xzar_monty

Precisely. This shouldn't be too much to ask. The current description 1) doesn't give you the information, and 2) makes no sense. That's pretty bad!

Nope. The description does not say that. That would be: "Has a chance of creating a shockwave each time he or she receives a wound", or something to that effect. If this is what the description attempts to say, fair enough, but it fails miserably. The description as it is is logically nonsensical, because it is impossible for anything to happen both occasionally and each time. It's tantamount to saying something like, "You are given a spherical cube as a gift". Makes no sense. I'll wager my English is far superior to yours, but that's beside the point. English is definitely not my first langage and still, i completely agree with you. I was about to give pretty much the same example as you about how the tooltip should have been writen in order to make it clear. It's strange to see that even english native speakers seem to, somehow, fail to recognize poor english for what it is. My own english is still far from perfect, but pretty often, i kind of have to correct sentences i read in order to make them understandable (not on this forum though). It strikes me as weird. More than once, i was told by an english person that my english was better than some native speakers'. At first, i definitely thought it was just some flattering. Pretty recently, i started to wonder if it were really just that... Many native English speakers, particularly from the United States, and to a lesser extent from England, are completely unaware of how poor they are at their native language. Which, sadly, is nearly always the only language they know. So they actually don't speak any language well. It goes to show that educational standards are sometimes staggeringly poor. So you are quite right to wonder.

Ok, 30% sounds pretty good. Thanks. And as Boeroer pointed out, the ability would probably be overpowered if it activated each time you receive a wound. (Incidentally, I still think it's a superb ability. Looking at the various things available on level 7, my immediate thought was: who would NOT pick this one, and why?)

Nope. The description does not say that. That would be: "Has a chance of creating a shockwave each time he or she receives a wound", or something to that effect. If this is what the description attempts to say, fair enough, but it fails miserably. The description as it is is logically nonsensical, because it is impossible for anything to happen both occasionally and each time. It's tantamount to saying something like, "You are given a spherical cube as a gift". Makes no sense. I'll wager my English is far superior to yours, but that's beside the point.

Thanks, that was a really good reply. I will have to observe how it works. The xp balance in this game is really weird, btw. I am now at level 7, and all I've done is travel from one map to another according to what I've been told and talk to people. There has been very, very little in the way of RPG adventuring, including fights. (I appreciate the fact that your rewards for fighting are limited, but I wonder if it's taken too far this time.)

I've seen some discussion about how the ability descriptions and other documentation in the game leave a lot to be desired. Well, the game's been out for quite some time now, and I just came across a real gem. I'm playing a monk, and at 7th level, there is the option of choosing an ability called Rooting pain. Here's how the description starts: "Occasionally creates a shockwave around the monk each time he or she gains a wound..." So, does it happen occasionally or each time? Does it happen each time when the occasion, whatever that may be, is right? Or did Obsidian just not now what they were doing? Seriously: how can stuff like this be so much poorer than it was in the previous game? How can that be justified?

Well that's why PoE also gives you an option to disable that information, which I feel is fair enough. If we're talking PnP, enemy weaknesses and strengths always had to be completely transparent as you were doing the maths yourself, and the 'figuring out' bit was dictated by being clever, not by purposefully obscuring rules. If me and my DM did a roll which a monster would fail and then the DM would proclaim "A-HA! But the monster has a hidden power!" I'd smack him and you would too. What? Enemy strengths and weaknesses had to be completely transparent in PnP? Which universe is this? They did not, and do not, have to be transparent in any way whatsoever. For the record, I still happen to play D&D (3.5, the best one in my view) approximately twice a month, and stuff like that is not transparent, nor would we players want it to be. If we come across something previously unknown, we may make Knowledge checks, provided we have the skills (in our group, this would nearly always be either the priest or the wizard), and if we're successful, we may know something about the creature before anything happens. If things do happen and we end up fighting, we may make observations about what happens, what seems to work and what does not. But no, definitely no transparency. I'm really surprised about your comment, it just doesn't make sense to my way of playing. (As experienced players, we do have the problem of meta-knowledge, i.e. we often know more than is realistic for our characters to know. There is no clear-cut way out of this, but we do the best we can.)

Unfortunately I have to agree with the comments right above this. There is a profound contradiction in the heart of this game, and either the developers didn't realize it (which I think would be odd) or they just didn't care. The paradox is that you have a huge world to explore at your leisure, but at the same time you are made to feel as if you're in a hurry to catch Eothas. It just doesn't work. The whole premise is faulty. Have any developers commented on the story side of the game? I mean their stated intentions, etc., or their responses to what players have said.

This, again, is a matter of taste. I don't particularly like it when the game holds me by the hand and pats my back the way PoE does. I like a challenge, and I like to figure things out myself. So, I appreciate it when the game tells me when something clearly isn't working, but unless I have a reason to know about a critter's defenses, strengths and weaknesses, I don't want to know about them.

I have to agree that the writing in Deadfire leaves an awful lot to be desired. The main plot doesn't engage me AT ALL, I simply do not care about it. The premise is silly, the development is all over the place and it just doesn't catch me. I suppose I'll just explore the world according to my liking and see what happens. The gods intervening in various dialogues and other places is also quite jarring. It really strengthens the impression that what I do doesn't actually matter, I'm just a puppet here. Obviously the player is a puppet to quite a large extent in any CRPG (because nearly everything has to be scripted), but it's not ok to underline that. Also, I don't like the fact that the main plot consistently gives me huge amounts of experience for simply walking (or sailing) from one place to another. This seriously lets me down as a role-playing veteran, both PnP and CRPG. I like to earn what I get. However, it's good to know that I can look forward to better writing in the DLCs. Strangely enough, by the way, I thought the writing in White March was also better than it was in PoE1.

<cannot delete post. ignore>

Let us not forget that in the Greatest CRPG Of All Time, Baldur's Gate II, there's a lich behind a secret door in an inn. Let me just say that when I first encountered it, I was not prepared, level-wise, and did not do well. It was essentially impossible to do anything else except die.

I'm sorry but you just don't know what you're talking about. Enjoyment is a matter of taste, which is always subjective. It is impossible to talk of enjoyment in objective terms. (Except like this: "Three out of ten people reported that they had enjoyed this." That's objective, it's a fact, provided that no one's lying.)

It's opinions again: I don't think it's vastly superior to PoE1, or in fact superior at all. I would argue it's about as good as PoE1 was. Plenty of good things have disappeared, which is a crying shame, but plenty of other things have appeared, which is great. Also, you're not speaking objectively when you say it's the best isometric RPG you can play right now. I don't think that can be judged objectively. I for one find Pathfinder: Kingmaker more promising, but it does need quite a bit of patching before I start playing it properly. (And if you don't like P:K, that's fine, but it's still subjective.)

Nitpicker! You are right, though. Fair point.

I've only reached level 6 and a half, but an awful lot has definitely changed. The ability system, the items, and so on. I'm confused as to why: the system in PoE1 was pretty good and didn't warrant such overhaul, in my view. Now, whether you'd like Deadfire more or less is impossible to say. I enjoy the game, there are many fun and good things about it, but at this point I would say that character development, abilities and items were a lot better in PoE1.

That obviously depends on one's expectations. I find it to be quite enjoyable, but it's not substantially (or perhaps at all) better than PoE1, and it's not as engaging as the true classic of the genre. Having to choose between this and Neverwinter Nights, I'd definitely choose this, but having to choose between this and BG2, I'd just as definitely choose BG2.

I'm waiting for Deadfire to be complete before making a final judgement on that matter (BG2 without Throne of Bhaal was certainly lacking -no HLAs, no Wild Mages; it was a bit like playing POE1 without White March). Ha, opinions again. In my view, BG2 is clearly a lot better than PoE1, but at the same time it has to be said that the White March is a lot better than Throne of Bhaal. ToB was so railroaded and one-dimensional that it's almost a shame to the franchise, whereas the White March is a good addition to the original game. For me, simply playing BG2 and ignoring ToB is more satisfying than playing through both, as ToB really adds nothing, even if the story is taken to its conclusion.

Heck, yes, as I just stated in another thread, it appears that I'm getting huge amounts of xp all the time and leveling up really fast. I was just thinking (and just wrote elsewhere) that either I'm going to reach level cap early on, or the game is a lot shorter than I think it should be. Incidentally, PoE also totally sucked on this front. I would say this was the point where Obsidian did the poorest job.

We used to play Ultima IV on a Commodore 64. You know, 38911 bytes free (memory) and all that. Four floppy discs, loading times almost as long as PoE or Deadfire. ;-) Incidentally, one additional thing that I've noticed in this game: boy do I gain experience levels fast. So, by the current look of things, either I'm going to reach level cap early on, or the game is a lot shorter than I would expect.

Just wait until the last DLC is out for the best chances of not having problems with bugs. I thought of that myself but then decided to give it a go once the second DLC arrived. It has looked quite good, I've enjoyed it.

A fairly fun romp indeed! That was well put, that. That's precisely what it looks like at the moment. Many essential features of the genre have somehow disappeared but at least so far, the result does look fun. I will also have to give credit for the fact that the change of scenery works really well. I mean, I haven't missed dungeon crawling for a second. @Haplok: Thanks for your comment on enchanting. My judgement was quite possibly premature -- I hadn't fully recognized that all items have unique enchantment paths. As for the difficulty: thank you for the comments, I will crank it up. Incidentally, does anyone else feel that tactical combat is often non-existent because once a battle begins, a significant proportion of the enemy (sometimes all of them) rushes straight into you? I think I have seen quite a lot of this, so far. There are some enemies with ranged weapons (good) and even some monsters that prefer to attack only/mostly from range (wurms; good), but by and large battles are characterized by a group of enemies rushing into me as soon as battle begins. Another nice point, by the way: some PoE1 maps had a senseless number of story-wise meaningless enemies you had to battle, which was annoying, since you got so little XP and precious little loot, too. This problem seems to have been solved, which I think is great.

With the second DLC out, I decided the game is probably stable enough to start playing. So I've been adventuring for a while now, and here are some of my thoughts. 1) I'm really surprised that so much was changed in the game system. Like, spells, abilities, enchanting possibilities and so on. What's more, it seems to me that essentially every change is for the worse. I'm not saying that anything has been ruined, but I really am surprised. I didn't think there was that much wrong with the system in PoE. 2) The "empower" button essentially looks like a built-in cheat. I really wonder why it's there. I'm not using it. 3) I've been playing CRPGs since Ultima IV in the 1980s, and this is by the far the easiest I've ever seen. None of my characters has even been knocked out yet, it just hasn't happened once. I grant that I do have some experience with these games, but still: it's too easy. Especially given that you get all your ability and spell resources back right after each battle so you never have to manage them. I'm almost at level 6 now. Will things get more difficult? 4) The main storyline doesn't seem engaging. I just don't care. A while ago I was sort of summoned to listen to a discussion the gods were having, and I thought it was almost silly. Especially given that one of the gods essentially said, "Let's all take a deep breath now". I would argue (very strongly even) that one of the defining characteristics of a medieval fantasy god is that he/she/it never, ever uses 20th century babble. 5) No real bugs that I have seen so far. I did notice that immediately upon entering a certain cave, Eder discovered a trap at the other end of it (and I do mean far away, my characters weren't anywhere near it, it's a big cave). That was definitely a bug, but not a big one. 6) I'm not sure if the relationship system (or whatever it's called) does much of anything, but maybe it'll trigger into action later on. 7) Some of the quest writing is complex, varied and good. For instance, you get to know about the pirate that attacked you right at the start of the game, and there are at least two major pathways to solving that quest, and within one of them (the one I chose) there are at least two different approaches. That was good, I was genuinely impressed. 8 ) The naval setting is good. The music is good, despite being a bit generic. The graphics are really beautiful at best. I currently have no opinion on naval combat (have engaged in it just once) or the fact that the size of the group has been reduced from six to five. I'm enjoying this quite a bit at the moment, mostly because of #8. The main drawback is #3, followed by #4. Stuff like #2 can simply be ignored.

Here's a suggestion: choose whichever you think is good and then see what happens. I chose undead for my first favored enemy, and I have no idea if it's a good choice or not. However, it's an excellent role-playing choice from my perspective, given the kind of ranger I intend to play, and I'm not interested in knowing beforehand whether it turns out to be good, story-wise, or not. Ranger (and paladin) spells tend to be rather poor. The strength of these characters is elsewhere, and the spells are a fairly weak (but not meaningless) bonus.

Why is the game developer spending any time on a walkthrough? Assuming you are right here, I find this quite baffling. I thought they just made the game, and others played it. If someone out there wanted to do a walkthrough, they could, but I don't see why. (Isn't using a walkthrough the best possible way to ruin your game? Like, voluntarily giving the joy of discovery to other people, not having any yourself?) It was a KS add-on you could buy. I agree it's not the best use of their time, especially given they're a very small team, but it also means doing crowdfunding was also something they were learning on the fly. I think it is honorable that they are sticking with all their KS promises, even the ones that are not quite ideal. Ok, that explains it. Thank you very much for this! Given that it's a promise, I understand and respect the fact that they're doing it.