Voss

So doomed if anyone comes up behind you.

I find this isn't a problem outside modern bioware games. That the dialogue choices are only loosely related to the actual dialogue is asinine. Most games, what you pick is what you say, the only way to really get it wrong is to rush and not read it.

Which is interesting in it's own right, because it says straight up that you find the armor system pretty pointless. @drunetovich, no that is bad as well. Target soft targets first just changes to a different counterintuitive behavior- where dps characters have to suck up the penalties of heavy armor, and tanks go naked.

I don't know that they need to become more powerful necessarily. But as the signature effect of the priesthood, per encounter rather than per rest would go a long way in my book. @mrmonocle- it is fine if you want to use those two weapons. It is horrifyingly restrictive if you don't, and as is, the mini-spells don't give you a reason to take the talent.

Oh, I don't. I definitely view it as fluffed speculation. It would be nice if there were somewhere with a nice and accurate breakdown of what does what and how things function. In text, so it is usable as a reference. Things have changed so much that I very much doubt even a (theoretical) manual or game guide presents an accurate picture of the game mechanics on launch. Which, personally, is a problem. I like to plot out my character choices from beginning to end beforehand, so I don't get blindsided by seemingly nice sounding abilities turning out to be traps.

I don't think it was a formatting error, though- the user in question cut the duration bit out of Int and moved it into Res. If you dig into the changelog (the last one for the 21st, actually, the stuff on the 22nd was mostly gender), it is a deliberate cut/paste with little else happening. It was (and is still) changed on the on other attributes page as well. http://pillarsofeternity.gamepedia.com/Attribute

Granted- I think a lot of classes would benefit from more options to choose from. I just primarily dislike the paladin in its current form. Switch the modal on, point them at the enemy and let them go like a windup toy. The playstyle can easily be completely passive and uninvolved unless something unexpected happens (and the few active abilities they have are so use-specific that even if something does come up, they likely can't address it in any fashion).

Not sure. That wiki has been almost aggressively inaccurate and inconsistent to the point that I've been taking information on it as more along the line of speculation subject to change rather than fact. If it is true, I'm not sure why no one with bb480 mentioned it, as it significantly alters a lot of character builds.

It honestly doesn't change their dps that much. It does a normal hit in burn damage over time. As a 1/encounter thing it isn't terrible, but it isn't super-important either. They bring a nice constant buff to the table, but mostly they just make normal attacks. Honestly, the big thing is paladins are just rather lacking in abilities. Like a lot of the 'melee/mundane' classes they feel a bit overshadowed- their counterpart is very much the chanter- also a nice source of buffs, but can utterly reshape the battlefield every X seconds (expressed as 3/4/5 phrases). Stack up short phrases and they can just pop stuns off on a standard rotation, and then factor in summons, etc. The comparison is pretty crazy. The problem with paladins is they lend themselves so much to the passive buffer while tanking, and not much else. A backstop for other characters to fight from, which depending on the player's preferred style, can be really boring and unsatisfying. In a dps role, they really seem to lag behind other classes better suited to purpose.

You can build a totally non-melee fighter, at least at level 5. (Disciplined Barrage, Offensive Talent, Confident Aim, Offensive Talent, Weapon Specialization) Just because sabers and blunderbusses are in the Ruffian category doesn't mean they're comparable weapons. The way to accurately compare is to set as many controls up as possible, not include extra variables that make the comparison more difficult. Anything that is not derived from class should be exactly the same so you know where the differences are coming from. That you are imagining the results is exactly the point of testing. Test correctly and you won't have to guess. You'll know.

I do believe you sold me on the chanter. I may still stick with a rogue, but I do like providing something else while attacking, and interrupting the routine with something ridiculous with no real resource cost.

Sorry but you are comparing dual wielded sabers to a bow. That is a complete oranges to apples comparison, since you are much more comparing the weapon groups than the classes itself. If we just wanna compare whatever loadout, then here I'll go with lvl 8 offensive dual saber specced fighter against a blunderbuss ranger, both solo: You just did the same thing. If you really want to compare classes rather than weapons, give them the same weapons.

I think it depends, because while the beginning and end (of both BGs) are very linear to the point of wallowing in common railroad plot failures, the majority of the games (the good parts) aren't linear at all, and there are lots of things to explore and search, while completely ignoring the main plot- which frankly is cheesy, empty and unnecessary. Getting involved in the iron crisis and the plots of the Iron Throne are interesting enough without devolving the main character to special snowflake with special powers because navelgazing bollocks. Being a fantasy hero should frankly be special enough without mucking it up. Finding some connection and reason to go to Amn would have been a lot better than an off screen 'you got captured because... plot demands you get captured.' This contrasts pretty strongly with the IWD experience, where everything is on a straight line of poorly-thought out and incoherent encounters against random monsters pulled from the Monster Manual (sorry, Monstrous Compendium) on an utter whim. The early part of 2 is a bit better for this as it is (random Malarites aside) focused on the goblinoid threat, but still just one path to the end linear.

Yeah. I'm bad enough about this in normal games. With PoE's obfuscation of mechanics, I expect several frustrated restarts.

That's actually exactly what I was looking at; to have a character that would be able to navigate dialogue options freely to affect the pacing through RP, not so heavily in combat. A call back to Planescape. Except they claim the stat-based dialogue options are spread equally and aren't even necessarily the best choice. So honestly this means making a combat ineffective character for nothing. 'Normal' dialogue options (and reputation options- benevolent, rational, cruel, etc) seem more suited to RPing than 'you smell, so obviously no one would bed you.' Not that Might/Int is combat ineffective, but taking some of the other stats just because doesn't seem to serve much purpose on either end of the system. @Diogenes- for a cipher, dex seems useful but not that important. A couple big guns and switching between them to avoid reload times should top your pool and pick it back up after burning through power points. At that point, the combat is likely to be decided one way or another. (Basically: opening shot, burn points, second shot to gain more points, burn and... probably done). More damage and keeping enemies debuffed longer seems far more important.

In a system like this? You treat the attributes as what they are (a spreadsheet of % modifiers to various things- personally I'd rather increment each of them directly rather than keep up the pretense), and you bind dialogue options to skills. Lore instead of Int, Stealth instead of Dex, Athletics instead of Strength. Some get a bit fuzzy, but since the game seems to treat mechanics as perception anyway (in terms of noticing traps and other hidden things), I'd go for that over survival. You might need another skill or two, but the skills are a bit flat and lacking anyway, so could use more breadth as is. Attributes are something of legacy mechanic anyway, kept around more out of habit than rationale. Much to the detriment of the last two versions of D&D, which try to bind them directly to defenses as well (4th literally gives up and makes half of them dump stats for each class, and 5th just decrees that some saving throws are worth less than others). You could easily map the effects of a strength bonus or perception bonus as a feat/talent/perk, but you'd have to give them out more often, or at least at level 1. .

No, what needs to be done is the devs need to stop inflicting crappy artificial subsystems* just because a developer doesn't like it when people use different approaches to combat. There is no need to code this kind of nonsense in, especially with all the actual problems that need to be addressed. *that don't even work as intended

I've seen it. I just haven't been able to make a character that's anywhere close to unplayable, other than the ranger in one of the BB's which was because the ranger class was borderline unplayable. Again, there are plenty of balance issues there for sure, but nothing close to genuine trap choices à la quarterstaff specialization in IWD or, say, Toughness, Great Fortitude, a couple of Skill Focuses and CHA 18/STR 10 for a D&D3 fighter. As far as I can tell anyway. Stuff and nonsense. There are a lot of trap choices, and the blatantly bad builds like your fighter example are obviously present. Take, for example, an 18 con/17 Per wizard with one handed sword and only circumstantial defensive and utility talents. The talents alone are absolutely brim filled with genuine traps, far more than actually useful stuff. Add in the counterintuitive design and other elements that are intentionally (but stealthily) different from the norm (for no other reason than to be different, from what I can tell), and I can easily see character creation being a trainwreck for the unsuspecting. I fully expect at least one early review to pull out the Admiral Ackbar meme for this one.

Er, no. First off, it has everything to do with kiting, because that is the stated purpose. Second, it does no such things for different melee types. Once they are engaged, nobody wants to move, Unless they're wielding reach weapons (pikes, quarterstaves), a 'highly mobile' character must be just as static as a tank for as long as the engaging enemies live. Combat stops dead once people start fighting in melee, and movement is no longer a reasonable option once this happens. Which makes mobile melee archetypes effectively an oxymoron in PoE.

none of the races suck so much that you shouldn't pick it for roleplaying reasons. Disagree. I'd happily set most of the races in this game on fire and start over. For being ugly, mechanically terrible or just boring. And I'd start with the godlike, for violating all three. For a first character, I'm leaning toward Island Aumaua Rogue, Raider from Deadfire. Strong, Smart and Loaded with Guns, because resting is for chumps. Seriously, I hate per day abilities. I may choose companions just to avoid them entirely, partly just to see what that does to the feel of the game, even if that means allowing the ranger (read that in the same tone most people say leper) to exist in my presence. Plus then I can rag on Eder and Pelle for not being tough enough to push on in the front. I wanted to go with Island Aumaua too, but aparrently they've changed they awsome +1 weapon set for +5% movement speed -.- Now i'll either go with pale elf (elemental res) or coastal aumaua (prone/stun res) for my wizard. Wait, what? What kind of garbage is that? I'm beginning to think I need to wait for several weeks until a couple patches pass and there are full descriptions of how the systems work before I even touch the game. Especially class/race/talents/spells. Oh, and weapons, since apparently guns got smacked by the Sawyer Nerf Bat.

I can't. 3rd (and 4th, but honestly it's a pure boardgame so whatever) have all sorts of movement/mobility combat shenanigans. To the point that disengagement feels like someone got a bug up their butt about the 3.5 half-ogre spiked chain Spring Attack/Combat Reflexes/Trip build and threaded the PoE combat system with all sorts of nonsense just to deal with that without realizing it wasn't relevant at all to an entirely different system. Hence engagement, ridiculous disengagement attacks and the idea that kiting should be punished, rather than treated as a legitimate tactic.

Unless of course they designed each area to have a buffer zone between the party and any stress-point. Which is quite possible, considering modern area design. If the party can leave the area and isn't immediately ambushed by enemies, it wouldn't be a problem in practice. In short, there might not be any ambushes. Huh? I don't give a dead possum about ambushes. This has nothing to do with gameplay and all about memory leaks, errors loading assets and everything under the hood. Loading assets for a whole new area is often a problematic stress point for games- literally why autosave-on-area-transition exists. Doing the autosave after the new area loads defeats the primary purpose of having them. Much like having airplane baggage scanned after takeoff. And given 'Bugsidian's' track record in this area, I will be beyond shocked if CTDs don't happen.

What the heck is up with that waterwheel? It moves along for a bit then jumps every few seconds. Back on topic... between not working as intended (even if that intention makes for poor gameplay) and the laughable fog of war reset, this feels a bit embarassing for Obsidian

Not true. Free, unlimited, ultra-bonused disengagement attacks heavily favor that the "kitee" will decimate anyone attempting to retreat. And if they never manage engagement (quite possible if the firer is faster or starts far enough away and knows the kite route), the ranged kiter always wins. Always, barring misclicks.

Examples of the first, please. As for immutable (I think that is what you were going for)- they aren't. They can be set for anything. From fractions of a second to minutes, to 24 hours, or even weekly. Various games do all of the above, sometimes simultaneously for different abilities. Sometimes they're even combined with mana or another power system, which is even more annoying, or with cast times, or something even more obscure. Heck, World of Warcraft's horrible deathknight class uses cooldowns, a build-then-use mana pool and rune unlocks simultaneously for some abilities. The big flaw with them is there is no point that it feels like anything other than a metagame system. Whatever is going on functions purely on metagame design logic, not something inherent to the setting or the ability.