Crucis

View, the problem is that a fair amount of the stuff in game is so darned vague that it can be difficult to tell what is what. As for two handed weapons, honestly I'm not a huge fan of 2H'd weapons. Not saying that I don't occasionally use them, but I don't particularly like spending a talent on the 2H weapon feat. If I spend a talent point on a style, it's usually on weapon and shield style because I like the extra defense. But that's a play style thing for me. OTOH, I suppose if one *is* a fan of 2H'd weapons, then the 2H style feat may be worth taking. Personal taste, I guess.

No, it's not a "truth". It's your opinion. Mind you, I don't necessarily disagree with your opinion, but it's still an opinion.

Ahhh. In my first two parties, I wussed out and didn't kill the Ardra dragon and betrayed the dragon slayer (named Falenroed, or something like that), so haven't had access to her items. Maybe in my next party, I'll take the time to kill the dragon.

OK, I just loaded up an old Save game from fairly late for my last party, and did the mission that gets you the Sanguine Plate. I'm not so sure that I think that it's the best looking armor in the game, though I suspect that that Frenzy ability can be quite useful. The Sanguine Plate visually reminds me of the Bathed in Blood plate from IWD1. I actually can think of a number of other armors that I personally think are better looking. 1. Argwes Ardra plate. It's a green Fine plate armor with a Second Chance enchantment and +2 Lore. And very nice looking. 2. Elardh Dwr (or Steel Swan) Exceptional breastplate. Pure white breast plate armor. 3. Lost Meadow Mail: Green and silver, exceptional chain mail armor with +1 regeneration. Very, very nice looking. 4. Vengiatta Rugia: Superb red and yellow padded armor, with retaliation and extra flanking damage effects. Very nice looking armor for the stylish rogue in your party. Looks even better when you wear the Dandy Hat of the Diseased Yak, which is a very stylish, wide brimmed hat that gives +2 Resolve, but -1 INT. Very stylish indeed.

Act 2's trigger is actually a lot more telegraphed than Act 1's. Act 1 sort of just happens. As you say, the end of Act 1 is rather subtle. It does sorta just happen. But Act 2 ... well, it may not be exactly obvious that the event that ends Act 2 is going to BE the event the ends Act 2 (sorry for the repetition). But once it happens, there's nothing subtle about it.

JONIN, as Exoduss points out, you have to be careful about Might if you're going to be casting spells from scrolls. This is true of INT as well. I'm honestly not sure how one builds a "good" Chanter. Heck, I suppose the real question is this... What is a "good" chanter? It almost seems like the best thing you can do with a chanter in a party is to build up the other five people in the party to be the best they can be. Make them the real damage dealers for the party. And then use the Chanter to make those other 5 even better with his Chants, as well as an occasional Invocation spell. I'm not even sure that I'd count on this Chanter for damage dealing, pe se. Oh, you could stick him behind the front lines with a Pike or an Arbalest or Arquebus and take whatever damage he adds to the mix. But his real job would be to make the rest of the team better more than being a major damage dealer. Just a thought.

...and you missed out on the best-looking plate in the game to boot! Really? I thought that that green plate looked pretty good. Don't remember the name of it, nor where I got it. (I want to say that I probably got it either in the lower levels of the Endless Paths or somewhere around Twin Elms. I just don't remember.) Come to think of it, there's a really good looking suit of green tinted chain mail that's quite nice as well.

A fighter will have the following advantages that no other class can get: 1.) Armored grace - reduces armor penalty by 16%. A fighter in robes will be as fast as anyone else naked. A fighter in leather will be faster than anyone else in robes. 2.) Weapon spec and mastery - together will add 25% damage to all weapons in the same weapon group. Every fighter will have the above abilities. This will deliver more damage than a ranged rogue without sneak attacks who only has the 20% hit to crit talent and deep wounds to increase ranged damage. Compared to a ranger with swift aim a fighter will fire slower but hit harder with more accuracy, or fire faster with less accuracy compared to a ranger with vicious shot. Taking the defender and wary defender will greatly enhance the already superior defensive characteristics of the fighter. Going all in for offensive would get you confident aim for a 20% graze>hit (with 35% graze it would go to 28% graze and increase of 50% damage to 7% of attacks or a 3.5% increase to average damage) plus a 20% increase to minimum damage for a total of 13.5% increase to average damage. Either approach will also apply to melee attacks. Fighters are a lot more powerful than many here give them credit for. Good observation on the Armored Grace. The Weap Spec and Mastery is rather obvious, but still worth noting because it will be useful both ways, not just for ranged. As I've said previously, I probably wouldn't try to match the Ranger at his own game. I'd try for creating the best mix of melee and ranged that felt possible so that the character could try to be equally useful both ways. I don't think that I'd give up Defender and Wary Defender as they seem too good to pass up, and I'm not sure that the alternatives would be better offensively than they are defensively, or whether it'd be worth the cost of not having D and WD in the character's tool kit.

The talent you're thinking of is "Swift Aim". It just occurred to me as I read your post. I absolutely agree that all common things being equal, the Ranger will be a much better ranged damage producer than a ranged Fighter. That said, I don't think that creating a fighter who is 100% absolutely focused on trying to emulate Ranger damage output is a particularly great build. As I've been saying in previous posts, I'd think that a more balanced ranged vs melee build would be more useful. Why bother trying to match a ranger with a fighter when it's not possible? Why not try for a build that has some effectiveness at range, but is also effective in melee as well? With this sort of build, you're accepting the reality that you can't out-ranger with a ranged fighter, and you decide to take a different route, a different role. Is this a necessary role? Perhaps not. But why do people have to play according to a single formula with their parties? Would this character qualify as a DPS fighter? I don't know. I don't think in meta-gaming terms. I see the character as someone who is as comfortable using ranged weapons as with melee weapon. For the build, I think that the character would probably pick a single weapon focus group and then add specialization and mastery. Perhaps add Defender and Wary Defender for the defensive benefits. Pick other talents and abilities that would work well both ways, and probably avoid others that don't. (Defender and Wary Defender seem too good to ignore though.) Seems like a potentially interesting character to me, but who knows. Could also be a dud.

I agree that factoring out the common stuff is necessary when trying to make comparisons. Oh sure, you could keep them in, but it simplifies things to stick to the things that aren't common between the two things being compared. Not having looked at the game or the wiki or whatever, are you sure that a ranger has a faster rate of fire than a fighter, assuming that they have the same stats and are wearing the same armor (or none)? Furthermore, I kinda disagree with your claim that the role of a ranged fighter is to defend the backlike squishies. IMO, that could very well be described as a role of rangers as well. Just because one's primary role is to use ranged weapons to pump out constant fire doesn't mean that one can't switch to being an effective body guard for one's casters when necessary. That said, short of going all on to create a ranged fighter at the complete expense of melee capability, I could see a (what I prefer calling) a balanced fighter being more of a chartacter who fills multiple roles. A body guard for the squishies, yes. Someone who can provide some ranged fire support, even if not as well as a ranger or ranged rogue. And someone who could go into melee if necessary, if not quite as well (and well protected) as a full-on, fully-armored fighter.

Two run throughs and I still haven't done all the quests. Nice.

TY Razor.

Where do you get this Sanguine Plate and what is it (well, obviously it's plates armor from its name)? I don't recall seeing it in my first two run-throughs, though I could be wrong.

Seems kinda useless build to be honest , and it coming from developer.. its obvious noone gave a **** about combat when making PoE Are you even capable of holding a civil conversation without the use of obscenities, for crying out loud? Stop assuming that everyone wants to play the same way you do. Not everyone plays wizards as rogue support casters. Some people prefer to play them as nukers, for example. As for the Dev's Orlan fighter, what is it with you? So what if the guy likes a build you don't like? Not everyone is looking to create the absolutely most OP build possible. And frankly, given how mediocre some of the companions can appear at first glance, it's entirely possible to build less than optimal characters that can be successful and enjoyable to play.

Not every spell that casters can cast is a spell that is a sneak attack triggering affliction spell, for crying out loud. Let's see. A wizard might be casting Magic Missiles or Fireballs or Chain Lightning or Confusion or god knows whatever other spells that have no affliction affects. Spell casters don't exist for the sole and only purpose of supporting Rogues and their sneak attacks.

A ranged fighter could basically be getting +45% damage on every attack while the rogues sneak attack is +50% but it needs a modifier. The fighters would not. True the rogue gets the bonus a lot earlier than the fighter. Would just need to test the fighter crit percent to see how often he can grit with his much higher accuracy then the rogue with his +20% crit chance. Jimmy, this is a good observation. That 5% isn't a big difference. And other than an opening salvo sneak attack, or the rogue setting himself up for flanking shots, it seems that the rest of the sneak attack afflictions require someone to create an afflicting condition before the rogue can trigger a sneak attack.... which means that a caster is having to cast a support spell, or some other character has to expend a special ability. I'm not sure that that's worth the extra 5%. Now, I won't argue against the fact that the rogue will certainly have other special abilities that are stacking on top of his attacks that are also increasing damage. Obviously they do. But are they that much better than this fighter? One thing you can get out of this fighter is that unless one has gone completely over the top to make a ranged fighter, chances are pretty good that you may have a reasonably well balanced fighter who can go into melee when necessary and probably still hold his own better than a ranged rogue, in part because if you're picked a weapon focus, specialization, and mastery, you have a fighter who's pretty nasty with his preferred weapons, ranged or melee. Maybe throw in Constant Recovery, Defender, and Wary Defender, and you probably have a pretty good 2 way Fighter.

While it is true that casters do have a lot of ways to keep enemies afflicted, I'm also noticing that if you're constantly having casters only pay attention to casting afflicting spells to support a rogue's sneak attacks, it seems that they're losing out on casting more damaging spells. So in the end, is your party more effective or more efficient by having the casters supporting a Rogue, or by having those casters doing what they'd normally do if there wasn't a rogue that needed some "affliction support"?

Another option. Let Invocations be memorized on a per-rest basis, like some other caster classes. That said, I think the ditch invocations option is a pretty good one. I just don't like the fact that higher level Invocations create pressure on Chanters to use weaker, faster chants, or vice-versa that higher level chants make getting to the higher level invocations only possible in the longest of battles. I think that just focusing Chanters on ... chanting ... seems like a good idea, although I suppose that making invocations on a per-rest basis would be workable as well.

Oh stop with insulting bovine fecal matter. You got issues. I wasn't insulting anyone. Now for you that's an entirely different story. You damned well were. You said that anyone who doesn't use more casters is lazy. That's pretty damned insulting in my book. So stop it. Stop insulting people. You ever heard of people referring to themselves as “you“? It's normal english grammar. Hardly. In the real world, proper english grammar is to refer to yourself as "I" or "me".

You're just making excuses for bad behavior. And there's a big difference between saying that casters require more micro and calling people who choose not to use more casters "lazy". Stop being a jerk.

Oh stop with insulting bovine fecal matter. You got issues. I wasn't insulting anyone. Now for you that's an entirely different story. You damned well were. You said that anyone who doesn't use more casters is lazy. That's pretty damned insulting in my book. So stop it. Stop insulting people.

Not sure I see why Xbows or Arbalests matter here, beyond the Pally's own weapon focus or whatever special ability the ranged weapon in question might possess. Range (and high damage per hit for flames of devotion) - when dominated / confused he might walk towards the mushroom pack and then be in range for more confusion/domination attacks (assuming you've managed to pull/clean the mobile opponents first) or traps .. Best case scenario - lose more health than necessary .. Hunting bows and warbows have that same range.

Oh stop with insulting bovine fecal matter.

Not sure I see why Xbows or Arbalests matter here, beyond the Pally's own weapon focus or whatever special ability the ranged weapon in question might possess.

I don't care whether racial abilities are "interesting". I care that they're useful. The game itself generates the "interesting" situations, not racial abilities.