Jerm

May I know what is the impact of having multiple treasure cards or cards opened from treasures? For example if I have 10 smiths and just 1 orb of fire, when I start an adventure, will I have less of a chance to get the orb than the smiths?

It's most definitely I lost the weapon along with the nice deck I built for Merisiel. There is no other merisiel when I filter for experienced. That's a bummer, hours of time spent wasted unless there's some way I can get it back.

Yes you are right. I can verify that. Problem now is merisiel 2 found deathsbane +1 and I dissolved that party already. Now how do I get back the weapon? The inventory system seems like a mess. Obviously I'm missing something here

Okay, I added the same merisiel, so I gues the deck will be shared and any changes will affect both?

question what happens when i have merisiel in 2 different parties? when i adventure with the other and tweak the deck, does it also change the deck of merisiel in the other party as well?

I chose a wrong stat reward for a character. How can I 'reset' the character and reassign the point?

Sorry didn't quite understand the math part.. The conclusion is its better to spend real money on the bundle and use gold for cheats or the other way round?

I have just recently read again the definition of banishing a card. It says you banish it from the game and you do not get it back after your scenario. I take this to mean the card is gone from the game. What happens if you banish way too many cards until you don't have enough o start a game

Thanks for your tips! I'll get to it right away! I wish the enchantment could be deeper instead of only 1 quality, 1 stat, and 1 slaying type...Maybe a talent that could put more unique enchantments?

So I've been holding on to bloodstones, Adras, and whatever you need to enchant items in the hope of finding the best weapon for my 2 handed druid, sword & shield Eder, Arquebus Kana, Staff Durance, and Hunter with a Bow Sagani. I've been tempted to put on some enchantments but I can only do some of them once (due to lack of ingredients). There's always this lingering fear that once you put the enchantment, the next adventure you'll pick up a better version of the item you just enchanted. My question is when do you choose to enchant your gear? And what level of enchantment are you comfortable to freely enchant onto most of your items?

Agree with this. Seems people are wanting to make a mountain out of a molehill for fights that you can door block not more than 10 times in the game. It's not about what you did, it's about what the optimal thing to do is. And in any fight in which you can door block, you should door block (if you want to play "right"). That's just dictated by the current mechanics of the game and encounter design. Do you want to play a game in which you know exactly what to do whenever things get too hard? Or do you want to play a game in which you have to thoughtfully consider what you need to do in each encounter? The fact that the game doesn't "force your hand" (i.e. force you to play your best) even on the hardest difficulty is another problem entirely. But I digress... I don't door-block much either, myself. But that's because I find it boring, not because I've found a better strategy. When door-blocking is possible, there is not a better strategy. Same thing with the other thing I complain about all the time, the Estoc. The Estoc is the best 2H melee weapon in the game, and its only shortcoming (piercing damage) is made up for by the Poleaxe (its sister 2H weapon in the weapon focus). If you want to play a 2H frontline melee weapon character, and you want to do it well, the Estoc is the best choice. Period. And I hate that. I want meaningful choices, not the choice of "right" or "fun". As you said, since the game doesn't force our hands and you chose to digress, thereby fighting without the door block strategy, you let yourself play in the most optimal way (without door block strategy of course). You still get to play in the most optimal way. I personally am okay with it. I find it a legit strategy and I enjoy doing so. Door blocking in certain situations is the optimal way for me. I don't really see a problem. The fights aren't so very difficult we have to door block to win them. If I see a bunch of ranged enemies, of course I'm going to adapt by doing a bit of kiting if the space allows. If there are tons of heavy hitting melee, of course I'm going to fight at a choke point if a choke point is available. Most importantly is that door blocking isn't 50% of the fights. It isn't even 20%. Its a non-issue imo.

1. they already do. been hit by both druid and mage spell aoe, as well as barbarian shouts. 2. they already do. I have had rogues "escape" to the back of my party to stick the mage who just tried to cast "slick" on them but was too slow. 3. they already do. shades summon shadows, and they can teleport. though on this one, you're right about summoning in general. there actually are very few summoners in the game, and very few summoning spells in general. 4. had that fight. "the dweller" is EXACTLY that kind of fight, with greater earth blights acting as tanks for the dweller, who tosses giant boulders at you and squashes your entire team if they are standing too close. 5. they already do, Ive seen barbs doing their buff yells and their priests casting armor and bless. more would be welcome though. point is, all of this stuff already IS in the game, the reason you don't notice is that indeed, there could be more of it. also, ranged attackers don't tend to penetrate even weak DR for some reason, even when they have crossbows. my archers, OTOH, seem to do quite well. but really? it actually really does look like the level designers had planned for people to mostly use the chokepoint strategy for mobs. if there were only two things I would suggest, it would be making more open areas to fight in, or more access in indoor areas (so enemies can more easily get around behind you in a doorway), and mainly.... increase sight range. the first would actually require redesigning a lot of levels, so that's unlikely. the second would start to encourage people to lay down webs and things to slow attackers from rushing you, thus making open fights more viable than using chokepoints all the time. example... web. web in this game has a much smaller aoe than in most other games, and only hobbles instead of stick, and hobbling really doesn't slow things as much as it should, so by the time you finish casting it, enemies are already on top of you. with a longer sight and cast range, you could cast this at the edge of your vision, and actually have it make a significant impact on enemies trying to rush you. anywho, yeah, the combat could be improved quite a bit I think, even without level redesign. all the needed features are there, they just need to be utlized better. Yes they already do have that, but half of the fights you mention happen in an open area. Not at an area where you can choke them at a doorway. Anyway, the gist of my post is to make is so its not so disadvantageous to the AI and in some cases even advantageous if you decide to choke them at a doorway with the few points I mentioned above. Later on they can mix up the combinations of hostiles that you have to decide if you want to choke and face a certain AOE or skill, or to fight in the open and have another enemy who excels in open spaces wreck your team.

Absolutely awesome for me too. I love this kind of games. BG/IWN like please. Just add more ridiculous battles like versus Dragons or a Lich that continuously casts 1 hit kill spells. Don't do DA, KOTOR type stuff. Its too arcade like.

We shouldn't be punished for using good strategy, in this case using the terrain to our advantage. Its part of the fun of the game. The issue isn't the strategy as your post suggested, but its how the AI deals with this strategy that makes it seem easy. What could be done is: 1) AOE spells by some enemy types 2) Teleporting skills of rogue type enemies 3) More minion summoning to harass your backline 4) Have a similar super tank low damage minion backed by strong range creatures. 5) Have more buffing enemies that make give their guys good region and DR. Having one or a combination of one of the above would greatly change they way you choke at the doorway. Ultimately, its still fun as you have to adjust to the different enemies.

Yeah, I find that the combat log shows too much info in too short timespan. The difference is because combat resolutions no longer happen at the same time as like in BG, so the updates just keep filling up nonstop.

You had to offload your entire arsenal of spells to kill 3 Xaurips? Wow, what difficulty are you playing at?

BG1/2/TOB player here. Definitely having to adjust to this camping supply system. I'm not thinking of any mods or anything, but just trying out the system (eg. not trying to run back to inns, and stuff). Playing on Hard btw. With camping supplies, I find myself doing a bit of planning before venturing out, and decisions definitely have to be made as to whether to rest or take on the next fight at 50%. I find this whole aspect really fun and its also true to a role playing aspect. No one can still fight a 100% every battle, and we shouldn't expect it. I take it like a gauntlet, as each fights gets tougher and you decide if you can proceed further or that's the limit your party can take. Sometimes I even fight with one of my tanks maimed and standing behind shooting arrows just to push myself. Winning those battles are really satisfying. There are going to be easy fights and tough fights and the fun is saving spells for the tougher fights while trying to make it through the easy fights relatively unscathed without using too many per rest abilities. Well, if you screw up during a battle, the result is having to run back to the inn to rest and refill supplies. I find that fun in itself in the RPG element. I don't find that boring. If resting was easily available, almost every fight would be at 100%. You lose all the other elements that make and RPG fun. Might as well be like Final Fantasy fights.

I cannot for the life of me understand what people have against a Respec option. The point of it being an optional feature is that people who dislike the idea can either turn it off (if it's in the Options menu) or simply elect not to use it. Why would you deprive those who want a respec option of it, just so you have the ability to not use it ? It being an option, by definition, allows you to not use it. Refusing that it be implemented outright however, preserves your ability to not use it while also preventing all those that want to Respec from doing so. Your current stance takes away from others, while not giving you anything. I refer you to the whole lot of BG2 players who refused to play Kensai/Mage, or to use Celestial Fury (or both \o/ ), because that was game breaking. That's the whole beauty of it, having the ability to refrain yourself from using these, while also letting people have fun their own way. Hell, you could even get an achievement for not respeccing in your playthrough ! Haha i was one of those Kensai/Mage with Celestial Fury and Silver Sword mind you... I feel respecing kinda takes away from the immersion of the character you are, the interactions you've been through, etc. That is entirely my own opinion and feeling. To justify my feelings would be some might take advantage of respecing, just before a scripted interaction or a conversation and reallocate some points into certain perks, to get past it etc. Having your character fixed and any growth made permanent adds to that element of you are who you are in the game, mistakes or successes wherewithal. And just who are we to prevent these people from ruining their game experience ? Hell, perhaps that's how they enjoy playing the game, respeccing at every corner just to get past a single dialogue. And the worst part is, people kill the game's replayability for themselves this way, because they spoil the surprise of "what if I'd had 15 intellect ? bonus item ? more gold ? come on there had to be something... oh god I'm picking 13 intel next time, inn + food buff and I'm so finding out". But then, that's their life to live and their game to play... Did none of you exploit the enchant/alchemy loop in Skyrim ? Make a 100% chameleon armor set in Oblivion ? Savescum on Gaxkang until he drops Fade Wall in DAO ? Make an Arcane Warrior and solo the whole game, until they patched the shield to turn off at 0 mana ? Use potions of speed to kite Drizzt around while your team pelts him with arrows for roughly 5 minutes ? Reroll your BG2 stats for 53 minutes to get that perfect 18/18/18/18/18/3 ? (yes, you can, you can even get 18/18/18/18/6 , which is a waste of time because the Ring of Human Influence boosts you up to 18 cha). Pickpocket Kangaxx before he turns hostile to get 2x Ring of Gaxx ? Cheese your way through ToB with a Kensai/Mage ? Drop roughly 20 traps around Firkraag to one shot him ? Cast Projected Image with your sorcerer, then Immunity: Divination, then cast spells all day, exhausting the image's repertoire instead of your own ? I could go on for hours but the point is it's up to one how one wants to play. Besides, the question in itself is moot, someone will come up with a respec mod (or a save editor) if the option isn't included in the game. Devs may as well do it correctly, integrate it with the world's lore, and possibly set restrictions (prohibitive gold cost, limited uses -which basically achieves the same- , achievement for not respeccing...). By the way a game comes to mind where respec was actually natively included (well, DLC-natively), and although I've been exceedingly disappointed by Dragon Age 2, including an official respec option allowed me to test ranged rogue vs melee rogue, without having to replay the whole thing. Which, believe you me, I never would have been able to stomach, but I digress. Edit: Oh btw there's also a native Respec option in Divinity Original Sin, however flawed it may be (losing all your spells and abilities and having to find/buy them again, the horror...). they might as well play a sandbox game...there should be a reason a game is made and certain design choices (to include or exclude) to adhere to the vision of the game. If I need to respect endlessly to enjoy my game, I shouldn't be 'entitled' to this every game I play because that's how I want to enjoy the game. The devs would go crazy if everyone had their way and we probably wouldn't get a pretty refined article in PoE. Personally, I played BG 2, four to five times over, and enjoyed every single play through (that's me). My point is we can't have our cake and eat it. Haha, on the other hand, exploits are another thing. I love games like PoE, where it isn't sandboxed. A system is in place. Mechanics are there for players to work within. I am exploring ways to push the limits of this mechanics or system, discover OP combos, builds, even exploits if possible. That is the fun for me. Its up to how one want to play but still within the system designed.

err...jealousy no?

what no way I deleted all my games in preparations for this so I have no distractions haha what? let me send you some FB games invite..haha

anyway, the patch is coming in a couple of days...I'm sure most of us have a game library that is more than sufficient to keep us busy for 2-3 days...

thanks lightzy...so when's your patch coming?

I cannot for the life of me understand what people have against a Respec option. The point of it being an optional feature is that people who dislike the idea can either turn it off (if it's in the Options menu) or simply elect not to use it. Why would you deprive those who want a respec option of it, just so you have the ability to not use it ? It being an option, by definition, allows you to not use it. Refusing that it be implemented outright however, preserves your ability to not use it while also preventing all those that want to Respec from doing so. Your current stance takes away from others, while not giving you anything. I refer you to the whole lot of BG2 players who refused to play Kensai/Mage, or to use Celestial Fury (or both \o/ ), because that was game breaking. That's the whole beauty of it, having the ability to refrain yourself from using these, while also letting people have fun their own way. Hell, you could even get an achievement for not respeccing in your playthrough ! Haha i was one of those Kensai/Mage with Celestial Fury and Silver Sword mind you... I feel respecing kinda takes away from the immersion of the character you are, the interactions you've been through, etc. That is entirely my own opinion and feeling. To justify my feelings would be some might take advantage of respecing, just before a scripted interaction or a conversation and reallocate some points into certain perks, to get past it etc. Having your character fixed and any growth made permanent adds to that element of you are who you are in the game, mistakes or successes wherewithal.

Ditto this^ Some areas are just transition areas to the main maps where real things occur. In BG you also had these transition areas but they had some quests you could pick up there, or some followers, or even some epic battles to be had in there. Remember Dritzzt anyone?

Being a BG player, I'm a fan of buff before combat. There is still restrictions on number of casts/rests, so you still have a tactical decision on whether or not to buff. Skill is also involved in the buffing process as buff in this game last 30 seconds at most. Compared to some spells that last 10 turns or 8 rounds + 1/level of caster in BG. So you can't buff like crazy and then head into battle like a superhero. You can probably stack 2, 3 at most, and head into battle, and even then, the first buff would expire when you engage the enemy for a bit. I don't see how buffing before battle would break or make fights underpowered. I feel it add a layer of decision too. In a role playing sense, it fits perfectly too, to have a priest give certain buffs right before a battle, rather than waiting for a fight to break out.