Boeroer

That is correct. Summoned weapons, summons and even the Animal Companion do not scale their values with Power Level but character level. I have no idea why, but it is like that. The only "weapons" that use PL progression are Monastic Unarmed Training and Transcendent Suffering. The only thing about summons and summoned weapons like the Blackbow that does scale with Power Level is their summoning duration. Frankly I just forgot that you had specifically asked about the Blackbow in combination with Power Level - sorry. My in-length response around Power Level was meant more general. So while Prestige can be a very useful passive it doesn't do much for your summoned weapons and thus wouldn't be very impactful for Caedebald's Blackbow - you are right.

Camping supplies were 4, 2 on PotD. So on average you were right. Although it maybe would often be just a lable I agree that it would be nice to have the Animist thing with all classes. Afaikt all the negatives of subclasses are there to balance out the bonuses. But sure: if you'd have no vanilla class you wouldn't have to balance the subclasses with that vanilla class. See Paladins and Priests that have no drawbacks vs. Wizards subclasses which have massive ones bc. of vanilla Wizard. All in all I'm pretty happy with the classes, multiclassing and subclassing though. I personally am not a fan of the open world approach. I very much like dungeon crawling in the style of Eye of the Beholder or Legend of Grimrock - here I don't mean the graphics and style now but the from of progression. So I would totally be for a big dungeon. Hell, the whole game could be one big dungeon for me.

If debuffing and damaging spells come from the same caster and the same spell tier: maybe. But if you can debuff let's say Reflex with a low level Miasma so that your Freezing Rake has a better chance to hit...? Also often it's way faster to debuff + cast damaging spell if the debuffer and the damage dealer are not the same character. I mean that's also true if they both would cast damaging spells - but maybe you have a guy that has decent debuffng capabilites but only mediocre damage (e.g. low MIG) or your spells come with a debuffing affect and damamge (often Druid). And usually debuffs last a lot longer than for one damaging cast. Several damaging casts (also from more than one caster) can profit from one debuff. See Chillfog: one lvl 1 cast for a very long Blind which makes landing several spells that follow easier. It has a big impact on most encounters (not only because of the blind, but still).

No, you got it figured out pretty well. The reason why +3 Accuracy feels less valuable later in the game is that the ratio of your ACC/enemies' defenses becomes bigger and bigger because your ACC rises faster than your enemies' defenses. Not only because of level progression but also because of abilities (more ACC buffs/ defense debuffs), items, consumables etc. Or in other words: in the early game often your ACC is lower than the enemies' defenses while in the late game it's often higher. Edit: well - you gave the answer yourself while I was writing, hehe. Casters also can benefit from ACC buffs and debuffing the enemy. Also the spells (as abilities) scale accuracy while auto attacks do not. So it's not that much different after all.

Or that. But I really can't remember much about how 3rd Edition D&D things so...

And nobody actually tried to claim otherwise so far.

I didn't say that. You are refuting a statement that wasn't made. I never said (nor do I believe) that blades can pierce plate armor - nor did I say that a rapier was effective agaist plate. I merely corrected your statement that the rapier was invented in a time when armor was less common while in fact it was used while plate armor was on a steep rise. My initial point was that the rapier could be seen as the better sword - or daggers can be seen as inferior battlefield weapons - and yet those different weapons are all sort of balanced in most RPGs so that the player has some stylistic choice. The point was that if you make things too realistic then the game becomes boring: players would all flock to the most effective "realistic" setup which would be some sort of plate armor and a pole weapon. And that point I just made to show that flanking doesn't necessarily have to be implemented in the most accurate way - if the simpler solution also works well enough (what I think) mechanically and conceptually. I am a computer scientist and software developer and I know some of the inner workings of Deadfire by observation and inspection. The current solution of flanking is more systemic and is easier to fit into the affliction system than your idea. That doesn't mean it's a bad idea - and as stuff like Marked Prey, Minor Threat and Stalker's Link show your idea isn't impossible or even that hard to realize. But it would be more complicated than the current, rel. simple flanking affliction that gets applied like any other hostile effect. Also and especially with regard to the string of consequences for other abilites and mechanics that use flanked as a trigger. I didn't say that it's impossible, I only wanted to show that the current solution is easier to fit into the system and works well enough. So that this might be a plausible explanation as to why Obsidian did it that way. Since development time costs money and most likely the vast majority of players don't really care if flanking is a benefical effect on the player or a hostile effect on the enemy I presume that most developers would go for the easier solution (if they are not hellbent on doing a realistic version). This is not only faster but also more robust since there is less risk of intruducing new bugs - and it also doesn't entail a whole new stream of potential problems with related mechanics such as Heating Up/On the Edge, Sneak Attack and so on - as I've already mentioned above. If Obsidian had it planned differently from the get-go then it would be another case I guess. Maybe if they had made a seperate category of effects where stuff like Marked Prey, Sworn Enemy, Minor Threat etc and then also Flanked could have been put in. Then your idea would have had a good chance to not only be more realistic but also be systemic and fit well. But even then I don't know if it wouldn't be too complicated for the common player. I already find the mechanics of Marked Prey and Sworn Enemy a bit obscure for new players. Could be solved easily with better tooltips, explanation and tutorials of course...

Difference is that I make it pretty clear when I'm posting opinions and not factual statements. Saying "the way it is now is just wrong" implies that this is somehow a universal truth while it's merely your personal opinion. By the way I also don't like the Arcana/Scroll system either. In my opinion scrolls should provide completely different effects from class abilites. But I assume there are some arguments that speak in favor of the current solution. It's just not my cup of tea is all.

Gorecci Street is not a fair testing ground.

Ah, okay. But if you only use one sabre you also can only proc one instance of White Flames healing. With two sabres you will have 12 less ACC, but you will be able to trigger White FLames twice(!). So you have two chances to proc White FLames at least once, if not twice. With one sabre you only have one chance but with higher +12 ACC. And of couse you'll do less damage with FoD with one sabre only.

Wait: do you know what "average", "very roughly" and "just to have an easy number" mean? Again: I'm not arguing about the different impact a point of ACC has over the course of the game. I really think you need to read more carefully. You have a tendency to counter arguments that weren't made.

Who told you that dual wiedling brings a loss of accuracy? That's wrong. The only thing that would lower your accuracy would be a medium or large shield. PER 13 is completely fine - especially if you are not playing PotD difficulty. Also because you can put the Ring of Focused Flame on your Kind Wayfarer and then your White Flames have +20 Accuracy. Maybe you will miss a bit more often in the very earlygame - but after some levels PER 13 will be no issue. You could take 2 points from CON and one from RES and put them into PER if you feel that you need some more. You might want to have somebody in the party with 16+ PER at the beginning - because there are some secrets and traps that you can't detect if everybody only has mediocre PER. Very low DEX can be bad for a Paladin who uses Lay on Hands quite a bit. Because your recovery will be so long that sometimes party members die before you can finish recovery and cast Lay on Hands.

That is not correct. It was developed during a period where plate armor was prominent (1550+). I guess you are confusing it with a foil. Anyway - I don't want to turn this into a discussion about misconceptions about medieval weaponry since that's completey deflecting from the actual discussion and utterly missing my point: that realism shouldn't be a primary concern for a D&D inspired fantasy RPG. Unless you have insight in the code of Deadfire and are a programmer you can't judge how easy or difficult it would be to implement something. About rapiers (for anybody who's interested) :

Yes. Also because flat +3 ACC really loses impact later on. Unless you really want to to stack as much ACC as you can possibly get for certain special builds. If it would be +3% ACC - now that would be a whole different beast...

Let me repeat myself once more: After release we had some forum users here who filled whole spreadsheets with data about rolls, enemies and so on and concluded that +1 ACC is roughly a 2% dps increase on average. This is an apporximation and doesn't look at specific enemies, builds and situations. It's just a number so you can quickly compare stuff. At the beginning of the game +1 ACC has a higher impact than +2%, later is has lower impact. But that doesn't contradict that the overall increase can be roughly estimated at 2% just in order to have a simple value for a first quick estimation. Maybe that's your personal definition, but dps is simply a value per time unit. I can look at a long time sample or a shorter one. If I'd average my dps over the whole playthrough then even a one-time damage spike leads to an increase of overall dps I did over the course of the game. And be it even so tiny. I didn't oppose your statement about the negligibility of +3 Accuracy at higher levels at all. Why are you arguing about this?

Let me repeat myself: It's a game, not a simulation. You could also argue that an arquebus should at least have 20 PEN or that swords and axes usually are sidearms and not main weapons. You could argue that the rapier is the better sword and should simply have better stats or that daggers and stilettos should be inferior weapons on the battlefield. You could argue that leather armor is not really a thing and that actual padded armor is way tougher than some fur armor. And that plate armor doesn't really slow you down that much and is always superior. But what would you get if you put too much realsim into a game and make it a medieval simulation? A boring game.

But if you flank an enemy - why should only you get the bonus and not your buddy? You are both in the same position. What if a third party member joins? So I would argue everybody who attacks the flanked enemy in melee should get the bonus. Your idea may be more realistic but it comes with several mechanical complications like the one above. That means it's more difficult to implement. Besides that there would be other issues, for example: Sneak Attack gets unlocked by flanked. With your solution that couldn't be done anymore (without altering the Sneak Attack logic quite a bit). How would Streetfighter unlock his passive? How would you implement Phantom Foes? Wouldn't it be better if the enemy still got he flanked status but only characters that attack in melee would profit from it? Anyway I guess Obsidian went with the more abstract but easy solution that is in line with the other afflictions and more systemic. You can argue that a flanked character is distracted in general and has to take care of two or more attackers in melee which leaves him more vulnerable. At some point you have to scrap realism and go with the easier yet still imaginable solution.

Over the course of the whole game 1 point of ACC translate to (very roughly) 2% dps increase. So +3 ACC would mean 6%. +2 DEX will give you +6% Action Speed. While this is not exactly the same it's sort of comparable. So with the +2 DEX alone you're somewhat on par when it comes to dps - not even looking at stuff like better reactivity, better Reflex, better chances of unlocking dialogue options through increased DEX and so on. It's also less dependend on enemies' stats. Then, if you are using Evocation spells, the +1 PL alone is better than +3 ACC. PL will give you +1 ACC, +5% multiplicative(!) dmg bonus, +5% multiplicative duration and +0.25 PEN for your Evocation spells. So I would always prefer the Firethrower Gloves unless I'm doing a very specific build tha needs all the dps it can get (e.g. something with Swift Flurry or a Skald or whatver).

So what you mean is that not the victim of flanking should ge the affliction "flanked " but the character who flanks should instead get a buff named "flanking"? Or do you mean that the flankig status should still be on the victim, but only the flanking character should profit from it (basically like Marked Prey or the Marking mechanic in PoE)?

This build will work in Story Mode. If you feel that you can't generate enough wounds because enemies can't hit you: use the ability "Mortification of the Soul".

You have to complete quests or advance in them. One turn = one advancement in (or the completion of) a quest. It doesn't matter which quests.

Hm... didn't notice.

Yeah - you can't run into the fray with him in the early game unless you skip Frenzy and/or use a shield. -10 deflection from Frenzy, low starting deflection with the rel. low health of any lvl-1-char is a bad combo. Reach weapons from the second row work well with Frenzy until the higher health (I mean the starting health + the rel. big gains at lvl-up) starts to make some difference. Savage Defiance also helps (Robust adds some AR and healing over time).