Boeroer

Correct. A hand mortar.

The point of Reaping Knives is that someone else can generate focus for you while you can still generate focus for yourself with your weapon attacks. THus, casting it on yourself would be... pointless?

But you did see in the video that the whole environment and background was flat, right?

Rotate camera? Nope. The backgrounds are still painted. Thank the gods nope.

They already nerfed dual wielding from 50% to 30%.

Reminds me of this (the blocks were €) - a bargain:

Yup

Huh? Never did experience something like that. What's your system specs and so on? https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/94309-must-read-how-to-report-an-issue/

It's all good. I still think that two handers (or two handed style) needs a bit of a buff - or the other styles a biut of a nerf - to balance weapons styles better.

Are there *any* game effects that will hit "undead" but not "vessels" though? The few lore references to "undead" seem more descriptive than prescriptive, as it were . . . it's not like D&D where there's a separate "category" of undead and certain things effect undead in specific ways (i.e., a priest's Turn Undead, etc.) In Eora, that "category" is "vessels". There's also no effect that will apply to Lurkers but not Oozes. Or to Blights but not Shadows - although those are very different types of creatures. All of them are primordial/spirits and thus get hurt equally by Primal Bane/Ghost Hunter for example. So those game mechanics with umbreall terms/creature categories don't really prove anything in this case (in my opionion). Also this: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/65206-update-73-narrative-design-a-day-in-the-life-companion-goals-and-the-undead/

I don't want to mock you or twist your words or anything like that. I don't know if what you said is really a thing, because: In Deadfire the recovery of two handers is not longer than that of the heavier one handers (or am I mistaken)? So it's already like "in real life" as you said.

Right. I also think that's the main reason. 11 would be possible - but that's an odd number (hehe) for something like that.

Hm... I don't completely understand why there's still confusion about this in the forums. Sure - I also was uncertain what stacks and what not in beta1 - until I read this in the game (and here): Passives stack, actives don't. It's a lot simpler than PoE1 because now it's made very clear what passives and what actives are (except with proficiency modals which are also considered actives - every modal is. That could be made more clear).

No. +50% of area is +50% of area. It's just not +50% of radius. Actually in Deadfire it's mathematically correct. Maybe the gain per point of INT should be a bit higher, but at least the growth is linear, not exponential (which is a balancing nightmare). In PoE there was a problem that with very high INT the AoE sizes got ridicilously big - since an increase in radius has an exponential effect. If you have a radius of 5 meters your area is PI*5² = ~79m² --> *1.5 = 118m² If you have a radius of 6.1 meters your area is PI*6.1² = ~117m² This is just a matter of tweaking (maybe a few more % per point of INT) and proper UI description.

That's way too reasonable!

If you do WMI and WMII (including bounties, Concelhaut and Llengrath) you will hit lvl 16 before Act III. I also do it that way most of the time because Act III is pretty meh for me anyways. Often I simply rush to the god's table, pick a god, do the quest (and companion quests) and jump into the pit.

You could say that in the PoE context, yes. But oops - we're totally drifting away from Madscientist's original post.

I think there a lot more great games nowadays than there used to be in the past - especially when it comes to "worth its money". It's just all the junk under which they are buried that makes people think it's a decline. But that's mostly because nowadays you can develop an indie game pretty easily without a lot of superspecial knowledge or skills (see Unity3D, Godot and so on). We had some awesome indie games in the past few years and also some really nice big titles. I remember times where Pools of Radiance was a great game - or Trailblazer (man did I love that game on my Commodore 128d). But the frequency with which those came out was... veeery looow. The older I get the less I play or even try different games but tend to stick to one that really fits me/is fun for me. But that doesn't mean that most other games are rubbish. I also don't think that the exisitence of Full VO makes a game worse per se. I can totally see how repetetive talking of every unimportant shmuck can be very annoying though. So I'd alsoways say it depends on the implementation. I personally don't need VO at all, but I also don't think it's a downgrade just because it's there.

Yes, pretty sure - I'm not always at lvl 16 when I finish a quick run. But I always only have one additional hireling (apart from the official companions) whom I never send to adventures because he's my early game mechanics guy whom I drop at a certain point. So having not too many guys in the stronghold helps of course. It also helps a lot if you don't pick up companions (that you don't want to bring early) too soon but wait a bit. Because once you pick them up they get the same xp as you. So if you pick them up later it's less of a hassle to keep them all at the same level as yours. Of course meta knowledge helps - but all in all it's not too difficult to do it. The XP from stronghold adventurers is pretty high and will not be divided/shared between party members like quest XP/encounter XP will. I understand that this "management" of XP can be a bit annoying though.

...and prepare for the best! No... wait...

Well "Double VO" was an early stretch goal during the campaign - so I guess the step to Full VO didn't jumble their stuff too much.

Yes, that would be better. Or saying something like "+50% AoE from INT = +1.1m range". Maybe too long. For me +1.1m would do.

Good theory. I guess you are right. Should be easy to fix with the removal of the keyword.

Yes, with a reach weapon for example.

Yeah, thank you for the analogy. That is exactly what I meant.