though if I want help I hsould just accept that the person offering the help has the right to call me a moron and a dick every other sentence.....I have my reservations about the game. Sorry that me expressing that motivates you to attack me personally. My nature is to respond sarcastically/mockingly.

So lets just smoke that tomohawk and burry it.

The problem with open-ended games, to me, is they are dang near impossible to make. I'd prefer something linear...that admits to being linear...like Icewindale. If they work in some optionals, great. pretending that you can really choose your way through comes down to biting off more than you can chew. This particular maker had a habit of doing that...and it wasn7t exactly profitable.

I don7t need the maniacle crazy massmurderer option that has been worked into Baldur's and the like...doesn't a ppeal to me. Having it as an option may make them some money...

I do like the idea of having a middleground to walk. Where you can choose more freely. Unfortunately I have found that Arcanum still feels pretty set in its way. You can't really think to say what you would. I recognize that it takes a lot of programming to make that possible, to account for all the approaches that there might be and to have quest chains that can addapt and adjust...without breaking....

So I would have preferred a more practical linear approach to the often broken so-called openended one.

I digress. Writing mods and/or coding games isn't really fun to me. I like looking through the story. I like seeing it kinda flash by, check out the different systems/magic/combat...in Arcanum Tech is a system. A bit hands tied to look at the magic or tech, can only choose one on a single run through.

Going in to write a mod to add options I want, to fit how I want to play through with a character concept...Is the exact oposite approach a game designer should have to designing games...the exact opposite of what creating an open-ended game requires. Yo uneed to write for other people, not yourself. Modding the aggro chagne for more realism is a good idea though and I agree wtih you there. It comes down to a lot of work. I7d rather walk through a story knowing its a story being told by someone else than the false promise I can walk through an AI world with credible realism and choose my way according to the character concept I envisioned.

Mostly, your character needs more Int. Thankfully there are potions for that. Your tone was hostile from your first post. While it wasn't a good idea for Mystral to rise to the bait, you shouldn't have baited him. It was unkind. You told all of us that we are fools who like to 'convince [ourselves] that [we] did something cool.'
Honestly, the option you're talking about, killing strike-breakers who happen to be the city's police, is not an option with verisimilitude. Yes, you could conceivably do that, and if you did it should actually split the loyalties much, much finer than the game lets it, but you have to realize that it would make Tarant your enemy, right? Stop that. Mystral called you a moron once because you were being sarcastic and rude, and the attitude continued when other, more level-headed responses attempted to show you the quest resolution you were looking for. We all do. You attacked us all! I quote: Had you felt satisfied to attack the game, I'm not sure you'd've received Mystral's response of calling you a moron. Fine. It's your hatchet. Go smoke it. They always bit off more than they could chew, it's true. Troika titles were full of promise, and all three of them were rushed out the door before they were completed. Arcanum is no less an example of this than either of its brethren.
This mostly was a problem of their business model, since working for third parties with specific demands while using such a small staff and bla bla bla with strong perfectionist tendencies meant they never actually completed a game properly, meaning their next project was also rushed, meaning they were in no position to demand more freedom the next time. Eventually, there was no next time.
As such, all their games are buggy, strong on promise and thick with content and interesting stuff, and sadly incomplete.
Part of the reason for this was because they wanted multiple approaches, more approaches than anybody had been able to manage before. This is why, in Arcanum, there are several quests which can be furthered by Conjuring Spirits, Seeing Contents, sneak thievery, bullying, gentle and intelligent persuasion, intelligent dialogue, brute force, and sometimes probably even technological know-how. (I haven't played through that approach enough to see how it helps. And hey, it's possible it doesn't.)
But it's true that eventually somebody will want an approach they didn't consider.
Honestly, your big problems with your approach are half yours, half theirs.
1) You want to do something which, 'realistically'*, would upset the whole city and turn it against you.
2) The game handles the fallout of this attack poorly. Very, very poorly. You should probably get killed, but it should be by guards, not orcs or journalists. (And if you're badass enough to take out all the city's guards, well... bravo, that's actually pretty cool. Hence 'probably.')

* I hate using that word in fantasy scenarios, but I can't find the right conjugation of 'verisimilitude' for that adjective. That's not really why the option exists. The option exists because PCs are wildcards who are supposed to be able to do what they want, and arbitrarily blocking off an area with 'invisible walls' or making NPCs invulnerable is cheap and irritating to players. Lord British was a gamer before he was a programmer, and he was famous for this sort of thing. Planescape: Torment has the dialogue trees you want. I can only think of one occasion in Arcanum where you were allowed to agree to a quest and specifically say, in the dialogue option, that you were lying when you made the agreement. Other parts of the game may allow you to do this by acting against the agreement you made, or reporting the other party to the authorities, but the [truth] and [lie] tags on responses is genuinely helpful, and not an entirely artificial or stupid expansion of the dialogue trees.
And that's only the simplest example of Planescape: Torment's relative freedom of dialogue.
Arcanum tends to give options (note: tends), but it does fall short in several places. Rather a pity. Eh. I'm just intrigued by the notion. We'll get back to this in a second... I just think that an additional and genuinely interesting quest would be a boon to others. I'm not sure how much I'd even enjoy playing through a quest of my own design, as I'd probably spend the whole time picking apart my own work. However, other people might appreciate the added options.
They usually do, actually, if the options are any good. I can't even promise that's possible, or I think it'd have been done by now. I can always hope somebody has the chops to pull it off. Your character concept wants to solve the world's complex social problems with a sub-par degree of intelligence. I'm sorry, but the problems in Arcanum aren't that simple sometimes. In this case, that's because the writers of the game wanted to tell a story, and you don't like their story here.
An example of this: "A bit hands tied to look at the magic or tech, can only choose one on a single run through."
Your hands are tied there because the story of the game requires the two to be essentially different. I assume you've stopped to read some of the books along the way, and have seen all the references to in-setting debates over the nature of the two forces?
Whereas some magical steampunk settings allow the free mishmashing of technology and magic, there's a strange trope they were exploring in Arcanum where technology and magic are opposed forces. It's almost a cliche, and often it's overplayed, but here it was central to the story and important to the game. To ask this not to be reflected in game mechanics would actually be a pretty bad idea, since it would result in events taking place during your playthrough which literally would be impossible by the game setting's physics. (This is called 'Gameplay and Story Segregation.' It's a common fault they were trying to avoid, I think.)
Perhaps you don't like the Magic Vs. Technology trope, even as it's expressed here. I usually don't like it, but Arcanum's in-depth discussion of the trope fascinates me, so I'm willing to call it a problem of presentation elsewhere. It also came up in the movie Wizards, by Ralph Bakshi, but your mileage may vary with that film. (Most of my friends and I like it. Nevertheless, I suspect it's a bit niche.)

Anyway...
Look, when you want help, don't come in swinging at the people you're asking. Don't tell us we're 'convincing ourselves' of foolish notions amidst a series of other statements about the game where you refer to it as stupid and retarded.
If you dismiss this advice, and it's advice, don't expect everybody to remain civil. You acted like a dick from the first post, in direct violation of Wil Wheaton's rule. Don't. It's that simple. If you act like a nice guy, you are a nice guy. If you hurl insults every which way, you're not. So be a nice guy.

I know you think people are overreacting, but this statement is simply false. Arcanum is not a prime example of that at all. There are a huge number of ways to play through the game, including several ways to solve the particular quest in question. Unfortunately, your character is not smart enough to access most of them. And the fact that everyone goes hostile is probably a bug, as you say.

Arcanum can occasionally be frustrating when you want to solve a quest in a certain way but find it is impossible. But this is usually because your character simply isn't good enough; not good enough at thievery to pickpocket someone, or not good enough at persuasion to convince someone, or simply not smart enough to talk your way out of something. I like this aspect of the design, because it means you can't always get what you want with any given character build. You'll always be bad at something, which means things won't necessarily always go your way.

Are you trying to argue that Arcanum is not open-ended because there are merely several ways to solve quests, instead of an infinite number of ways? If so, I wonder if there are ANY games that you actually consider to be "open-ended".

I reckon he said that's part of the problem for him. He doesn't feel any game is ever open-ended, and seems to be crusading against any use of the term.
Myself, I suspect he's trying to overdefine the term out of usefulness. Sort of like a lot of folks do with 'realism,' though that word at least has an alternative in 'verisimilitude.' (Yes, I'm making fun of myself a bit there.)

I did probably overreact in my first post, but I was having a bad day.

If I came across as overly harsh, then I apologize, although I'll mention I didn't call the OP a moron, I just said you (or your character if you were roleplaying) were acting like a moron if you just attacked the guards outright and complaining that it made everyone hostile.

As MackieStingray pointed out, attacking town guards is usually a very bad idea in any game unless you actually want to slaughter the whole town (even then I'd say it's a bad idea, never understood the appeal of virtual massacres myself, even if I want to be evil, I'd much rather play a manipulative bastard than a psychopath).

Do note also that asking for help about a quest while loudly complaining that the game you want help with sucks is unlikely to attract much goodwill from the forum's users who are most likely fans of the game.

Speaking strictly for myself I was mostly satisfied with the amount of choices and options I got in Arcanum.
Of course there were times when I felt limited, when I wished I could take a course of action that the devs didn't think of, but show me any game where that doesn't happen.
Ultimately developers have limited resources to work with and can't implement everything possible, and Arcanum goes much further than most RPGs in trying to give you choices, imo.

As I've mentioned before, I first played Arcanum years ago and it was one of the first RPGs I played that had any open-end-ness. I had been raised on Final Fantasy and the like, and while those are fun, they are quite linear. I was amazed on that first quest where I could actually talk with the wizard who cursed the "monks" and learn that they were actually bandits and instead of killing the wizard, help him. That blew my mind to learn that I could do the complete opposite of what a quest initially told me to do. So to say Arcanum isn't open-ended just makes me scoff, but I stayed out of it when things got heated here as I tend to either:
A. Be that annoying person who mediates and says, "Let's all get along."
B. The one who makes a comment so cynical and rude even the people who were upset at the person acting like a jerk feel bad for the guy.
I was leaning toward B, and kept my mouth shut.

Well I just wrote a long response...but I guess it bugged and didn7t post....frustrating.

Anyway I never wanted to solve the problems of the world or whatever.

I just talked the guy into surrendering and when he got gunned down my party (without my prodding) went bloodcrazed killing everyone, even teh orcs, and the journalist attacks us too.

So taht was the issue.

i went back to try and make something happen where it didn't involve me killing the orcs (doesn't work for my character concept).

Itried INT pots but doens't work. So for whatever reason this are my ONLY options, even with intelligence

1. Ignore the scene/quest alltogether (considered it bugged?)
2. Kill the orcs....doesnt work for character concept
3. Trigger a chain of events which involves me killing everything in Taurant.

At this point my character is strong enough ,as is the party. I have no issue killing the guards. They have some nice guns but I have no techies (magic party, I don7t really like steampunk atall) . I got Chukka na Sog and am a half-ogre myself. With Virgil and Dante to heal us, pretty easy to slaughter anything and everything.

But I don't watn to slaughter everyone. I just want to not kill the orcs. If I can't kill the guards, fine. If I am not smart enough to save the orc from death...fine. I just don7t want to aggro on EVERYTHING.
Not sure if I am replying to the right person, I got 5 or more jumping in.

I had a long post I made which didn't post...I messed something up.

Anyway having different strategies to achieve the same goal is different than having different goals.

In arcanum some goals and outcomes give fate points, others do not. Different outcomes give different items, amounts of experience etc. Some quest chains totally break if you take a certain path.

This is really what I am saying makes it not open-ended to me. Its like the difference between having character options and having BALANCED options. Giving peopel class/race etc. options which are gimped, is, to me and many gamers, the same as only giving them one class. Only the options which are of equal depth etc. as the primary option are valid options.

So if of the different paths you can walk (in terms of outcomes, not methods of achieving teh outcome) if they are not all of roughly equal length and do not all lead to an equal endgame...then they are not equal options, and there is one true option. Its more like a bunch of fails.

That is my perspective on it anyway. We don7t have to agree of course.