BlackAdder

I would prefer druids if shapeshifting was like that: 1. Toggle between the forms at will, no timed duration - it's pretty underwhelming to run out surrounded by a bunch of enemies. 2. Scale to level to keep it relevant for the whole game - now it's super powerful at the beginning, lame soon after. 3. Disable spell casting while shifted - maybe with a longer shifting cast time, definitely not instant. You'd have to waste some time transforming, so it wouldn't be very clever to switch back and forth at a drop of a hat, and you'd have to choose what would be more appropriate to the situation, spells or mauling. As it is right now I just don't like it. Note: I didn't vote. The choices are deceptive. Even if someone is happy with the current iteration, would still have no reason to vote 'No'.

Do you really believe that with the current attribute system you can mechanically represent the characteristics of a companion? In a game where the best wizard is a world-class weightlifter and acrobat and the best tank is a wimpy oaf with a keen eyesight and unwavering determination. In every RPG system attributes are an abstraction, but in PoE it's an abstraction of an abstraction. It's beyond silly. In other games, even when the system offers me a totally useless dump stat, I don't go to very low range due to RP reasons. But the way PoE is setup... well, I have no qualms when I see those 3s.

If you click on the line it will expand to show the individual hits in detail. It is kinda busywork in case you want to have the breakdown, but it makes the combat log tidier in most cases that you don't care. What bothers me is that the description doesn't specifically say when the massive damage is applied. If someone doesn't know about the low endurance thingy, someone gets very different expectations about the spell.

Heh, I was actually thinking the same thing when I wrote that about shadows. Glad I wasn't alone. But we are still playing a game in the end and there's simply has to be a way to fight your adversaries or there's no point in playing. If the reason why you can hurt those shadows is consistent with the game world, it's enough, even if it requires a slight suspended disbelief (ex. they are semi-corporeal and through brute force you can destroy them but not restrain them by tangible effect). As for the fire vs fire thing, I do think that it refers to the means one uses to address a situation and not to the nature of the one addressing it, ie in a threat of violence use violence instead of diplomacy etc. It would be strange indeed to try to put out a fire by lighting up a bigger one. Finally I'd like to point out that I'm not too hot for an all out rock-paper-scissors kinda system. I actually prefer a mix of hard and soft counters. Taking D&D as an example there are the specific hard counters (protection from petrification) and there the broader "soft" ones (bless, protection from evil). As long the counters are not too narrow (for one ability or spell only) or too broad to become god mode, it's much better than what we have in PoE. As it is now I sometimes feel more like an accountant doing spreadsheets than a powerful mage weaving mystical powers.

The first time I fought shadows in the temple of Eothas I assumed they would be unfazed by knockdown, since they are supposed to be incorporeal entities. Little did I know. Maybe you don't care about such trivial details, but to me that game-ist approach to everything was a quick path to ruin any shred of immersion. Everything works on everything might fly in a MOBA or a MMO where you want all your players to be constantly on action. In a game that proclaims rich world-building, immersive storytelling and giving a whole party at player's disposal, that's just lazy and unimaginative design. Also the second scenario described in the OP doesn't apply in the IE games. I can think of exactly one situation where an enemy had immunity to all but one source of damage and there you could just weather it out until it cycled to the appropriate weakness (the chromatic demon in Watcher's Keep). Most other strong enemies had an immunity or so that was well justified by their nature, but nothing that would stop dead any class or build.

“demisexual genderqueer Muslim atheist” You have to appreciate a funny troll, I certainly thought it was amusing.

On one hand I wanna go "NOOOO mah ex-pees!". On the other it's rather nonsense to have the current behaviour.

I'm very unimpressed with the whole of combat in PoE and even more with how awful the attribute system turned out to be. But I have to admit that the way they handled accuracy is both original (to my knowledge) and beautiful. One has to keep in mind that accuracy is not just chance to hit, as in most games. Is both hit *and* crit. The higher the different to the target's deflection, the bigger the chance to get criticals is. It's a fantastic way to keep accuracy relevant beyond the necessary "minimum required" and not make it a total waste above that point. So it is rather clear that ANY class would benefit immensely from godly amounts of accuracy. Thus it's a bad idea to associate an attribute with it. The whole other system is rather misguided though, with the muscle wizards and closet-built priests and whatnot.

I wonder the same, but given how eagerly Josh "Balance" Sawyer jumped on the case I doubt that the, implied by many, choice was actually real. What's even sadder in the whole incident is that the specific memorial was one of the few that fit the game's setting in mood and wasn't just a backer's opportunity to express their hilarity and wit. Still, the new one is not bad either, so at least there's that.

Would be useful if they turned level 1 spells to per encounter at level 5 or so and Eldritch Aim had much longer duration. As it is you'd have to save your spells for the important battles and I can't see battlemage being more useful than a spell slinger mage at those situations. Pity, really, I love battlemages too. They don't seem to be useful though, apart from a proof of concept kind of way.

So... "I'm not going to comment on demonstratively proven lies and intentional misinterpretations because I'm on her side." Well, that's a reasonable stance if I even saw one. How progressive of you!

I have to agree with OP's take on druid. When I initially picked one I was hoping shapeshifting would be a much more pronounced feature. My dissapointment when at level 3 I shifted and saw *all* defences go down was immense. I'm thinking 3 things would make shifting a valid class feature: 1. Toggleable at will. 2. Disable casting when shifted. 3. Form's defences added on equippement. (specific numbers tweeked accordingly of course) That would allow for a more valied role in party, to plug holes in cases of emmergency but never approaching the effectiveness of dedicated classes. The way it is now druids are another variance of wizards.

1. No, they don't stack. I tried with the corresponding shock talents and it made no difference in the extra on-hit damage. 2. I haven't tried on a druid, but I'm well expecting those talents should boost spell damage. If anyone can confirm though would be best.