Boeroer

What's the problem? Looks fine. SC Ascendant is a bit weaker than some multiclass combos like Helwalker/Ascendant or Streetfighter/Ascendant in the earlier parts of the game. But as soon as SC Ascandant gets Time Siphon he's an absolute beast. And of course you'll get access to Driving Echoes for your other casters and Shared Nightmare which is superb with Ascendants/while ascended. Is anybody of your guys wielding a Morning Star? 'Cause no proper playthrough without a Morning Star. I have a hunch that you want to use Disintegrate and Takedown Combo + Forbidden Fist's enfeebling effect. Therefore a Morning Star would be very helpful to land those reliably. Both Takedown Combo and Disintegrate target Fortitude. CON- and MIG afflictions would help further. Looking at your Stalker/Bloodmage: I once had a Stalker/Wizard with the Morning Star Willbreaker (using Takedown Combo + Essential Phantom with Draining Touch) and it was pretty good. So maybe that's an option? Don't know if you know it, but your Bloodmage/Bleak Walker can get +10% corrosive lash and +10% burning lash for all the wizard spells: with the soulbound arquebus Blightheart and Eternal Devotion. It's pretty neat to add 20% multiplicative dmg to your spells. Has to play ranged then though because switching away from Blighheart will remove the 10% corrosove lash immedialtely. Another great (really great) Arcane Knight is Steel Garrote/Bloodmage with Whispers of the Endless Paths. Melee then of course. Max out deflection and use Offensive Parry. You will drain health faster than you can lose it while damaging foes at the same time. It's very easy to use Blood Sacrifice and cast spells atthe same time because Offensive Parry will also happen while casting. So you're doing melee dmg and healing while casting. Pretty cool. Offensive Parry itself dazes enemies so you don't even need to acitively afflict enemies around that guy if you don't want to. He's afflicting enemies "passively" all by himself. How is the Priest of Eothas/Livegiver supposed to look like?

Yes, the Spike-Flinger's bug is especially annoying since it doesn't become faster with soulbound upgrades but slower.

You might want to tag @BAdler so he gets notified. Oops, now we already did. Edit: ach nevermind, you already quoted him so he gets notified anyway. Now he got two notifications... sorry...

@BMac of Obsidian posted a nice starting tutorial on modding in the modding subforum. It also has follow-ups. I think it's a good place to start: Modding ist mostly done by altering text files that are written in JSON format. So something like (just an example): { "name": "Boar", "model": 324234wefwef, "powers": [ "raw damage DoT", "health recovery" ] } I didn't look into spiritshift specifically, but judging by how other stuff works I believe there are several ways to achieve what you want. I would try to just copy the combat values of the form you like mechanically (here Boar) and paste those into the form that looks nice to you (e.g. Cat). Then you'd have Boar, Cat with Boar's values, Stag, Bear and Wolf in the modded game. You'd lose the original Cat. To preserve the original Cat form you could make a copy of the Cat form before and name it... I don't know... Stelgaer or so - and then replace the Stelgaer's combat values with the Boar ones. Then you would have Cat, Boar, Stag, Wolf, Bear and a new one: Stelgaer. Which looks like a Cat but behaves like a Boar. As far as I know you could even tint the Cat modal of your new Stelgaer form so that it looks more dark/blackish. But that may be too advanced. If you want to look at an example for modding Spiritshift you could download the files of the Community Patch (nop need to install the mod) and browse through the files to see how @Phenomenum altered the "Stag-Carnage" ability from 1/encounter attack to a passive. Also @Harpagornis made a whole mod around Spiritshift and surely has some deep knowledge about how to mod Spiritshift specifically.

Wow, never saw that happen. I played with the Community Patch for some hundret hours and the only "bugs" I saw were mechanical ones (like SHattered Pillar's Lesser Wounds reducing the max wound count back to 5 again - and such). But nothing so glitchy like this. How did you install the mod? Manually or with this Vortex thing from Nexus (unfortunaltely it doesn't work with that Vortex thing)? If manually (according to the installation instructions): Maybe some files got corrupted during download? Seem like some addresses got mangled up but who knows. Maybe delete all the Communuty Patch mod folders and reinstall?

It is relatively easy to create a small mod which does this.

Do you mean Nexus? Did you use the install wizard? I think it's called Vortex, isn't it? Unfortunately you can't use the installer of the Nexus site. You have to download and extract it into the correct directory manually as the instructions describe.

I adressed that (kind of) in one of my posts above:

I would add the Boar form. It has an automatic raw damage over time effect on its attacks (kind of bleeding damage) and it heals passively while shifted. Which is nice. Also it looks absolutely hilarious. Stag is indeed bad. But you can install the Community Patch mod which transforms the 1/encounter ability of Stag Carnage into a passive ability like the Barbarian Carnage (only a bit weaker). Then it's a fine (but not OP) spiritshift form. PS: good to see that the big upgrade of Spiritshift, Spiritcapslock, still finds its use.

I can't see extreme viewpoints in this thread... at all. As an olive branch I even presented some ideas to you that would take your initial idea and make it so that it fits into Deadfire's mechanics rel. flawlessly. Wouldn't call that extreme nor letting opportunities pass by. You didn't even comment on that. Eh? Nobody disagreed with that as far as I can tell? Getting those "refuting statements that weren't made" vibes again... but maybe I just missed the passage where somebody commented on that. I can't find it when skimming the thread. Bringing forth reasonable arguments that show why the current solution is good isn't roadblocking. If you had convincing arguments there would have been forum users who'd agree to your proposals. If you are confronted with a lot of comprehensible counterarguments it doesn't necessarily mean that you get roadblocked - it could also mean that your idea isn't as spectacularly good as you thought it was.

Yes you can. You should get 78 points with race and cultural background (like e.g. Living Lands). The background also gives you a bonus point. All in all you'll have 78 points to distribute. And in the example there are 78 points. So it should be possible.

Here's a list of talents that I find useful for a cipher (no particular order): Weapon Focus (whatever weapon group you like best) Biting Whip Draining Whip Greater Focus Apprentice's Sneak Attack Outlander's Frenzy (until you get Time Parasite) melee Cipher specifically: Veteran's Recovery Two Weapon Style / One-Handed Style / Two-Handed Style (depending on your weapon choice) Weapon and Shield Style (with shield) Savage Attack (especially after getting Borrowed Instincts) Vulnerable Attack (melee Cipher when reaching 0 recovery, thsi can be done with dual wielding and/or any speed weapon + Time Parasite; especially when using light weapons) Spirit of Decay (with Bittercut) randed Cipher: Marksman Gunner (ranged Cipher with guns or crossbows) OR Quick Switch & Arms Bearer (Island Aumauan ranged Cipher with 4 guns or crossbows, switching after each shot) Penetrating Shot (ranged Cipher with blunderbuss or Golden Gaze - or a ranged weapon with speed enchantment + Time Parasite after reaching 0 recovery) Dangerous Implements (with wand, scepter or rod) Heart of the Storm (with Stormcaller)

As PotD player I am biased. You are right. On normal or even easy it can def. wait.

It does? Nice. I tried it on a Nvidia 555M (or something like that) dedicated mobile graphics card and it was not good at all.

I posted that vid above (inside the spoiler tags). But the sidetopic "misconceptions about medieval gear" seems to be an unneccessary distraction from the actual topic of the implementatio of flanking in Deadfire (and PoE). *There is no doubt and not really any discussion that plate armor doesn't work in reality like it does in games or movies. But if you make plate armor (in games and other media) as effective as it is in reality then it would take away from the overall experience - at least if you are not making a very historical accurate game or movie. A fighter in plate would alway be the optimal way to play in combat. Rogues with daggers and leather armor (which isn't really a thing) would be wrecked completely. Who does want that in a fantasy where it's supposed to be fun to play different yet viable roles/setups?

Quick question since I'm not superfamiliar with contemporary D&D rules: Since when (which edition) does a crit need to be confirmed and how does that work? I guess you have to confirm it with a successful "normal" hit roll? Which would make a lot of sense and that's how I know it from some other systems. I can confirm numerous critical toddler hits where it hurts the most. Didn't even need a weapon, knee and ellbows are sufficient.

You misunderstood me it seems. I didn't mean that those Blessings would unlock new areas but that you could simply choose that the world map was all open and accessible. So the first playthrough would somewhat limit your freedom and "guide" you through the game better in order to experience the story in the way the writers intended (to some extend). And after you finished that first, story focused playthrough you can do subsequent ones where everything (or most things) are accessible right from the get-go (if you wish so). Hope I somehow explained it well enough so that you guys can understand what I mean. Basically you'd transform the world map from semi-open to open for subsequent playthroughs. OR: give an option where players can choose a more guided playthrough ("experience the story like the writers itended") or a fully open world playthrough ("go where you please"). Maybe that could be a thing? Just throwing out ideas here...

Deadfire is an open world game, so is Skyrim: a game where you can go everywhere and won't get restricted in your travels. That means you could end up in a place where enemies are way too powerful for you - or too weak. That's why Skyrim has scaling and Deadfire has, too. Else a majority of the encounters could become unfun. But those problems with difficulty etc. are not my personal problems with open world games. They focus on exploration and that's a fine thing to have in general. But what I don't like is that it's nearly impossible to tell a coherent story/follow a plot in a somewhat cosistent way. I mean unless you stick to the default path through the game. But if you do that: why have an open world in the first place? So... as soon as you leave the trodden path it is inevitable that the main story/plot comes to a halt and you'll have some kind of sideshow. That also means that often players (me as well) get the feeling that the main story isn't really that important. Without the main plit in your head you might get the feeling that you are lost somehow. "Where to go next? Hm... no idea, doesn't really seem to matter that much, does it?" I believe it's incredibly hard for designern and writers to create an open world game experience without sacrificing consistency and urge of your plot. PoE didn't have that kind of open-world approach: you could visit all places only after you unlocked them. E.g. you can only go to Raedric's Castle if you first go to Easternwood - and so on. And on top of that you had three acts that were seperate from one another. Deadfire keeps this only in citites where you have to unlock the districts by traveling to the adjacent ones first. But the world map is free with the only exception that is Ukaizo which is the seperate endgame. This might also be related to the overall quality of the plotline, but Deafire's plot feels a lot less compelling than PoE's (and even that one didn't give you an overwhelming feeling of urge, but was fine with me). I think open world does play a part in this. Skyrim has the same problem, at least for me: what am I supposed to do again? Like: ultimately? I tend to forget... "Look, here I can become a member of the Brotherhood, cool. It's fun to get assignments to stab random people from behind and..." On the other hand pure dungeon crawlers like Eye of the Beholder drop the player into a place (a room or a forst or whatever) and there's only one (or two) way out. You fight your way out of the dungeon (or into it in pursuit of X) and usually there's puzzles and fights and all - but you can't go left and right that much. You are focused on the main goal. Funnily enough those games often have very little story and plot - maybe because they don't need them to create motivation and tension. The setting itself does already provide this. And of course such games are so much easier to balance. Usually fantasy RPGs are somewhat of an interactive story though. So plot, story, motivation - those are important. Else it's more like a combat simulator or a tactics game. See Battle Brothers: open world, focus on tactics/combat and no overarching plot/story, only some "random" goals to achieve and contracts to fulfill. And it works just fine - but it's not a game like Deadfire or Baldur's Gate or Plainscape: Torment or anything like that. So I would argue that the current "open world hype" is bad. An RPG has to be advertized with that or else player are gonna say "Wut? How 2000!" - even if it hurts the overall experience. A somewhat open world is okay - let's say open "stages" of the game world. Like open acts. Too much railroading like in Legend of Grimrock would hurt the replayability I guess - too much open world hurts the story and the feeling of progression. Something in between would be fine. It would be easier to write for, it would be easier to balance (no scaling of encounters needed) and it would be more exiting - especially in the first playthrough. Maybe one could even do a game where the first playthrough is not open world but you would unlock areas like Berath's Blessings and then would have a more open world in additional plythrougs..? Hm... getting interested while I write this...

Now rereading and missed "Priest of Eothas" the first time. I have to say Priest of Eothas/Chanter (especially Troubadour) sounds a lot more fitting to me than Priest of Eothas/Cipher. I mean thematically. Mechanically there's no problem either. Troubadour with its passive that lets you overlap two chants without gap and Ancient Memory + support chant coupled with a Priest makes a nice passive + active healer and buffer combo. And it is somehow fitting that a benevolent Priest of Eothas wanders around, putting joy in the hearts of his fellows with his jolly songs and such.

I would argue that weapon focus should be your first talent since its impact is biggest in the early game - but the rest:

Psion/Priest is actually not bad. The Psion's focus generation doesn't rely on hitting anything at all so a Psion would be the perfect fit for a supportive Priest (who also doesn't need to hit things that badly). Psion's focus generation scales with Power Level, so it's quite good at higher levels as long as you don't get hit (receiving damage is fine as long as there's no attack roll - so self damage or DoT ticks will not stop it). Priests may have ways to prevent getting hit. Most notably Withdraw (come out of it with full focus) and Skaen's Shadowing Beyond but also defensive buffs (especially Priest of Wael). Wearing a shield and staying in the back rows also helps of course. Priest of Wael/Beguiler is a great fit as well - thematically and also in terms of crowd control and buffing/debuffing. Priest of Woedica/Cipher does pretty nasty damage and focus refill with Soul Whip + summoned "claws". Even works well as Soul Blade.

And that's exactly why those weapons don't get implemented in a realistic way - because as I already said then everybody would wield a pole weapon. Players who wanted to play a stabby Rogue would be extremely disappointed that they don't stand a chance against that peasant with a pitchfork. Unarmed Monks would be ineffective unless they could somehow miraculously come into grappling range. This game - as most fantasy RPGs - is not a HEMA simulator. So its mechanics are there to allow all different kinds of players some fun and make combat enjoyable for all sorts of characters. Too much realism can kill enjoyment. Example: I once played the 3rd edition of a TTRPG where players with short weapons had to do separate rolls against characters with longer weapons in order to get into reach. And the long weapon guy could counter those rolls and do rolls of his own for regaining distance between them as long as there's enough room. Because that's more realistic when long reach weapons fight against shorter ones. That rule was making combat so tedious and unfun that it was scrapped in the 4th edition and never looked at again - nobody complained about that. It was more realistic but it didn't improve the gaming experience - quite the opposite. Abstraction is necessary and if flanking should be considered at all it should be an easy mechanic that fits into the existing affliction system. The current abstraction is a good way to do it because it isn't behaving differently from other afflictions - it's systemically fitting. I'd even go so far and say it isn't abstract/easy enough with that 180-degree requirement. Battle Brothers, which still is a game that balances all weapons but has a more realistic approach to their usage, is doing "flanked" this way: if more than one character is engaged to an enemy then every character who attacks this enemy in melee will get a +5% to-hit bonus. Every character who additionally engages that enemy (max six characters can surround an enemy) makes it even easier for everybody who attacks that enemy in melee: +5% to hit for every "flanker" (+25% max if completely surrounded). But only for melee attackers. Guys with reach weapons who are not engaged but can reach the enemy will profit from but not contribute to flankling. Now if you have the "Backstabber" perk you gain +10% bonus per additiona comrade engaging the enemy instead of only 5%. If the guy who gets attacked has the perk "Underdog" though then all those bonuses get downgraded by -5% (so to -0% usually and +5% for Backstabbers). This seems to be pretty much what you ask for: not everybody profits the same (Backstabbers get twice the bonus), some people are trained to fight multiple opponents (Underdogs can't get hit easier when surrounded unless there's Backstabbers) and ranged attackers won't get a bonus at all (in fact they risk to hit the flankers). It's far from being 100% realistic but you can rationalize its workings and it fits into the overall combat mechanics very well. Because everything is hex-based and perks and effects work in a particular way where this abstraction makes more sense than coming from a 180 degree angle or something. Same with flanking in Deadfire. It's not very realistic but it fits into the set of mechanics that are there and behaves as most other afflictions as one would expect. You can still come up with a somewhat plausible story why this abstraction can make sense and it's easy to play with. As I said earlier there would have been a chance to implement flanking in the line of Marking/Sworn Enemy etc. (I guess nobody gets what I mean) and that would fit your demands pretty much - but would it make the game experience more fun for the majority of players? Not really. Would your idea be more realistic? Probably. Would it improve the gameplay? Not likely. Players don't seem to care that much and a more complex solution that doesn't fit the affliction system might frustrate more players than it would please others. I would even argue that flanking in Deadfire is too fiddly and the 180 degree rule is too much. Since one of your arguments is that the effect is too strong (I do agree, -10 deflection would be more than enough): I would just tune it down: -10 deflection against melee attacks only. Ranged get nothing because while the enemy is busy with the flankers they have to make sure they don't hit their comrade(s) - so I would argue that evens out and thus no bonus. I also would exculde it from all PER afflictions since those immediately unlock Deathblows, but that's another story. One could even make flanking do only -5 deflection and then make it stackable: every melee attacker adds one stack of flanking. 5 attackers surrounding an enemy giving -20 deflection in melee. Or remove flanking from the Perception affliction path and make it its own layered affliction: flanked -5 vs. melee, surrounded -10 and -1 AR vs melee, overwhelmed -15 deflection and -2 AR vs melee. Numbers can be adjusted. Armor would get less because the surrounded/overwhelmed enemy is more likely to get stabbed into gaps of the armor etc. That would fit the system and cater more to your ideas. But I wouldn't try to exclude the guy who the enemy is facing since that's way to complicated. But I still think the way it works now is acceptable enough and I wouldn't touch it. I would however do it the way I described above if I were to design a PoE3 or so.

Isn't there a patch coming out now or what did I read recently?

Haha - oh man that is weird stuff. No wonder you thought that Aloth was superfluous. Under those circumstances I would use more Chanters instead of Wizards, too.

Sorry to double-post, but if you have massive problems with hitting and feel that one handed sabre works better at the moment: you can just use one sabre in the early game and switch to two weapons later - as soon as it gets better (it will get better). I mean before investing into a weapon style like One-Handed or Two-Weapon Style. After some levels dual wielding will def. be the better option for White Flames. You could even use dual wielding with a Rapier + modal in the main hand temporarily. It would have +13 ACC over a single sabre but still do twice the healing (second one with the offhand - e.g. a Dagger) while not being slower (White Flames skips the main hand's recovery). Lots of options...