mosspit

Pretty much. It is easier to control the difficulty at the start as the game can project most if not all of the gamer's choices. Towards end game, the progression paths of different gamers will be vastly different. Difficulty here can be thought as a filtering process to stop bad builds from completing the game. However, it risks being too restrictive as to promote boredom. I think it is more like getting the AI to make decisions that approach that how an actual human would take in a given situation. It is extremely difficult to code that kind of response, least of all for a game. In the Souls games, it kinda addressed this with the help of human invaders. Also that's why most crpgs inflate stats and enemy numbers to make up for the discrepancy. I only tried Demon Souls. As an arpg, I admit it isn't my cup of tea. The difficulty you can find in arpg games is a little different from a crpg, as they demand different things from the gamer ie reflexes, memorising attack patterns and tell-tale signs etc. And again, it really depends on how one define difficulty in a crpg.

Ironman doesn't make the game more difficult, it just promotes metagaming and makes failure more frustrating. That's where the question of "how you quantify difficulty" comes about. So what say you? btw failing a ToI is not necessarily frustrating. It depends on what you are looking for in a playthrough. Yup, spot-on with regards to tension.

You can also make use of some of the existing game modes. Like Trial of Iron. I just restarted again as I pulled an extra group of adragans in Act III . It's replaying without replaying. Incidentally, ironman mode is also how I squeezed more replays out of XCOM too. Speaking of difficulty, how do you guys quantify difficulty anyways?

Likely to be the gems merchant who appears at night. Slightly to the north of Salty Mast.

2 things about Gallant's Focus Doesn't stack with Priest Blessing spell. In fact, I also tried it with Disciplined Barrage and the 4 acc got suppressed. The coverage is actually quite small. You might make it decent by max'ing int but it can't really compare to that of a Pally. The way I see Nightshroud - it is a "free" superb enchanted weapon when upgraded. The proc chance for blind is actually quite bad. I levelled it by engaging a tanky enemy (eg troll) with my party tank and priest whack it. The 13 proc chances required took a long time... although the barbs spell proc is ok-ish. The most attractive part of it is the Shadowing Beyond ability, which gives some breathing room if your priest take on too much heat. If you want to be offensive, the Nightshroud is not the best choice.

I actually quite like this. Maybe not the exact implementation, but rather the direction. Confusion / Charm having a chance to a save every time they are hit is kinda neat. And maybe petrification having high DR on all attack types except for maybe piercing. One of the issues is that some of the most debilitating cc (in terms of active effects) also have the most severe reduction to saves.

@OP: You have included 2 things in your replies: difficulty and fun. Both are subjective with possibly some dependency on each other. You can achieve a good mix of both if you tailor your playthroughs, depending on how you define difficulty and fun. At the end of the day if you choose OP classes with OP skills, you are still going steamroll through the game.

Well perhaps most have gotten the memo that int is useful for a barb since it augments its class defining skill. That or to avoid having another deja vu that results in mods coming in to lock the thread.

Care to elaborate? How long do you think it will take to finish ? There isn't a sense of the game being "finalized", at least for me. I have the game since launch, and up to the last patch it introduced heavy changes. Some would even say some changes went against the initial design philosophy. Check out AndreaColombo's posts on further patch tease. Those normally includes direct replies/quotes from Josh Sawyer and so far they have been accurate. Things to expect may include: Stronghold changes Chanter mechanics change Casters' per-enc system changes So yeah...

OP's stats distribution reminds me of the "suicidal" barb who rush in, get surrounded and get killed to activate Vengeful Defeat. Maybe equip a Ring of Wonder so you can do it again.

This game aren't stabilizing any time soon.

Immunities isn't a big deal. In a way, it never was. All it serves is guide the gamer through another playstyle route. Those routes already existed without immunites in place. The problem is some folks refuse to acknowledge that these alternate approaches existed before 2.03, and by that they viewed these alternate approaches as "new". Hence the illusion of variety. I am more concerned about the direction. Started out with physical type immunities and now cc immunities... Am I the only one seeing these things creeping in slowly but surely? So if encounters are not balanced in the future, is this what I am going to expect - add 1 or 2 more immunities? Hell, make an enemy totally immune and you have the most difficult encounter. Because now there are zero options to beat it. Think of it long-term, you want replay value? You are going to need variety to drive that value. But whatever... from the looks of it, some folks really do need the game to impose the restrictions first before they are willing to switch up gameplay. In any case, I will figure out something to hold my interest.

You're welcome Anaeme

The 2H rogue I see most commonly recommended around here is the Tall Grass wielder. The weapon has inherent crit conversion, together with the rogue crit abilities, makes the prone effect proc frequently. It is a second line attacker that is meant to attack behind a tank. Dual wielders (usually ruffian) goes in to attack after the fontline has been formed and enemies chosen their targets. The advantages of a dual wielder is that there is more dps due to faster attacks. Also, rogue's strike abilities are full attacks (except for the lvl13 one based on description?). So the strikes, besides having a inherent dmg increase, will land twice which increase dmg further and also increasing the affiction proc chance. The downside is that you probably need some survivability, and taking Shadowing Beyond is highly recommended. Res up to the point you are comfortable, then might (assuming dex and per are allocated). Might's dmg increase is diluted by rogue's multiple dmg modifiers. Since might's dmg contribution is additive, the actual dmg increase is less than that on the stat screen.

Antelope if you are looking for a tanky companion. With the buff in the previous patch for resilient companion, Bear's starting DR bonus seems less appealing. You will get more mileage out of Antelope's starting bonus of +7 Def. You shouldn't need to go full 18 Res, especially for a fighter. The squishness that you experience should go away after level 5+. At low levels, I find that Barbs (and also Monks) can't really face-tank much with a shield. So you can temporarily just put shields on weapon swap for situations where they take too much heat, instead of giving them 18 res from the get go.

@OP: Yes. It is very refreshing and fun. Personally pre-2.0, I done one with all martials (Pally, Fighter, Monk, Barb, Rogue and Ranger). I had so much fun I re-did the same all-martial combination post-2.0 with slight build variation. Triple crowned the 2nd run (PotD ToI Expert Mode) to add a bit of excitement to it. Even though I game overed like 5 times, it was a blast! Basically most of the party members are built to handle their own, with at least some level of survivability. So for those playthroughs, I didn't really have a frontline. Sometimes the ranger got an enemy in her face but nothing that can't be managed. Currently I am doing an all melee playthrough but with a priest and cipher. ToI just to keep things interesting too

That's the thing... yes... it does. As the game exists prior to 2.03 you can simply find one strat that works for you and apply that strat to every single encounter in the game and it will be valid. When nothing is restricted there is no incentive to ever change your approach to an encounter. There is a fine line you have to walk though because you can get too limited. Obsidian is not making a game where there are 5 types of damage and an enemy is immune to all but one. Enemies that make logical sense having an immunity, like the fire elemental versus fire damage I mention earlier, or a dragon being immune to knock down, get those things. That said that's it, they aren't immune to every other type of damage or every status affliction. Just the ones that make sense. Following the path of least resistance doesn't mean the other options don't exist. I already mentioned about the incentive part. There is an illusion of variety because you are taking approaches that aren't beneficial before, as there were more optimal approaches previously. It doesn't mean those approaches did not exist in the first place. Personally, I have done playthroughs where I did not have to depend on cc way before immunities came into the picture. Meaning to say I took the less optimal approach. And I did not have to depend on the game to impose restrictions to allow for those low cc dependency approaches. Bottomline is still the same - taking away options does not create variety. Options and variety are not mutually exclusive.

Immunities, by their very definition, completely limit handling choices, which is the exact opposite of Variety. For example, if there are 5 different types of damage, but an enemy is immune to 4 of them... you only have 1 choice. Immunities guarantee an increase in monotony. Goodness, Gairnulf. You hop around far too many threads saying things that blatantly disregard math and science lol I agree. Whatever strategies or tactics that you will use to circumvent immunities in 2.03, they are available previously in 2.02 too. Difference is that there is more incentive to use the said strategies, that's it. Taking away options does not create variety.

Yeah Mental Binding is not too bad. It has been nerfed, but with patch 2.03 there are some benefits in choosing a variety of CC.

Have you taken Psychovampiric Shield? It lowers the target's Resolve by 10 and adds 10 deflection to your cipher. -10 Resolve translate into -10 Deflection and -20 Will. And it lasts quite a long time. So the target becomes easier to hit physically, becomes more susceptible to your mental powers, and the spell increases your survivability.

A bit of overselling of immunities here First, difficulty can be viewed as the removal of options, reducing the pool of viable builds. If you agree with this view than yes, the game became more difficult. But if one is to "rinse, wash and repeat" skills to defeat enemies before. There is still going to be a "rinse, wash and repeat" of skills to defeat enemies now. Just some separation of the type of spells against the non-immune enemies types. Nothing was fundamentally changed in the way CC works so don't expect the immunities to miraculously give an incredible experience. I was thinking that CC has the graze/hit/crit mechanics too. Something more could have done with it and I read some suggestions on these forums that really sounded interesting. It would be nice to see some those suggestions implemented instead.

It is more than that. Torment Reach range is determined by int. This post has a decent summary of the poster's findings - https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/74521-monk-build-int-as-a-dump-stat/?p=1654783. This post is kinda old (around 1.06?) but as far as Int goes, I think it is still okay for reference. The thread contains some findings on range of Rooting Pain vs int too but meh. Wounds duration is affected by Int. That was one of the things I noticed without referencing external sources on my int-dumped Monk - Wounds expire faster. And this is a subtle factor since Wound Duration is not as well documented as other duration skills. This will utlimately affect how you spent your skills and effectiveness of Turning Wheel. Iron Wheel too but meh. Then there are the duration skills like Clarity of Agony, Crucible of Suffering and ofc Swift/Lightning Strikes etc. The shortcomings of a int-dumped Monk is the sum of all its parts above. And it is difficult to analyse in a controlled environment. Eg. how do you determine the effectiveness loss of missing out on a hypothetical 3 wounds because you were paralyzed (due to low Will) and therefore causing the Wounds (again low int duration) to expire before you recover? There are so many scenarios. So I prefer just to comment on the overall feel of the different playthroughs.

Just wondering... Have OP done a playthrough using a Monk with dumped int? Cause I have. And when I compared that with other Monks with average int on my other playthroughs, I decided that int-dumped Monks sacrificed a little too much for those extra stats.

On the contrary, Priests gained the most relative strength in 2.03.

Yes sorry to hear that. I am also currently doing PotD Trial of Iron mode (already restarted once earlier on because of immunities). Didn't do triple crown this time round because I already done it last playthrough on a no-caster party (range indicator is not needed as most martial abilities do not need aoe targeting). Currently have a cipher and priest to help against the immunities. I don't know about wizards but for ciphers, they thankfully have powers like Psychovampiric Shield, Body Attunement and Wild Leech that isn't covered by immunities (but can still be saved against). No active effects but at least enemies saves can be reduced. Also I am also looking to see if I can fit in weapons that stun on crit in my builds. Those are not actual stun afflictions so they should bypass immunity.