Something to think about for the next kingdom come game

This is something for warhorse to think about, when the next kingdom come is made if it is going to be made ,something i would like to see would be an option to be able to carry on from the first game ,your levels you keep and the levels get raised from 20 to 40,
with this you can add more skills with in the skills we have,for example combat you can do better moves and look more like a professional fighter.same goes with your items they carry over to the next game.
kingdom is a great game its a game that i will always play over and over again .
if the next game comes along and your skills are reset and your items don’t follow over it would make you feel like you have gone backwards.
more in depth story and larger battles even siege wars taking place would by far make kingdom come 2 the best medieval game on the market.
as part 2 will be the journey going to another area new castle ect,it would be great if the original area rattay and all the other areas of part one is still in part two .a nice reasonable long story and missions to do in the new area that your travelling to but to then return to rattay continuing the relationship with thressa and all the other characters in the game.

1 Like

No, absolutely disagree. What makes a game? Start as a noob and become better after time! Not start as an already powerful fighter!!! That would be boring. I want to have everything, skills, armor and weapons lost! Start as a noob again. I even don’t want an option to import the skills from the first game.

Start as a noob and become better after time! Not start as an already powerful fighter!!!

Actually @savioursaint makes a good point. Think about it; you’re entering a new map entirely, with much better trained enemies, and most likely horse combat will finally be added. If you start as a brand new Henry, you’ll be completely walloped by knights, Cumans on horseback, and probably mercenaries will be more rampant due to Sigisumund’s invasion

1 Like

Where is the problem to start as a new Henry who get walloped by knights? Isn’t exactly this what’s the goal of a RPG? Starting with low or no skills? Where is the sense to play a game when you are already a strong fighter? That’s like playing a racing game and start with a Lamborghini. That’s why all games are boring! Developers forgot about what makes a game interesting. You should start with slow cars or with a weak character and become better by playing the story. I hate games where you are a super hero who can kill everyone. I like it to get killed by everyone. Henry is a nobody. A simple son of a smith. He’s not a rich lord.

Prior to the sacking of Skalitz, yes. After sacking Vranik, no.

Depends on what WH capabilities are whether there’s ample opportunity to grow and develop


As long as the intro missions have a multiple short paths, one to get new players up to speed.
if there a limit to your equipment or just something that temporally relives you of some of it.
Lets say we get cut scene ambush by some bandits , head smacks a rock and your horses are stolen.
There’s a quick mission with multiple paths, and ways fr you to learn the basics.

(how much stuff can you carry on your horse anyway?) an a good reason to

No matter what Henry is AFTER the game. What makes more fun? A new game where you start with all his skills maxed out at high level, with his best armor and weapons? Or a solid new game where you have to start from zero as it should! It’s absolutely laughable to discuss that. Do you use cheats in other games to start more powerful, to give you some extra skills? Why do people think being a strong hero makes more fun? I say the fun is to WORK hard and long to become strong. Not being strong from the beginning! Play Batman if you want a strong super hero.

It’s not a new concept. Some of my favorite games from the 80s had the option to continue with an endgame character from a previous game. If you were a new player, you played as intended. If you were a continuing player, it opened up new solutions and storylines to reward you for being a longtime supporter of the series.

Hell, even the Witcher series has carryover saves that influence the storyline.


Enabling a player to become a Gothic like super hero is a fundamental problem of RPG design. Honestly hate Cuman killer and other such perks. Open new paths of development. Create new challenges and there’ll be more than enough fun.

Witcher, Dragon Age, etc

1 Like

In Gothic you are a weak nobody, not a super hero! If you mean the end, this is not the topic, because we are talking about the game beginning! And I think you understand a lot wrong. You can’t import an end game character from a previous game, only story related decisions you chose in previous game were applied by an imported savegame in The Witcher 2. You do not start as Gerald the super fighter! Gerald was arrested in prison and lost all his armors and weapons! And he was lying on the ground, lost all his skills and memories. He begin at level 0 again!

You end Gothic as a super hero. Yes, it is the topic. It’s absurd that you intend to play a realistic RPG such as KCD and then end up a Cuman killer and such via OP perks. No needed to start off anew when you have to use technique to kill instead of OP perks.

What do you want from me? In Gothic you end as a super hero, yes. And in Gothic 2 you start by zero again! This is what this topic is about! So I don’t understand what you want.

I believe you missed what I meant.

Henry starting as fresh as he was in KCD in KCDII would make no sense. He has trained these abilities. He has no reason to suddenly lose all this knowledge (unless via coma)

That being said, as of now at Level 20, Henry can beat bandits, but most likely of KCDII he’ll have to face mounted opponents who would kill him if he started fresh, versus Level 20 Henry (to KCDII, Level 20 would be akin to Level 1, while Level 40 would be KCD Level 20) Henry this way would start with knowledge of how to fight, but not of mounted combat which is where the core of his bastard noble lineage would be focused to. Sir Hans would already know how to fight on horseback, Henry would not, thus adding the difficulty of lances, arrows, polearms, as well as much more chaotic combats.


They could make the intro sequence of KCD2 where bad things happened to Henry. He got blessured, in coma, lost all his money and all his experience. It’s even hard to get back his combat practice! So he has to learn from new.

Do we really need Henry for a KCD 2? I mean, with the perspective to show Hussite wars, why to focus on certain bastard and much less epic story ~15 years prior? Hey, Hussite wars. Legendary leaders of protestants, crossbows and firearms massively used, ability to kick asses of knights from half of Europe.

That’s the million dollar question. If yes, makes no sense to lose all the training/XP. If no, makes sense to start anew

That’s contrived.

1 Like

That wouldn’t be fun, KCD 2 is to be act 3, which means it’s a continuation. Now it wouldn’t make any sense to just suddenly lose the abilities. Why did you otherwise spend much time to learn combos, to learn perfect block etc. just for it to be lost in the next act? The way OP says it sounds alot better, Henry already has some acquired skills but knights would be better by far, not so far that Henry is like a peasant.


I’d say, Henry could be a side character, BUT, with mechanic, similar to Woman’s lot - side missions about him and his adventures, well, selected episodes of such. Like, how he took part in saving the king, or found killer of his parents and got his revenge. Well, stuff like that.

Tricky part is - different players already have different headcanon about “who is Henry” as a person, warrior and etc. Mine is chaotic neutral rogue, not favouring direct approach or honourable combat. Ambushes at night, slaying throats of sleeping people, poisons, arrows from the dark. Sure, he can kill a person in a fair duel, but prefers other ways.

But I’d assume, most popular way among players is still knight in the shining armour. So, architecture of such side missions should be either extremely flexible, or establish certain canon (which solves the problem, but only for part of players).

This is also part of problem of using same character in the sequel. Like, ok, we make him not a wimp at the start, but… well, Henry in the end of the game can be different Henry, when it comes to skills.