Hellraiser789

And it does make sense to hire a "rogue" character. They are a sketchy lot who tend to do anything for money....

Just because something has been done before doesn't make it bad.... But I do get where you're coming from. Just wish they could've found a way to include one. Also, granted my RPG experiences may be limited, but I haven't seen too many games with Barbarian or Monks....Although, yes, they can be very stereotypical, but thats not a bad thing. Heck, Minsc was, for all intents and purposes (and should've been IMO) a Barbarian and everyone loved him.

Personally, would love to see them add a Rogue, Barbarian, and a Monk NPCs in a future expansion pack..that'd be awesome. And if they wanted to add even more NPCs, that'd be great too, although unlikely IMO (3 more NPCs is already almost a 40% increase from the original so...) But totally agree - Rogue NPCs have been getting the shaft for awhile now, sadly.... Poor Yoshimo.

I haven't played the game yet, but it seems that you are completely fine playing the game with the given companions, they are just not optimized. However, I do have to agree that if their stat choices don't make sense and don't actually contribute to dialogue, thats kinda....meh. Yeah. for RP purposes, maybe the stats are fine, and quite possibly they work well. However, I really hate the argument that the NPCs should be weaker just because YOU are the main character, and everybody else is "just normal folk" so don't have high standards 'kay? .....That's just....no. This isn't Skyrim or a game where only your character matters. You get to control all of them anyway, so just assume you win every battle because youre a good tactician or something if you need an ego boost. The companions SHOULD be unique and do things the PC cant. There were so many times where I was like, damn Sarevok just saved my party, or thank god for Minsc's berserk, or how useful it was that Edwin got more spells. There's nothing wrong with companions that might outshine the PC in combat here or there - you are a party of ADVENTURERS, not an army of 1 with sideline bakers and merchants. If they can't pull their freaking weight in combat, get the hell out of here. And for anyone who says you'd would accept whatever aid you can get and it doesn't matter if they are good or not, would you send a child out to fight demons and ghouls and such just because they want to help? No! You'd say sorry, this isnt for you, and leave them behind in their village. Adventuring is dangerous business and the NPCs should reflect that or maybe they shouldn't join you. If you can't take that one or two characters might somehow, occasionally, be better than your PC, just because you're the main character, thats just having the devs stroke your ego. I LIKE when companions are unique and useful, especially when they can do things my main cant. it makes them more memorable and just plain awesome to have around. Granted, it seems you can play the game quite fine with the current companions' stats, so maybe they are fine. But wanting them to maybe be a bit better or wondering why the hell they were built the way they were built DOESNT mean min-max everything. I think @Rjc showed that great with his graph - just slight tweaks to make them more useful. Although, I am all for companions that have stats you can't get, but I think the little tweaks are fine. Personally, I wouldve like for you to level the companions up yourself so you don't have to beeline for them at the beginning every single time, just seems stupid to me- if you want them to have specific abilities/talents/etc, make those abilities automatic bonuses, and let me do the rest. I loved the KOTOR games because they let you increase stats as you leveled up, and you got to level up each character yourself, if you so chose, AND the NPCs came with cool unique feats and stuff. And those companions were unique and not OP at all, and you were practically the center of the universe in those games (of course, by the end, the main character was so OP that nothing mattered, but that was fun in its own way). Would've loved to see something similar here, but this game seems great regardless, so I guess its fine. Anyway, sorry, rants over, just throwing out my opinion.

If I had to guess, I would say a lot of the major gaming forums probably are having similar conversations, although from what I've seen, its been mostly like ours - most people aren't really offended by it and think its ridiculous. I'd say the opposite is mostly on twitter and their own personal website/blog sites. You could dry digging around for the links in this thread if you are really interested, or you could just google "Pillars of Eternity transphobia" and I am sure something would come up. If your interested in who started it, try googling "Pillars of Eternity icequeenerika". That aught to get you something.

I mean, Baldur's Gate 1(+Expansion) was probably about 40-60 hours, maybe more for brand new players? And they said that PoE was supposed to be closet to that in relative gameplay and level-wise (I'm pretty sure). Baldur's Gate 2 (+Expansion) was probably like 50-80 hours, depending on how much experience you had. And thats without replay value, which these games tend to have a lot of. Plus, I mean these games can take a lot more, depending on how much time you put into learning the lore and whatnot through books, etc. So really depends on your playstyle, but if I had to guess I'd say those hours are reasonable. So probably 40-60 hours for PoE, although it'll probably take more if you include getting used to the new systems and learning about all the lore and really exploring the world. Also, level 12 might not seem like much compared to games like Dragon Age now-a-days, but for BG1 the max was like 8-9 and that still had plenty of gameplay and hours to it. Then in Baldur's Gate 2, you started at 8ish and worked your way up to around 18-20, then around 35-40 with the expansion pack. Supposedly, PoE is meant to be more like BG1, while a future game would potentially be more like BG2 (if I recall correctly, someone correct me if I am wrong.) Like others said, level-ups tend to be more meaningful in these types of games. Quality over quantity, that type of thing lol. Trust me, if PoE turns out like BG1, you'll be exploring a deep, rich world and taking it slow will just make you appreciate it more. Have fun! Glad to hear you enjoy it!

And that's kind of a shame really. Something this relatively small shouldn't mean that LGBT content should never be included in games. It just means that maybe this isn't the game for that (doesnt fit designers' image maybe?), So its kind of a shame that some ridiculous extremists on twitter get to screw everything up for everybody else. But, I guess thats how the world works, so we should just accept it right? ~sigh~ Why can't people just be reasonable? Some people tried to be reasonable, Totalbiscuit tried to be start dialogue about on this Soundcloud https://soundcloud.com/totalbiscuit/pillars-of-transphobia The result from the always offended crowd was as mature as you could expect, they started two hashtags one was #Shutthe****upTotalBiscuit and the other was #ShutUptotalBiscuit. Aslo Katherine Cross from Feminist frequency show called him a "transphone of the highest degree" and Leigh Alexander formerly from Gamasutra also attacked him. Now people like Alexander basically live off donations from her followers, she needs to stay relevant through scandals to keep getting money, so it's up to you to decide if they are really allies for justice or just people trying to turn any little thing into a big scandal to stay relevant themselves. Can't say your wrong. I half-listened to TotalBiscuits dialogue, and didn't really find anything offensive, and it seemed like they (the twitter people) really took a lot out of context (wasn't paying that close attention to be honest). But I'm not saying that I agree with icequeenerika by any means. That whole twitter group is just insane IMO and shouldnt even be worth anyones time. But, obviously some people HAVE been offended, and I'd like to think they aren't ALL unreasonable morons who blindly follow #killallmen. Some people on this forum and others have brought up legit concerns about why it offends them (whether everyone views it as legit or offensive is irrelevant - they do, so thats enough IMO). So whats wrong with compromising and making it optional? Doesn't force anyone either way, and as long as its made clear that the devs only did it because they dont want the backers' content to reflect poorly on them or their vision for the game, I dont see it as an issues. That way, if anyone has a problem with any of the dev's actual content, well then they simply shouldn't play the game. Its Obsidian's game and reputation, and their lost profits - realistically none of us are actually financially reliant on this game so...the choice lies with the devs. Just my 2 cents though.

And that's kind of a shame really. Something this relatively small shouldn't mean that LGBT content should never be included in games. It just means that maybe this isn't the game for that (doesnt fit designers' image maybe?), So its kind of a shame that some ridiculous extremists on twitter get to screw everything up for everybody else. But, I guess thats how the world works, so we should just accept it right? ~sigh~ Why can't people just be reasonable? But they don't speak for the entirely of that group of people. There are LGBT that are perfectly fine with it, some have even posted in this thread stating such. And when you look at the histories of some of these objectors, they're largely just looking for stuff to get mad at. So it makes little sense to pander to them. Especially since it opens Obsidian to more harassment to pressure them to change other things. There are distinct cons that are quite possible here, and standing up to bullies who try to force developers to change their content (be it from them or their backers) is something that should be the norm. I understand that they dont speak for the whole LGBT community, but obviously it offended more than just a handful of people. And its not removing it for EVERYONE, just making it optional... At the same time, I can't argue about your second point. It COULD potentially open them up to having to potentially make any and all content ANYONE finds offensive be optional. Which would just be ridiculous and stupid, especially considering the darker and grim nature of the game. My only argument would be that, because its specifically backer content it could be made optional (as its not necessarily in line with the devs' vision of the game), and if people are still offended or want to make changes, then this just isnt the game for them and they need to accept that. Just my opinion. I'd like to please as many people as possible, but I do understand your point, as I agree that, for ME, its not really even an issue or even worth mentioning, honestly.

Because its not ONLY crazy people like #killallmen that have a problem with it. Yeah, theyre the vocal minority, but obviously there are members of the LGBT community who don't appreciate the joke being in the game. PLUS there's already people who want to see the backer content made optional ANYWAY. Two birds one stone. As to why you would do it and what you'd gain - profit. Potentially, there are LGBT consumers who are so offended by this they dont want to buy the game (a bit excessive IMO but to each his/her own). Also, does it really detract from anyone's gameplay by making it optional? Not really. Where's the hurt in giving them that? Makes the LGBT community happy and doesn't (shouldn't) offend the backers (or anti-censorship folks). Just trying to appease everyone isn't a bad thing when there's really no detriment or harm in doing so. I'm not really sure how I could provide you with "evidence" that it was transphobic. You've seem it the same as I. If you want, I can provide you with my reasoning. First of all, I don't think that the poem was necessarily intended to be transphobic. I can't really speak to the author's intent. However, I do find that the most obvious interpretation of it would be transphobic, and that's why I applaud Obsidian taking it out of the game (assuming that's what they're planning on doing). The pertinent lines of the poem are these two: The last woman be bedded, turned out a man and crying in shame, of a cliff he ran If we read it at face value - he had sex with a cis man who he thought was a woman, then it doesn't make much sense. Why didn't he notice the genitals differing from what he would expect? I mean it's not impossible or anything, but it seems like the author might have elaborated with some sort of explanation if this was the case. The other, transphobic, interpretation though, is fairly straightforward. Firedorn had sex with a trans woman, realized it after the fact and ran off a cliff in shame because he considers trans women to be men (and having sex with men is suicide-level horrible, apparently). The reason that this interpretation seems more likely to me, is that it doesn't seem like it requires elaboration to make sense, and that the situation of having sex with a trans woman unknowingly is a fairly common trope. Disclosure - the idea that trans women have an obligation or at least really ought to inform all their sexual partners that they are trans is a common topic in the public discourse. Hell, there's even a Trans Panic Defense occasionally used by people who commit violence against trans people. In this cultural context, the transphobic interpretation of the poem seems to me the more likely, and that's why I favour removing it from the game. Especially because I don't see it as in any way integral to the developer vision, so I don't see this stifling Obsidian's creativity in any way worth mentioning. As far as I can tell, they only mentioned that they would look into it. Not that it was getting removed necessarily. Also, from my perspective, and many others apparently, I didnt even CONSIDER that the guy slept with a transgendered person. I just figured he got drunk and woke up in bed with a guy and killed himself because hes an idiot, or the shock, or whatever; basically he overreacted and the joke was meant to be at his expense. There was no bashing of the guy/transgendered person he slept with or any violence against them, just a joke at the man's (Firedorn) expense because he died stupidly because he overreacted. Thats how a lot of people interpreted it. Transgenderism (?) didnt even cross my mind, and probably didnt cross a lot of others peoples mind either. However, I can respect that you might interpret it different (as you've stated), and think itd be fair to make it optional. But removing it completely for everyone? Especially with all of the darker and sinister things that happen throughout the game? I think that's a little excessive for a little limerick joke, especially when it has no impact on the main story and is already completely optional to view.

You could always just not click on it. It has its own icon and everything. I mean you gotta give them something - meet halfway and call it done. Obviously it offends some people so whats the harm in making it optional? To absolutely refuse any kind of compromise is just stubborn IMO. As much as I agree its a non issues, others think it is, so IF something is going to change, it should just be made optional. There - problem solved, everyone should be happy. But by no means - do NOT remove it. Worst thing that could be done at this point. It would just further encourage radicals and anger people who dont like censorship (or what they interpret as censorship) and offend the backers who donated so much money to the project (and were the actual target audience in the first place....) Compromise is good, and perhaps necessary for Obsidian to get themselves out of a bad situation.

I can't believe this has been going on for 24 pages... Honestly, can't see how this is an issue. Its a dirty limerick - they're actually pretty common in literature, music, history, etc. I might be wrong, but I think there were similar tombstones in other games, including BG1/2. Also fairly common in classic literature (Canterbury Tales anyone?). Although I could be recalling wrong on both accounts, but either way, I'd say its not the first or last dirty limerick I will read/hear about. Also, its pretty vague. As others have mentioned, it doesn't offer nearly enough evidence to support that anyone involved was transgendered. Being a man? Yes. But not necessarily transgendered. Here it is again, just cuz I find it funny and relevant to the current conversation. Also, I think it fits in with the setting PERFECTLY, and do not mind its existence in the slightest. "Firedorn Lightbringer Here lies Firedorn, a hero in bed He once was alive and now he's dead The last woman be bedded, turned out a man and crying in shame, of a cliff he ran." Plus - its a dirty limerick and a joke - is it REALLY that big a deal? Are we going to cancel the game, demand refunds, and bash a game company over THIS? of all things? REALLY? I just don't get it. And the argument about the person who started all this - maybe she should reconsider posting #KillAllMen or whatever if she wants to be taken seriously. Otherwise, I will view her opinion as a joke and dismiss it as such - similar to this limerick, actually. That said, if the LGBT community does find this to be offensive, I don't think offering a patch to make the backer content optional is a bad thing. In fact, from what I heard, many people would like this anyway, as they find many of the backer-supplied content to be out of place, so I think that would be a pretty reasonable solution, personally. Asking for more or less is just pushing the agenda, and I can't really support that, as it would really screw over Obsidian one way or the other. (Don't support LGBT community vs Don't support Kickstarter backers == Lose/Lose)

And, more relevantly, they've forgotten BG1 - an 80 hour game where you can count on 1 hand the number of magical weapons that offer anything other than a simple to-hit and damage bonus. Nothing other than Modern RPG conditioning/brain washing can explain why BG1 never got bashed for its "boring" loot itemization, while we sit here and watch PoE getting raked over the coals for it. Um. I don't think you played the same BG1 the rest of us played. Either that (and more likely), it's a bit easy to forget what a game released last century (seriously) was really like. But as I said before, while I don't necessarily agree with the OP, I do think Josh failed in his goal to make variety a viable option. Regardless of what he may have intended with the design, padded armor still sucks. Daggers vs stiletto is a no brainer in favor of stiletto. And whatever cloak throws the most defensive buffs on you is the right choice regardless of class. I would actually agree with Stun... there were NOT a ton of magical weaponry in Baldur's Gate 1...at least when compared to more recent games, or even Baldur's Gate 2. More than one hand, certainly, but usually like only 1 or 2 per weapon type, tops (aside from arrows). I'm not including things like Battle Axe +1, +2, etc, because they really didn't offer any real special effects.

Can anyone confirm what changes have been made to the Godlike's abilities? I know someone mentioned Sawyer was giving them a buff on release day and I was wondering what it was, since the Wiki hasn't been updated and no one mentioned it (that I'm aware of)

Anybody play Kotor 2? I liked how they did crafting in that game. You couldn't craft anywhere - only at workbenches and you could only craft things if you had the appropriate skills. Of course there were a ton more skills in that game, but this could be an opportunity to add more non-combat skills to the game due to the fact it was just delayed. And you never really felt the item-use paralysis because you could always make/buy the necessary components, so using them was never THAT big a deal, but when you came across an awesome component you were like "sweet!". I think if they simply made it so the absolute best equipment were unique and could not be crafted, while you could craft really good equipment that would last you the game, it just wasnt the best. That would reinforce the uniqueness of legendary weapons but still let you feel like it was worth it to craft good stuff. Might be cool to have enchanter/blacksmiths who would be willing to sell you blueprints so you could make the items on your own (blueprints would cost more and require appropriate skills). This way you could pay the smiths/enchanters to make it for you, or just buy the blueprints so you can make it as many times as you want.

A good AI would be awesome! Sadly, most games have terrible AI. Therefore - if its not good, cut it. Unless they are absolutely sure theyve managed to make a good reliable AI, it shouldnt be there. Also, either way it has to be something we can turn on/off. Nothing worse than having your commands ignored because of the AI. Yea, hopefully thats just a bug and theyll fix it soon.

I like randomness. It keeps things interesting. Its one of the reasons I love Borderlands. Since everything is random, you can play it 100 times and its still great. Not that this is borderlands, but you get my point. I think introducing a bit of randomness doesnt hurt. I mean, dont make it obvious like Im going to reload and open this chest 100000 times until I get the Ultimate Sword of Luck +10 (thatd be kinda cool...) but a little bit of randomness can go a long way I think to help replayability. TES games had it too, where you were never quite sure what monsters would show up or what loot you would get. I kinda liked that. I remember my brother was playing Morrowind and went to a city and found an awesome sword. So I spent hours trying to get to that city, checked the box, and there was no sword. Man was I disappointed. But then I found some cool armor, so it was all cool. Point being - randomness is cool.

I know its not super intuitive, but I think its fine. Its not great, but I think it works. Like Azrael and a few other people said, if theres 2 master swordsmen, each with equal ability and skill. And lets say they have exactly the same stats except Swordsman A has 18 Intellect and Swordsman B has 5 Intellect (So really smart vs really dumb). Who do you think would win? It would probably be pretty evenly matched at first, but eventually the smart guy would think of something to give him and edge in combat. And why ISNT kicking sand at your opponent deflection or intellect? Because when you think of deflection you think of actually deflecting an attack? This isnt a simulator - not everything will be super realistic or have each and every possibility named. They just kinda lumped all that stuff into deflection. Just think of it as tactical thinking or something like that. Its not necessarily "O Im good at reading books and Im brilliant and stuff" its NOT intelligence from DnD. Its similar, but in PoEt its supposed to be logic and reasoning, not memorization and braininess. Just my opinion. If my wording came off a little strong, I apologize, it wasnt intended to be aggressive.

What the hell are you ranting about? And if you don't see the point of the two of us arguing, why jump in the thread in the first place and join in with the argument? I can never understand randoms jumping into threads complaining about two people arguing and then joining the argument. FAIL. Also, the OP hasn't said he got the information from Matt Chat. Where the hell did you get that from? Go and do some reading before ranting like a fool. Better yet. Dude you cant even keep track of your own argument! I was obviously referring to your comments against Lephys. Here, Ill quote them for you, since you cant seem to remember them: Start Quote < Hiro: What do you mean 'I dunno'... Ah the denial drips off your post like sweet butter. What game was planned for release in May or June? DA:I? I'm not talking about DA:I and the release date getting put back for that game. Also May is Summer in America? Does it not include July and August? Are you still in denial that last year, a Project Director mentioned a Summer 2014 release for PoE? Well after the KS had ended (2012) and the game was in full development. Also, sounds like you haven't watched the Matt Chat. Keep avoiding those questions and living in denial Lephys. ----Here you talk about how a PD mentioned a SUMMER 2014 RELEASE! Lephys: I didn't have to watch the Matt Chat. The release date was listed as "summer" ever since the Kickstarter ended. Then it was later changed to winter, and explained that the change came after the re-evaluation of the project's extent after all funds raised and stretch goals, etc. ------Here Lephys says that the release date has been summer since the kickstarter ended. It was LATER (not 2012) changed to winter to accommodate the stretch goals and additional funding. Hiro: hahaha. Just as I suspected. Haven't watched the Matt Chat and talking out of your arse again. Also, the release date was listed as "Summer" when the kickstarted ended???? LMAO. Where did you pull that from??? Because the release date was NOT listed as Summer when the Kickstarter ended. And it wasn't re-evaluated after all the funds and stretch goals were in when the Kickstarter ended from a Summer to Winter release in 2012. It was never mentioned as a Summer release in 2012 at all. Another thing you've pulled from the air. Keep making that stuff up. And you are in denial. Even going as far as making up stuff. ------Here you then say that the release date was never summer, even though you had claimed THAT EXACT thing earlier. Your poor comprehension skills caused you to think that he was talking about 2012 (obviously he wasnt). And you haven't accepted the OPs claim that PoE originally had a planned earlier release date. Specifically a Summer 2014 release not when the Kickstarted ended (that you claim which is entirely false and made up) but nearly a year into development after the Kickstarter ended, when it was mentioned last year in 2013 by a dev. So what we have here folks is Lephys admitting he hasn't watched the Matt Chat, making up stuff about a Summer release date when the Kickstarter ended in 2012, when the money and stretch goals were in, which is false. And then dodging and weaving by bringing up irrelevant stuff like CoD? LOL. Keep living in denial. It doesn't help your argument when you make stuff up Lephys. It makes it worse. > End Quot He was obviously talking about how PoEt was pushed from an April 2014 release to winter 2014. Not DA:I like you seemed to think - No idea how you jumped to that conclusion. Then you were claiming that he said something about the game supposed to be released in 2012 after the kickstarter finished. He didnt say anything like that. He said that after the kickstarter campaign ended, the devs decided to push the deadline back to accommodate the additional content and stretch goals. http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2014/02/12/winter-is-coming-pillars-of-eternity-pushed-to-end-of-2014/ and guess what? THATS NOT FROM MATT CHAT IS IT? How about YOU do some reading? Your comments make it seem like you dont read any of the posts and that you just want to rage and spout nonsense because your feelings were hurt or some other nonsense. You obviously didnt read Lephys's posts and you obviously didnt read mine. Or if you DID read them, your comprehension skills are terrible. And the only reason I jumped in is because your little argument was taking up half the freaking thread. Plus you were being super aggressive and acting like an *** even though you were just ranting and didnt make any sense. If you were actually having a discussion, that wouldve been different. I had no problem with the OP voicing his concerns. But you were just ranting about how Lephys needed to apologize to you because you got butthurt over a couple of his comments. So next time you decide to argue with someone, do some reading of your own and actually READ WHAT THEY POSTED!!! If you dont, youre going to continue to sound like an idiot because your comments make no sense. Also, I see no correlation between delaying the release date and rushing the game. If they were rushing the release date, they would NEVER push that date back. That makes no sense. Period.

And no, you aren't right about anything about the release date. Vertical Slice? LOL. Some posts here and there? LMAO. Way off base. Keep clutching at straws. You have no idea and it shows. keeping living in denial. Yeah I've watched many movies and know how it ends too. So what's your point? You have none. But you do acknowledge the OP is right with the 'little known fact' that the release was going to be before December? You do acknowledge the OP is right with trying to avoid releasing the game at the same time as DA:I? Do you acknowledge these facts and the OP is right? If they were willing to push the deadline back, wouldnt that mean they ARENT trying to rush it? Not that the OP's concerns werent valid, but I dont see why you guys are arguing. You are saying the same things then yelling about how the other person is wrong and then calling each other names when you cant prove a point. And sure, DA:I probably played a big role in their reasoning to push it back (Say what you want: The audiences for DA:I and TW3 are going to overlap with this game. Its fantasy RPGs. Sure theres a little variation, but still....) Does that mean it was the ONLY reason? No. They probably decided they werent ready and so pushed the deadline back. Do I feel the devs are rushing the game? Not really, no. Am I concerned? Yea slightly. But Im sure the devs know what they are doing. Just have some faith in them. Also, who CARES about whether he got the information from Matt Chat or someplace else? I dont even know what the heck Matt Chat is and I can tell you anything you want to know. Its called Google. Information is everywhere, not just on one particular site. Thats how the world works now.

I like grazes. I think they are cool. Kinda seems more realistic and gives you something other than Hit. Miss. Hit. Hit. Miss. Seems like a good idea to me. And was randomness really THAT much of a factor in Baldurs Gate1/2? I remember when I first starting playing (mustve been 12 or something) I had no idea what 2d6 meant but just looked at damage and descriptions and went from there. Figured 2-handed swords would do the most damage (i.e. BIGGER = BETTER! YAY MINSC!) and just kinda rolled with it. But I wasn't a combat junkie either, calculating all the combat stats and stuff (at least not til I got older and understood the system haha). And to base hows the biggest fan off of how many times you played it or specific pieces of the game or "loving the whole package" isn't cool. Everybody took away something a little bit different. THATs probably the reason why everyone loved it. It was unique, you felt connected to it, it had a good story, and it was FUN. That all wrapped up = great game. Doesn't mean we need a copy and paste of all systems or anything. I loved them, but they can always be improved, and personally I look forward to trying some new stuff. If everything was exactly the same, it wouldnt be boring per se, but new things can be good, you just have to give them a chance. And if you don't like how the system is, offer some ways to improve it, or just wait until the game is released. Right now, everything is liable to change, so if you want a clear-cut, obviously finished game that has great mechanics and playability, you should probably just wait until its released. YMMV though.

Honestly, I have no idea. Anyone got any reasoning? If I had to guess, I'd say soul strength or something. Didn't make a lot of sense to me, but personally I don't care about the small stuff. I just want a nice, good, old-fashioned game, that I can enjoy and reminds me a bit of the IE games and has a great story. Other than that.... The Devs can do whatever they want. Hahaha

I think people are way too hung up on DnD rules. Just because Intellect seems like the same thing as Intelligence, it doesn't mean that it is. They even called it something else! Its a different system, so yes, things will be different. In DnD, yes, Intelligence = memorization and studying and books and such. But in PoEt, INTELLECT means critical thinking, problem solving, and being able to think quickly and make decisions faster (i.e. Battle Tactics, Strategic Thinking, etc). I don't think the attributes are super obvious, but I can't really say they are illogical. I think that if the stat bonuses are accurately shown at character creation (and after) its just a matter of reading the descriptions of the attributes, right? If you don't want to read, this probably isn't the game for you.... Is it that hard to accept that a smart fighter will be better at deflecting attacks? Think of it like this: A high Might/Con, Low Int fighter is so focused on damage, they don't care about deflecting attacks because they do so much damage that they don't worry about it (Their thoughts: "Kill! Kill! Kill!"). A high Might/Con/Int fighter is going to be worrying about deflecting attacks because he doesn't want to get hit and wants to conserve his health, reflected in his desire to deflect attacks (Their thoughts: "Attack! Deflect! Get into position! Deflect & Counter Attack!"). Or a high Int/Per fighter is going to focus on accurately hitting his target with low damage attacks, while deflecting attacks in order to preserve his health, making the battle last longer but doing consistent damage (Their thoughts: "Deflect! Hit! Deflect! Hit!"). Now this is just my interpretation of the system. Doesn't necessarily work for everyone I guess, and no ones opinion is necessarily wrong per se, its just how you want to see it. I mean, if you have better ideas to make all stats equal in combat (Dev's Goal) that allows it to be more narratively consistent (Your Goal/Dev's Lesser Goal), then by all means, present them. But to say that Might should kill everything and Intellect should do nothing just BECAUSE or "Thats how it works in other games, especially DnD!" or "Intellect should be Magic and Studying and Lore because thats how DnD is and Intellect === Intelligence", well those really aren't helpful, nor entirely accurate. PS: My comments are not directed at anyone specifically, just my interpretation of the general complaints. Please feel free to correct me if I interpreted incorrectly.

Look, I think I understand your concern. Why should any one person have more input/influence/whatever than the other backers? I get it (Not that I backed, mind you, so maybe Im out of line here). But I dont think the devs are going "O look at Sensuki's work! Its so amazing, lets scrap all our stuff!". I think they look at it and weigh it and see if it fits their system or not. Plus, a lot of the things Sensuki has suggested Josh has said he was thinking about implementing BEFORE anyway (like action speed?). About all that business with coding, I didnt really understand that (from your posts or Sensukis), as I have very limited coding experience. And I dont think Sensuki is saying he knows absolutely EVERYTHING about the code. But you have to admit he must of put a lot of work into learning it as best he could. I mean, he's already modding the game! If he can modify the stat system and other things, he must have a decent understanding of the code, no? Not that Sensuki's word should be taken as law, but I dont think his suggestions hurt. I can understand being concerned about it, but I think the devs are smart enough to realize that if something he wants to implement doesnt fit their vision, they wont implement it. If they like the idea, and want to great! but I dont think they necessarily feel they NEED to just because Sensuki said to. As far as the build goes, I havent played the beta, so I dont have a great understanding of the Attributes, Stats, and actual gameplay, but they seem alright, if a bit non-intuitive. But thats why you read the description of the stats right? If I was playing a game for the first time, I would look at all the stats in order to see what they do. I mean, all systems are different, right? As long as its explained, I think it'll be fine. Plus, I think you can still build your character like you want, I dont really see how thats been affected. Also, they're probably going to get tweaked and refined again and again until the devs come up with a set of stats that THEY feel reflect the narrative connection as well as improving combat. This is all my opinion however. I personally LOVE the idea of balanced stats between combat and dialogue options. I loved planescape torment, but I hated how you basically needed to invest in Wisdom, Intelligence, and Charisma in order to get the most out of the game, and then you SUCKED in combat (at least till later). It was a different concept, but I think the point of balancing stats means that no one would have to gimp their character in order to play in a way they enjoyed. (example: INT Fighter, PER Monk, CON Mage). Maybe its different for you. Maybe you loved the old system. I wasnt around to see what that was like, but I have high hopes for the game, and I think its only going to improve. So while I understand that you liked the old system and wished it stayed, I hope you can still enjoy the game without it and appreciate other aspects (like the story and companions maybe?). Hope that helps somehow. PS: If you just want it to be HARDER for you to build your specific build and think the game should penalize you more, I dont understand that at all (Not sure if thats what you meant , but I dont THINK so, at least). However, I DO agree that it would suck if they made the game stupid easy just because people dont understand the attribute system yet. However, I dont think this will be the case, as I imagine the game will receive further tweaks and the difficulty will be adjusted accordingly.

Ah, okay. Thanks for helping me understand the system better. And dont let those guys bother you. We all know you make those suggestions and stuff because you are looking to improve the game and we appreciate all the hard work you've been contributing to the project. Regardless of whether they used your suggestions or not, I'm sure it helps them with considerations and ideas, and if they happen to seem like they listen to you more than others, I'd say its because you present sound and logical conclusions based upon your ideas and understanding of the system. So keep up the good work!

A bit behind, but wouldnt this require Might to rely heavily on Perception? Because if your accuracy relies on Perception, and Might is only better if your accuracy is higher, that means Might relies on Perception right? Or does the boost in Perception not make as much a difference as your class's base accuracy? Also, are there currently any other ways to improve accuracy other than Perception? And does your accuracy get better as you level up? Sorry for so many questions - dont have the beta so I cant test this stuff myself.