Fiaryn

Sawyer is a little bit of an RPG snob/elitist. Over the years I've noticed a real tendency for him to look down on and subtly (or not so subtly) insult people who are real dedicated D&D enthusiasts. He seems to act as if being into obsure RPG systems means he's more knowledgable and a superior gamer. He's basically a pen&paper hipster. If you're referring to this post I think you're misreading it. He directly states that he has played, and enjoyed, pretty much every single edition of A/D&D. He is stating the people who are invested in the edition wars of D&D, specifically, are a group of people who tend not to play any table top RPGs other than variants of D&D. Which is generally true. Or, you know, it's a stereotype of a large and diverse group of people whose only commonality is being nerdy enough to argue about a particularl game system that is particularly important to them. It doesn't actually say anything at all about what other games they play. Not a thing. Just that this particular game system is important to them. I argue like ****-all about Star Trek, but you can't judge *anything* about what other fiction I enjoy based on that. Same here. It's Josh Sawyers personal opinion, based on his assumptions about people who play D&D. Note that while Josh says he's played every edition of D&D, he also says he's enjoyed other games far more. He's a fan of D&D, but he's not a *FAN* of D&D. He's played it as part of his general interest of playing RPG's, and enjoyed it. It's not his favorite, and he'd rather play others. He specifically points out flaws in D&D as reasons for doing things certain ways in PoE, as well. Look. I don't know Josh. Neither do you. We're both making assumptions here based on what little we know based in interviews, forum posts, etc. All I know is that Josh Sawyers body language, mannerisms, statements, and complaints in the past have led me to the conclusion that he is the kind of RPG player I've met in the past who vaguely looks down on people who play D&D regularly and tries to get everybody interested in this new obscure system that nobodies heard of instead. You can see some of that in the interaction between him and Null in the video today. Clearly the two get along, but there's a little bit of real ****-eating in Josh's smile when he turns to Null and says "And what about your favorite system?" and there's a little real hesitation in Null--a little stammering, a glance at Josh's eyes, etc.--before he starts to discuss (reluctantly) his love for 3.5. You can tell this isn't a new conversation and it's not a topic Null is eager to pursue again. That kind of thing, little hints like that. Can I prove any of it? Nope. Not a thing. Just my thoughts. Doesn't even matter, anyway. You seem really upset about Sawyer citing a general trend that, as the term implies, while being generally true also by definition does not describe the entire playerbase. There is a reason why people use qualifying statements like "probably" (the one he specifically cited) and "generally" and so forth. Large populations do have attributes that can be summarized, on average, while allowing for the fact that individual variation does exist. Concluding that he looks down on people who enjoy D&D is unlikely given that the guy puts up Instagram's of him BSing with coworkers over a game of 3.5 D&D. In a word: Chillax. No, I'm not really upset about anything. I'm having a discussion about something with somebody. You see, this is why I don't talk to people. Also: Weasel words do not a free pass make. Qualifying words and phrases are important for delineating the limits of knowledge. Especially useful when discussing large groups. While we're on the topic of subtle word choices though, did you know that despite stereotypes and generalizations being theoretical synonyms, they have very different connotations? For example, one typically chooses to use stereotyping over generalization when one is offended (rightly or wrongly). One might open a post with the use of stereotyping due to feeling as if one's personal tastes and preferences were being unfairly "put in a box" as it were.

Sawyer is a little bit of an RPG snob/elitist. Over the years I've noticed a real tendency for him to look down on and subtly (or not so subtly) insult people who are real dedicated D&D enthusiasts. He seems to act as if being into obsure RPG systems means he's more knowledgable and a superior gamer. He's basically a pen&paper hipster. If you're referring to this post I think you're misreading it. He directly states that he has played, and enjoyed, pretty much every single edition of A/D&D. He is stating the people who are invested in the edition wars of D&D, specifically, are a group of people who tend not to play any table top RPGs other than variants of D&D. Which is generally true. Or, you know, it's a stereotype of a large and diverse group of people whose only commonality is being nerdy enough to argue about a particularl game system that is particularly important to them. It doesn't actually say anything at all about what other games they play. Not a thing. Just that this particular game system is important to them. I argue like ****-all about Star Trek, but you can't judge *anything* about what other fiction I enjoy based on that. Same here. It's Josh Sawyers personal opinion, based on his assumptions about people who play D&D. Note that while Josh says he's played every edition of D&D, he also says he's enjoyed other games far more. He's a fan of D&D, but he's not a *FAN* of D&D. He's played it as part of his general interest of playing RPG's, and enjoyed it. It's not his favorite, and he'd rather play others. He specifically points out flaws in D&D as reasons for doing things certain ways in PoE, as well. Look. I don't know Josh. Neither do you. We're both making assumptions here based on what little we know based in interviews, forum posts, etc. All I know is that Josh Sawyers body language, mannerisms, statements, and complaints in the past have led me to the conclusion that he is the kind of RPG player I've met in the past who vaguely looks down on people who play D&D regularly and tries to get everybody interested in this new obscure system that nobodies heard of instead. You can see some of that in the interaction between him and Null in the video today. Clearly the two get along, but there's a little bit of real ****-eating in Josh's smile when he turns to Null and says "And what about your favorite system?" and there's a little real hesitation in Null--a little stammering, a glance at Josh's eyes, etc.--before he starts to discuss (reluctantly) his love for 3.5. You can tell this isn't a new conversation and it's not a topic Null is eager to pursue again. That kind of thing, little hints like that. Can I prove any of it? Nope. Not a thing. Just my thoughts. Doesn't even matter, anyway. You seem really upset about Sawyer citing a general trend that, as the term implies, while being generally true also by definition does not describe the entire playerbase. There is a reason why people use qualifying statements like "probably" (the one he specifically cited) and "generally" and so forth. Large populations do have attributes that can be summarized, on average, while allowing for the fact that individual variation does exist. Concluding that he looks down on people who enjoy D&D is unfounded given that the guy puts up Instagrams of him BSing with coworkers over a game of 3.5 D&D. In a word: Chillax.

Also there's a certain brand of "D&D enthusiast" who probably should be subtly looked down upon. A game system is a tool at the end of the day. Nothing more, nothing less. It does not deserve tribalistic loyalty or devotion.

Sawyer is a little bit of an RPG snob/elitist. Over the years I've noticed a real tendency for him to look down on and subtly (or not so subtly) insult people who are real dedicated D&D enthusiasts. He seems to act as if being into obsure RPG systems means he's more knowledgable and a superior gamer. He's basically a pen&paper hipster. If you're referring to this post I think you're misreading it. He directly states that he has played, and enjoyed, pretty much every single edition of A/D&D. He is stating the people who are invested in the edition wars of D&D, specifically, are a group of people who tend not to play any table top RPGs other than variants of D&D. Which is generally true. It is possible to enjoy a thing, in his case D&D, while still preferring another thing. This is especially true of table top RPGs which are largely a social experience, and that social experience can easily trump the (enormous) design flaws of whatever game system is being utilized.

Yes. As boring as possible. The design goal for PoE2, I think you'll find, is to accurately recreate the properties of oatmeal in digitized form specifically with regards to Fighter. You might not think that oatmeal can be rendered down to 0s and 1s, but just you wait.

So I'm trying to prep my final save for PoE2, and the one sticking point I'm having is the finale of WM2. I'd like to temper Abydon but frankly I'm not sure if I can anymore. I get that you need to make two rhetorical points that stick in each category, and I've got the Eyeless to concede the point on history as hindrance and memory as pain. The sticking point is Maybe Abydon Should Forget. I can make the point about Durgan's Battery because I freed the souls but then I run aground. Aloth is anti-Leaden Key so that avenue is out and I sided with Animancy at the hearings. Has anyone who's looked through the code on that dialogue tree any idea if there's other approaches I could take that I just can't see? Some other triggers I could use to make the last point I need?

Also Pallegina is legally male, which is why she was allowed to join the Brotherhood of Five Suns. I get the impression that she's a little pissed off about that actually. Close, but not quite. Godlike are legally genderless. It doesn't matter if you're overtly male or female, as far as society is concerned your lack of an ability to reproduce makes you effectively genderless and unfit for marriage.

I'd generally agree with this. There were earlier posters who felt rankled at what they perceived to be a narrative meant to attack the premise of religion as a whole, but I believe there's a solid argument to be made for the core narrative being about rejecting dogmatic traditionalism, rather than being anti-theist per se. The Gods are real, but their origins are falsehoods. What's so interesting about it all is that though the Gods are effectively unbelievably complex magical AI, they have long since defied their "code". Aside from Woedica, none of them really give much of a damn about animancy. That's Thaos' crusade in particular. Thaos is the old guard, the arch-conservative who no longer represents the faith he claims to champion. The very source of scripture has evolved and left him behind, as has the world at large. Thaos: Old Man Yells At Cloud.

Side bar notation about that poll. You could only vote for one person. Shocker, Eder won by a land slide. If the poll was a "rate them one to ten" affair I assure you the results would have had Grieving Mother and Durance way further down. Can't necessarily agree. Durance may be an awful person but that does not reflect on him as a character. I think most people, correctly, recognize that being a deeply flawed, even repugnant individual is part of what makes him compelling as a piece of character writing. Some characters should make us uncomfortable.

Honestly, I'd say it's more headache than it's worth and a waste of development resources. I'd rather emphasize making each class fun to play and feature dense in its own right. At a maximum, I'd like to see 4E style multiclass feats where you pick up a knack or two from <insert class>, as is the case right now.

It is entirely possible that Eothas is still alive, merely dormant. They are ultimately nothing more than incredibly powerful rampant AIs made out of a crap load of souls. While I have little doubt that the Godhammer hurt him, I doubt he is gone. Would not be surprised if PoE2 involved rebooting him with an Engwithan Machine somewhere. Edit: Part of why I'm inclined to doubt his death is that well, the most likely current explanation for the Godlikes, I feel, is that they're Souls that helped comprise the Gods that have been shed through entropy (the natural splitting of souls seen in mortals) over time, warped by their time as a component of a deity. If Eothas was dead, truly dead, I would expect an inexplicable surge of Radiant Godlikes or what have you.

I don't know why anyone would care about backer NPCs. They're color coded for your convenience to ignore, and some of them have nice little Sensory Stone like stories. They're irrelevant and if the next patch removed them from the game I'd hardly notice.

Having not played the game since launch, I'm eager to have another go at things come White March Part 2. I see that much has changed and, in particular, my favorite class has gotten much love in the form of Spiritshift actually scaling worth a damn. Also Perception actually does things worth mentioning now, what a crazy world we live in. I'd welcome any advice for making a strong Druid that makes as much use of Spiritshift as it can get away with in this scary new 3.0 world. I'm not aiming to do a PotD run but I like to be effective all the same. Stat distributions, spiritshift choice (stag? bear? cat? who is driving?), what's competitive these days?

I can confirm all of the above works like a charm, although the StartQuest part does not appear to be necessary. The next quest started for me, ages ago before I even began this topic, automatically when I entered Defiance Bay interestingly.

Quite likely. Only reason I knew anything was wrong was comparing experiences with a friend.

Not having the conversation with the soul

Sorry Matt, I made the post originally because I only learned I was in a pickle long after I was in a position to do something of that nature. Will the 1.03 have any means of redress for those of us who are in such a situation?

Reywind: Out of curiosity, were you kiting Maerwald out of his room before killing him when the bug occurred? Because having started a new character to test it out, that seemed to be the common factor for the bug happening to me.

This sadly does not apply, as I've long since completed the quest. What we'd need to fix it is some kind of command to force the conversation with Maerwald's soul but if that's even possible, I have no idea.

So I've discovered, many many hours after actually having this fight, that after killing Maerwald a dialogue was supposed to trigger with his soul and I was supposed to have the choice to set it free, bind it, or absorb it. Unfortunately, nothing of the sort ever happened for me and I just went on my merry way having no idea. How can I fix this? Is there a flag I can mess with via the console or...?

Their condemned behaviors are Stoic and Cruel. There's nothing stopping you from being Rational. Clever is celebrated behavior, as is Passionate, but that does not mean you can't be more than that.

One of the few times I've seen actually genuine "choice" and persuasiveness successfully implemented in dialogue, in a real sense, was in Arcanum: Of Steamworks and Magicka Obscura. The conversations with the King of the Dwarves and the Bedaakan Chieftain are verbal minefields in which what in other games would be the obviously correct choices don't cut it. Cheap emotional appeals are insufficient. You have to actually understand their cultural frameworks and appeal to them on their terms.

Thats actually one of the theories. We have evidence that we lived together with them on occasion and that there was interbreeding. Maybe we just had too many babies for them to keep up. Actually thats a good reason for the reason we have so many races living together in this setting. Sex is a pretty gigantic drive, you could argue that a large percentage of human achievement is based on the desire for sex. There is no limit to the amount of things that people will do to get laid, climb mountains, build skyscrapers, pretend to enjoy club music etc etc. Imagine you are a human dude or dudette just trying to live your life, blacksmithing it up or whatever. You're busy with your career and don't have time for kids. But hey, theres this whole town of elf cuties just down the road who you can bang as much as you like with no risk of pregnancy. That's pretty huge! Right. With Homo Neanderthalensis, the question is one of degrees. Was their extinction primarily because of warfare, or interbreeding? We can never know and it hardly matters because the most likely answer is "yes".

Lets not go all revisionist history here. The interactions with Jaheira, Viconia, and Aerie are pretty brain dead. You typically have four or five responses to their romantic overtures. All of them except one will be obviously 'wrong', in that they're assholish or dismissive for no real reason. It's like a minigame to discover if you have even the slightest modicum of social awareness, not so much a triumph of roleplaying.

A caveat to my general distaste for romances in videogames: I think where the concept really falls apart is when it's tied to a game like this. What I mean is, I'm not sure it's really even possible to create a believable romance that doesn't feel like cheap wish fulfillment when one participant in said relationship is completely under my control in words, deeds, everything. Games where the actual characterization is out of my hands tend to feel more natural, because the writer isn't having to account for the million things I could do. Which, naturally, they can't. Your interactions with the character tend to occur in this sort of down time vacuum whereas your actions out in the game world proper have minimal impact on the progression of the 'romance'. It's a hard thing to put into words.