.jpg.ce846aae50e732dc4985eb712252381f.jpg)
why
-
Posts
305 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by why
-
-
If you had posted this as a possible bug report or even done a forum search on defense bugs rather than accuse the system of being quote "dishonest" and "difficult," I would have taken back my words and even apologized. It wouldn't be the first time I'd rethought a position. As it is, I don't take back a single word.
However, I don't like piling on either, so I'm happy to hear it worked out. Have fun kicking construct ass!
-
I'm picking it up straight away, but if I like what I see I'll pick it up on the PC also. I have hope, but I've learned to temper my hopes. We'll see how this baby runs on my Galaxy S2.
-
Hot damn! We have a date and it would definitely count as early 2016!
-
3
-
-
The personal enchantment could be something you could only do once per playthrought
First playthrough (and that's the only one many will do) this might become frustrating experience.
This is the real problem. It's like the really cool strongholds in BG2. It's a lot of work with the risk that most people will only see one stronghold at all and may not end up doing much with or understanding any.
In this case, if Obsidian decided to pursue this idea, then they'd have to start the process of the personal enchantment relatively early and beat the player over the head with all the concepts in order to make it absolutely clear what was happening. It could add to replay value, and it could definitely be a big move to choice and consequence to be sure, but it would be risky and no matter what some players wouldn't get it. Of course, some players won't 'get it' no matter what. Some players miss even the simplest of concepts spelled out clearly. That's fair enough, but Obsidian would have to implement it carefully.
I would say that a personal enchantment, along the lines of what wayfarer and Hawk said above, would have to reflect actual choices in the game. What decisions did the player face during the game, what path did he choose, and what was the outcome? Let's say he followed a path to save a village, and this path must be not only stated in the game but a clear decision on the part of the character, only to find the village was later destroyed because of his incompetence. Have the whole thing build into his personal enchant. The problem is that this sort of choice and consequence would have to reflect something Pillars just doesn't do very much, which is to account for the difference between stated goals and hidden thoughts. As... Voltaire? Somebody said, and I paraphrase, some men use words for the sole purpose of hiding their thoughts. In a role playing game, the player must know not only what his character says, but also what he thinks. The motives of the latter should be clear to the former. This is not only true in a game with an alignment system but equally true in a game without one. In fact, knowing thoughts and motivations is even more important to characterization in a game that doesn't have an alignment system because the game doesn't provide the ultimate moral judgment about the character's actions. The player does.
A personal enchant tied to the character in such an intimate way could in fact yield a huge benefit as a way to differential, define, and personalize the game for each player. Moreover, the results of the decisions and the enchant need not be weak because of different outcomes. The player might have wanted the PC to save the village. The player and thus the PC might be discouraged by failing to do so. However, the enchantment might have a certain strength and urgency precisely because of the failure.
Sure a system surrounding a single enchant sounds like considerably more work than they'd like to put into it, but it would make enchanting kick ass in a way that it simply isn't now. I would probably argue against it, but I also think it would be cool if they did it. One's a business decisions. One is my own personal real life gamer choice and consequence.
-
1
-
-
Here's how I see it, to reaffirm Inky and Heijy, Solo PotD is esentially bragging rights level. Sure, some real grognards will play it for the extra fun and games, but the majority of folks doing it are probably also looking for some satisfaction that they could do it. Some of them even admit it. Complaining about the difficulty while engaging in a playstyle that is so clearly rarified and centered around proving your prowess is crazy. It is not only supposed to be crazy difficult, it should be crazy difficult and, most importantly, it must be insanely difficult for PotD to have any meaning at all. There is no shame in finding the encounter difficult with a solo character on the hardest setting the party based game has to offer. It is manifestly bad form to complain about it as if it's a problem on the developers' end.
Now, if it turns out there is a bug that's hamstringing you, then you might have a beef but I frankly don't even grant that. Go get a few more characters and finish the encounter with the dignity of knowing you did your best and found your limitations. Go tweak your character and finish with the 'in your face' assertion that you could do it all along, damn straight! ...Because no one can claim bragging rights more than the guy who beat the encounter on the highest setting with an artificial limitation compounded by a bug that works to his detriment.
-
2
-
-
I do too, but I can see where it could be off putting. I know some gamers like a steady progression of gear. For myself, I like the RP aspect of 'your' weapon. Imagine Elric dumping his sword because he killed the kobold king and found a kickass club or something.
-
1
-
-
A lot of fights in the BG series were all about getting past magic resistance for me. As far as I'm concerned, magic resistance was tougher to deal with than the immunities in Pillars.
-
Part one was weird in that it gave a questline kind of set in the main game that was considerably harder than the actual expansion area. In order to satisfy difficulty junkies, they might do the same thing. Just don't try one new area from WM2 get a stomping, and not try the rest. As long as your the appropriate level for the specic area, you should still have a lot of leeway in how you progress. Assuming it's like WM1.
-
I like Kana and he managed to stay on his feet pretty well on normal. I did use him as a front liner. On hard, I wanted to try different npcs, so I only used him for a short period. I might try him again PotD, but I want to finish all npc sidequests and, sadly, I never have a lot of time to play. I thought I'd have time this past week, but we bought a new car and at the same time I had to replace the rack and pinion and power steering pump on the wife's '91 Mustang. Real life is cramping my quality Kana time.
-
I'm not trying to be clever, but you should just reconsider easy. Much simpler solution than a toggle.
-
At least you'd be ready for a real "rooster"fight. (I think ****fight will be censored. Rat bastards!)
The only thing about creating a huge variety of enchants is that it does tend to diminish the items in the game. I don't really mind that, but it does seem that you can sometimes get an item early and use it the whole time, or least a huge chunk of the game, because you just put your custom enchantments on it and the new gear you find ends up being a sidegrade rather than an upgrade.
-
1
-
-
Superb needs dragon stuff to craft right. So Legendary needs... Thaos bodyparts maybe?
There have to be some parts of Eothas still lying around the White March ...
I can see it now.... To enchant this plate armor to legendary level you need two Eothas Nipples of holy gouging. That and some glue. :D
Makes you wonder what the codpiece will do...
-
2
-
-
I dissgree with the initial premise. Don't get me wrong. You bought the game, and complaining can be fun. The problem I have with your initial premise is that because some classes don't allow for your particular vision, Pillars has less role playing than Baldur's gate. BG had limitations to what each class could do also. If anything, I would say Pillars has more flexibility. It might not be set up ideally for your vision, but that's not lack of roleplay. It's merely different ideas about what each class should do.
-
2
-
-
Then there'll be epic, relic, divine, and finally monstrously f'n asswhippin'.
-
4
-
-
yeah, and Dowling said the great JE may deign to answer a question or two. I can't think of anything worth bothering them, but I might have some upon seeing the gameplay. The Obsidian crowd is pretty nice and puts up with my meaningless comments, so I would suggest dropping in to take a gander. I'm really looking forward to seeing the White March 2. First day buy for me!Well, they did promise us something better than a gameplay trailer after all, and that's the improved version of one!
-
Actually,
The dialogue option that fires when you approach the gate lets you put the hood on. Can't remember if it does manage to fool them...
I believe I saved right before this and tried several different options. In fact, I'm absolutely certain that I
donned the hood and never killed off the folks there. I'll go back and edit this post to be sure, but if I've got it right, I never fought them at all, period. So, Godlike can, in fact, use the hood.
Yeah, I just checked and you never need to fight anyone. Regardless of stats, you can still wear what you need.
-
I'm impressed that you managed it. I'm with Boeroer, there's a good chance no-one else has done it. I would have thought the QA crew would have been going overtime trying to break things like this, but sometimes simple things like this just get beyond them. However, logically, since I used stealth to get past a lot of the encounters here until I went past them to go back and kill what I considered raiders, the fact is that getting closer to the siege perimeter becomes increasingly more dangerous and that makes sense. So, it's not completely illogical.
I will say this, if you can't handle Baelorin, you need not worry about the end boss in the overall area. Any incoherence in this post I will shamelessly blame on wine.
-
1
-
-
Not for level 1. So Kana's stuck with those stupid skeletons and Pallegina with Flames even if you'd want to build her as pure support.
Ah, I see that now. I believed you, but I just reloaded an old save and poked around to verify. Perfect example of why I should lurk and read while informed members post!
-
2
-
-
You already have the ability to toggle talents and spells and non Stat choices, don't you?
-
I'm sure she's quite important to someone. :D I mean, I don't know who she is, but she can be important to us too if she dishes dirt about the game.
Anyhow, I'm not really complaining. Mostly just engaging in age old dance between eager fans and cautious developers.
-
Okay, it's been long enough and so I'll irritate everyone by clamoring for more info. I think a bunch of us should join the Obsidian channel at theor Friday night game fest in order to complain at M. Dowring to wheeled more info. I will if you will!
-
Ahh, I see. Not a big deal for me so far, but maybe when I do PotD next run it will make more of a difference. Still have my beef with enchants, though. On the other hand, I know a lot of other folks are clamoring for the same thing. I'm just adding my voice to theirs. Actually, I hope that they've already changed it and I just didn't see it yet.Intervals between monsters' attacks are shorter than affliction durations on grazes.
The reason I want the change has nothing to do with difficulty. I want teh surprise! More randomness. I want to fear the effect: "oh no, my character is AFFLICTED now!"
Currently if a monster's accuracy is comparable to your defenses you're going to be afflicted all the time. I'd be happy with longer durations or more crippling effects, but without grazing.
-
I thought effects were lessened on grazes and heightened on crits. If that's the case, then there's incentive to make it harder to land a hit and a damned good incentive to make it harder to land a crit. At least that's how I see it. The game is not brutally hard, so I don't really pay that much attention to the mechanics. If the monsters landed enough party destroying effects, then I'd probably look into it more.
I'll just be happy to change some of my enchantments so I can adjust for new gear. Right now, if I get a +2 strength ring that, say, brings on Consecrated Ground on a hit, then I have to play tetris so that I lose a stat bump or one is rendered redundant. I don't mind it a little, but I think armor is the biggest bummer. You get some nice effects on armor and it sucks that you can't even replace the stats. Decide once and hope for the best. I think the stat bumps on rings and other items is coo, but let us switch around those stats on armor at least. Of course, I haven't had time to follow stuff as much lately, but I have some vague recollection that they're changing that. I was very happy to see somewhere in this thread about an increase in enchantment levels. Suhweeeet!
-
I don't want added incentive for bad guys to attack my stronghold. Better that they attack me in the field so I can smite them there and not be forced to travel back to Caed Nua to face their attack. Nope, I'm like a dragon. I want to sleep on a pile of my loot at night. :D
-
5
-
Pathfinder Adventures will release March 29th!
in Pathfinder Adventures: General Discussion (No Spoilers!)
Posted