Lord Vicious

Version 1.03.0526 - steam: The bug with adventurers' voicesets disappearing is not fixed. I don't know whether this is the "hotfixed" version or merely the "patched" version (what happened with posting full version numbers in updates?), but my Steam client was on auto-update. Haven't checked the lockpicking bug yet, but the voiceset bug is extremely annoying and 100% persisting. It removes any possibility of hiring new adventurers other than your first full party, because all new ones will have no voices AND the ones you swap via Stronghold will also lose their voicesets. Really hoped Obsidian fixed this in 1.03, but apparently not.

That is just pathetic. Wizards have indeed been nerfed to crap. There is absolutely no point in playing one at the moment, they are inferior to the more powerful classes in basically every way. And even more - they are a CHORE to play, because they are still burdened with the drawbacks of Vancian spellcasting, despite having lost most of its power. Maybe things change at levels over 8, but Obsidian in their wisdom have decided to not include these levels into the Backer Beta. I only hope their internal beta-testers blow the whistle on this. Otherwise, Wizards will go down the drain on release, which would be a pity since Sorcery is half of the Sword & Sorcery genre. Whereas now, Rogues and Fighters rule all with their pointy sticks.

Whoa, you're right! How stupid of me to miss it. Now I can make a firing squad with 2 fine arquebus and 1 fine arbalest rogues. Good fun.

Where did you get a fine arbalest in the beta? In fact, we need a list of all prominent items currently in beta, with their locations.

Maybe it's magic. Or rather, a minor miracle performed by one's deity (or manifested via religious fervour, whatever floats in this setting). And if you really want to pursue this logic, then you should start with Might itself, which affects damage from all sources, including "mechanical" ranged weapons. Perhaps treat it as an increase in skill with all damaging implements. So that you handle your arquebus better and are more likely to hit a vital part.

The new build is up, dude, please release the Editor

Completely pointless. Remove all of this. And add kill XP.

It looks like +1000 accuracy is only applied to the spell's own targeting, so that it never misses, and the only effect for the duration is the 200-point stasis shield.

Sent it, check PM.

That is awesome! Please upload ASAP! Also, can it get around the annoying level cap? I would really like to see the higher level abilities and finally give my wizard a decent selection of spells rather than 1 per level.

Thanks for the response! Updating save loc is not that big a deal (we can manually copy saves to and from the old location), but updating the core functionality (e.g. editing of gold, xp, attributes) would be very welcome. People like me who to experiment with custom parties would higly appreciate that, I am sure. And after the postponement, it's a long way till we see a final version. Might as well amuse ourselves with the beta in the meantime, right? But it's your call, of course.

Fiebras, the fact that you only ever played clerics as "boring healers" in Infinity games is not the games' fault. The options were there, you just chose not to use them. In particular, you completely ignored the multi-class/dual-class mechanic, which together with self-buffs and offensive spells (including epic spells) could turn a priest into an engine of destruction. A Half-orc Fighter/Cleric was an awesome character. You've also ignored the priest kits, some of which (e.g. Priest of Talos) added a very interesting taste to the "boring" class. In PoE, however, priests feel lackluster compared to the classic CRPGs. The same can be said of all other classes, though. My overall feeling is that PoE is shaping up to be not a thoroughbred reincarnation of the old genre, but rather an unfortunate cross between a classic party-based CRPG and an Action RPG like Diablo. And as we know, a jack of all trades is master of none (which is why bards suck).

Where are the mods you are talking about? It would be really great to have a simpler way to make a custom party right away, and awesome to move beyond 8th level. So please share! P.S. Thanks for the awesome writeup on the Rogue! P.P.S. Are you planning to write about the Wizard? Interesting to hear your opinion on this class, which so far apparently gets the short end of the stick in PoE.

I played the same Baldur's Gate as everyone else, thank you very much. BG1 was almost a complete sandbox, with the player being able to visit almost every location right out of the box, and the rest after just a few quests. To get to the city you had to progress the storyline somewhat, but that was not a big deal. BG2 was so big, that its "free - roam" Chapter II was basically like an entire game. And with mods like Big World that united the two games and their add-ons into an almost seamless world, the sandbox effect was definitive. Again, it's not like 100% sandboxes like TES or Fallouts, but there was a high degree of sandbox gameplay in the BG series. And in some ways it was even better than TES, for instance, because the latter suffered from generic environments, whereas everything in BG was unique. Now, I do not understand this "objective" talk. My character's objective is to become powerful and rich. (I'm pretty sure that's the dominant objective for many - if not most - of the human race). So doing something that makes him more powerful (getting experience and loot) and rich (getting loot) is his greatest "objective". Yes, he can do a stupid Fedex quest or save some pointless damsel in distress. But he'd be just as happy (in fact, happier probably) if he could get experience and loot also by ushering loot-carrying creatures - be they monsters or NPCs - towards oblivion. Why should I play rat exterminator in a smelly basement when I can ambush the guard, cut his throat and take his weapons, armor and money? Hunting guards is a much more interesting challenge than hunting rats, and something I really enjoyed doing in Candlekeep as a Fighter/Thief, or in Vivec as an Ordinator Eliminator, for example.

This game is being marketed as a successor to the Baldur's Gate series and other classic CRPGs, is it not? I'm pretty sure that the basic expectation that most of us share is "give us something as good as BG". Games like "Dead State", for all their merits, are not like classic CRPGs. They function on different principles. There is no need, IMHO, to make PoE into one of those games, when it should be a modern implementation of the classic CRPG genre. P.S. Otherwise, you are making a lot of great points that I agree with.

What kind of logic is this? So winning at something is now a "purely emotional/ego" goal? So great sportsmen or chess players are doing it only to "stroke their own ego"? So a person who wishes to succeed at something is just an "emotional egotist"? With this logic, basically every human activity can be viewed with disdain. Including "bestiary filling" or any other "pursuit of objectives". Remember, friend, that this is a game. The purpose of playing a game is to win and enjoy doing so. How is winning a fight not an accomplishment? Particularly if it's a difficult fight that could get your entire party killed? And how winning fights is different from filling bestiaries? It's the same "activity" - killing creatures you encounter. And it's the same "accomplishment" - you get rewarded for killing these creatures. The only difference is that the "bestiary approach" artificially limits the player's opportunities to get these rewards. That is, instead of being able to get 1000 rewards for killing 1000 creatures, the player can only get 10 rewards for killing 100 creatures ("10 of each kind"). Once the player gets these 10 rewards, there is no more incentive for him to continue fighting the remaining 900 creatures. Which automatically decreases the playability of the game, since "fighting creatures" constitutes a huge part of it. Not to mention, it ruins the immersion and makes "sandbox" gameplay unrewarding.

BG 1 and BG2 were very high on the "sandbox" ladder. Not quite up on top with Fallout and Elder Scrolls, but player freedom was extremely significant. In the Enhanced Editions (which incorporate ToSC and ToB), and especially in umbrella mods like Big World, this is particularly evident. Once out of the initial "dungeon", the player was free to explore an enormous world, do a huge amount of quests in any order, and kill and loot many enemies. In fact, exploring BG1 and BG2 in this "sandbox" manner was absolutely awesome - and it was made possible, to a large extent, by the kill xp and loot system, that actually rewarded the player for independent actions outside the main plot line. Removing this kind of incentive takes a lot of fun out of "free roam", and makes the game more dull for everyone.

Also having the same issue. No save games are loading. Actually, this problem appeared during the previous beta (which caused me to drop it, along with the other fatal bugs like inventory).

Killing an opponent is a very specific "objective". Killing any opponent is bound to give you *some* experience (mostly depending on the difficulty of the fight). I absolutely do not understand this bias against "kill XP". If it's what many players want, why not give it to them? How would it lessen game enjoyment for other players? This is like arguing against loot drops (which is also something I absolutely cannot comprehend). The only explanation coming into my mind is, ironically, the same that explains the "no bad builds" concept and the oversall diminishing effect of player strategies on game outcome (like decreasing stat importance etc.). That explanation is as follows: The developers are in fact catering to the "lowest common denominator" and are making the game more casual. By decreasing the effect of player actions (such as build strategies or getting bonuses from winning fights) they are making the game "streamlined" so that a "good" player does not enjoy significant advantages for playing the game better than "mediocre" or even "bad". Hopefully, this is not the case and we will get a game where our actions do matter, and not just a rollercoaster from point A to point Z that is the same for everyone.

Someone over at the codex said that they're not implementing dropping items on the ground because (a) it makes the save/reload system much harder to implement and (b) it's not needed anyway because you can drop everything into the stash. I am sorry, what? All Infinity engine games and the Fallout games could do this 15 years ago, yet now "it makes the save/reload system much harder to implement"? This is crazy! Yet another sign of how this game doesn't manage to live up to the great RPGs of old. And furthermore, dropping items on the ground doesn't have anything to do with getting all the gear from the NPCs you kill. The loot can go straight to your inventory if the engine can't handle item drops. This is just a weak excuse for robbing players of their loot, which in turn is a lame cover-up of inability to balance the game properly.

Are you planning to update your editor to v.301? Because I'm sure a lot of us would appreciate the continuation of this great project!

Thanks for the prompt reply, link sent.

After editing party member names and gold, the saved game does not load.

This is pure awesomeness. Please add the ability to edit party member portraits and appearances. That's about as close as we can get to a fully custom party until the "dismiss party member" function is added or the "party member death bug" is fixed.

There were useful helmets in Baldur's Gate. The Helm of Balduran comes to mind, and some others offered substantial bonuses as well. Plus all helmets gave added protection vs. crits. That made them useful mechanically, and made the game more immersive. Helmets are not a decoration, they are a part of the armour, and so must be relevant in defence. Making them an empty fasion statement is just another step towards "consolization" and overall simplification of gameplay, which is exactly what a classical CRPG revival should be AGAINST.