Mortal

warriors get high accuracy per level up, so they are probably better suited for damage dealing than paladins (which doesn't really mean much ) haven't really tried to play a dps warrior, but my Eder tank isn't half bad at dishing out some pain despite the fact he's specced for sword and board duty and is in def stance all of the time. warriors don't seem to have a whole lot of dps abilites (do they even have any?), but a dps fighter with the ability to knock down stuff probably isn't a bad thing. i think when someone is knocked down attackers have a higher chace to hit/crit, so the twice per combat knockdown might be ssen as a dps talent in disguise.

the name sounds meso-american. might be inspired by some Aztec/Olmec/Mayan name. i guess if you try to spell it like some meso-american name it may be easier? if you ever played one of the civ games, some of those pre-columbian nations had similar city names. even if you never played civ games you probably heard some of the more prominent names like "Tenochtitlan" or "Chichen Itza" in some context (i'm sure i made at least one spelling mistake in one of the two name ). not really sure from the in-game lore if there is a connection to those cultures, though.

i don't think the mechanic per se is too bad. it's just a bit strange that a wizard suddenly learns to "regenerate" alls his weaker magical powers after combat without needing a rest. and all of that in the transistion from level 8 to 9. i agree with thos who suggested that the mechanic should have been introduced more granular. maybe get one per encounter level 1 spell when you unlock level 3 spells, another "free" level 1 spell and maybe one free level 2 spell when you make it to level 4 spells etc. Or something along that line. also. i liked the idea of making the bonus level 1/2/3 spell talents "per encounter" spells. that would acutally make them fairly valuable and not a bad choice at all IMO.

don't think 8/10 is unfair for PoE. it's a beatiful work of art, a well written story and (unfortunately) a pretty basic and slightly boring combat system with some balance issues. i like the story, the setting and especially the artwork, but combat is an important part of the game, so IMO it doesn't deserve more than an 8/10. on the other hand, i also played D:OS. i liked it a lot when i played it. combat was very fun (though i have to admit i liked it much better than POE because it's turn based. never liked RTwP systems). overall the game world felt less polished in DO:S and a lot of the praised crafting system was totally redundant while on the other hand some aspects (crafted weapons) made the game too easy (crafted weapons were a lot better than 99% of the loot you got from killing stuff). overall 8/10, just like POE. since DA:I was also mentioned. call me crazy but out of those 3 games, i enjoyed DA:I the most. the combat mechanics are fairly shallow, but i never even viewed it as a tactical game. DA:I combat is easy, but action packed and fun. the story is a bit cheesy at times (it's a bioware game, after all), but it had some epic moments that touched me on an emotional level. essentially it's 100 hours of popcorn cinema. not exactly the same category as D:OS or POE in my opinion, so it's a bit unfair and not very useful to compare the three games, but if i had to recommend one of the 3, i'd go with DA:I.

i always enjoyed lower level RPGs more, so i'm not too concerned with the cap at level 12. many games have higher caps, but in those games you usually breeze through the levels quickly, which sort of trivializes the "level up" experience. and frankly, many games with high level caps would have been better with less but more meaningful levels. I hope they don't go overboard on the level cap with an expansion or sequel. i'm not a huge fan of high level gameplay in D&D style games. especially if the vanilla game or the first expansion takes you to the traditional max level of the game system and the next expansion introduces stupid "epic levels". the "epic" ruleset for NWN/NWN2 was horrible and in BG2 levels past 15 (or so) felt completely redundant. and don't even get me started on the atrocity that is fallout: new vegas. the base game up to level 20 was great, but the raised level caps from the DLCs made the game borderline unplayable (due to auto scaling of mobs, but no solid weapon upgrades - so some stupid mobs could survive half a dozen headshots with a high caliber sniper rifle etc). so no, more levels isn't necessarily better. in my experience, it's the opposite - the higher the level cap, the less meaningful each level up feels and the more "artificial" stuff they have to make up so the high level traits/talents/whatever feel more powerful than the low level stuff.

the max supplies are tied to the difficulty, so the reasonable thing would be to just lower the difficulty to normal or easy instead of wasting your real life time running back to town after 3 encounters. makes more sense than asking devs/modders to make the game easier on the setting you chose.

i kinda like the lack of kill XP. makes non-violent quest solutions useful. in other games i often ignore stuff like infiltration quests or stealth because killing the mobs outright gives more XP and thus more power in the long run. or the horrible "do the stealth/diplomacy thing first and then still slaughter the goblins afterwards" XP grinding. yeah you can easily avoid that problem by not doing it, but it's easier to resist if there is no reward for unneeded, excessive violence

so far i'm finding the hard difficulty a decent challenge. i guess it may be too easy if you run a party of min/max custom characters. i think hard mode is balanced for "realistic" characters (like the story NPCs). also, it probably helps to play the game the way it was intended (i.e. conserve spells/ per rest abilites and try to clear maps/dungeons without excessive running back to town for extra camping supllies/free camping). it's probably much easier if you just use up all your spell slots in 1-2 fights and run back to town afterwards? i had plenty of wipes in the early stages. after i finally learned how to properly use my tank characters as meatshields, it got easier. there are still encounters where i wipe and have to reload and camp to replenish spells before i can beat them. so it's definitely harder than most other games i've played on "hard" recently. to be fair, the difficulty levels in many games are just mislabeled (presumably so the players can feal great for beating "super hard" mode). i don't have that impression with PoE. hard mode actually feels hard. i like it

I think you also get a higher camping supply capacity on low difficulties. You can only carry 2 camping supplies on hard, so you can't just fire all of your spells every encounter and camp afterwards. i typically try to solve encounters with just the "per encounter" powers and maybe one or two lvl 1/2 buff/debuff spells and only fall back to mass "per rest" powers/spells for the harder "bossfight" encounters or in emergencies. (well, technically you can still spam all your powers in each encounter if you are willing to run back to town to replenish your supply and/or use the free camping in an inn, but IMO that's against the spirit of playing on the hard difficulty setting - might as well play on easy if i have to "cheat" to beat hard)