protopersona

Multiplayer games are a different thing from a single player experience. That have different sales trends. Comparing this situation to multiplayer games-as-a-service is just being obtuse. Considering that this is probably the only single player game ever that gets as much balance patches as MMO titles, I don't see why wouldn't I compare.Balance patches don't turn Deadfire into a games-as-a-service platform though. Multiplayer games need to extend player retention with drip fed content. It gets more people playing the game over time with there friends, which keeps them buying micro transactions. Single player games don't have this problem. Here the devs have done a major and drastic shake up to the game, something that would never fly in a multiplayer game. It's like having a second launch. Honestly it's a pretty smart move since it gets a new round of media coverage. Your comparing apples to oranges.

The concern stems from the reality that in any given games development there's only so much time and money to go around. Right now Deadfire is testing out turn-based combat. If the sales of the game go up drastically at this point, it's pretty likely TB combat influenced that spike. At that point what developer wouldn't ask why they aren't putting more resources into TB combat? People are worried that in a sequel RTwP will either become the secondary mode to the primary development of TB combat or be dropped completely. It's a valid question to be asking, and if obsidian is smart they will be addressing that fear.

I think you guys are getting a bit too anal about this. This thread had points to make, but you've rectum. We've pretty much bottomed out on how useful this is going to be, butt I bet people are gonna keep sodomizing this anyways. Colon guys, we're better than that.

The last beta was for 4.1, which has officially released. There currently is not a beta release to test.

Multiplayer games are a different thing from a single player experience. That have different sales trends. Comparing this situation to multiplayer games-as-a-service is just being obtuse.

https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/107898-41-stealthsneak-speed-issue/ Nope, not just you.

This. The current system calculates just fine, and actions already have a built in initiative adjustment. The problem is that hard turns creates an action economy balance where everyone is mostly getting the same amount of actions, just at different times. To the OP, an action point system would be troublesome and time consuming to implement. Everything would need to be coded over to AP costs, where currently the game is rounding off action times to determine how much of a turn an action takes. The current implementation is rather slick from a coding perspective.

Known bug, will be fixed in next hotfix.

In my description of the Beckoner in Pt-Br, it says that the invocations have 50% of the original life and are smaller (visually). Just say that, nothing to last less, this is the invention of the people. Note: The cost of Beckoner invocations is -1 (I think in this case they are cheaper), if the default is 4 the Beckoner would be 3. What game version do you have? Because Beckoner Summons are actually one point more expensive (4 instead of 3 in case of skeletons) and the description of the Beckoner passive clearly states that the summons are smaller, have less health and less duration (actual game version 4.1): So it's def. not "the invention of the people". The chanter's summons are smaller and have half their normal health. Summon Invocations cost +1 Phrases. Source: https://pillarsofeternity.gamepedia.com/Subclasses#Beckoner Worse than the description does not match with the official site, and unless cheat pt-Br (Translation) does not have the part of least duration, I tested here too and all skulls lasted exactly 18 seconds. as it is in the description (Unless the description shows, the duration already with the reduction of time) That wiki is not an official source. It can be edited by anyone. Obviously not everything is updated or current.

Good news! They already did that. It's rough around the edges, but it's more playable than Deadfire was at launch! Go nuts!

Um, what was the point of this post?

C'mon gramps, even the first-gen consoles had two controllers. Guess why? FOR MULTIPLAYER!!! Also, multiplayer (in whatever form) as an optional mode, that doesn't change the game's core from being a single player experience – why not? For the same reason any tacked on mode is bad for a game. It takes time and resources that could have been used to improve and polish more important areas of the game. if the tacked on mode generates more revenue over and beyond what it took to create, then it generates more time and resources to improve and polish important areas of the game. Sure, but let's be realistic. Any mode that was actually tacked on tends to just be a way to pad out the game, and is often seen as a neat distraction but not worth playing the game for. The exceptions to this trend often become the new focus of the franchise and take it over, like multiplayer and zombies did to Call of Duty. I'm not saying TB mode has been implemented to pad out the game. It's a good mode that has a lot of work put into it. It definitely has some issues though, many of which I think come from trying to convert RTwP mechanics directly instead of giving everything it own set of TB stats. Problem is if the attach rate of the game suddenly jumps up after it's release, there's a valid incentive to put more resources into improving TB in future games. And game budgets are definitely a zero sum proposition, so that time and polish would have to come from something else. Maybe that doesn't mean removing RTwP mode, but it could mean not improving it any beyond what we already have. I'm not against PoE3 having a focus on offering TB at launch, I'd prefer it. I can see why fans of RTwP would find it worrisome though.

True, though what are the more important areas? It's important to give people options they like, no? See that depends on the context. Every situation is going to be different. In this case, whether TB mode was a welcome addition or another tacked on mode is going to be a subjective decision. Nobody is right or wrong on that call either. The negative feedback on the mode has valid concerns, and good developers would balance addressing both sides of that.

C'mon gramps, even the first-gen consoles had two controllers. Guess why? FOR MULTIPLAYER!!! Also, multiplayer (in whatever form) as an optional mode, that doesn't change the game's core from being a single player experience – why not? For the same reason any tacked on mode is bad for a game. It takes time and resources that could have been used to improve and polish more important areas of the game.

That is something to be said about stat/roll based combat and a turn based system giving player time and space to analyze the situation and choose the best tools for the job. It's like D&D was designed to be turn-based or something! D&D, like any and all other pnp games, was not 'designed' to be turn based but rather *had* to be turn based because that is the only way you can do things with a bunch of people seated around a table. It is a limitation of pnp gaming, and the point of progressing to computer gaming is to overcome the limitations and weaknesses of pnp gaming. Not really. At best the move from PnP to CRPGs trade strengths for other strengths. PnP is still the king of narrative and player agency. Players are able to have real, tangible effects and changes on the worlds they play in. They can build a legacy. They also have almost complete freedom to do anything they can justify in the limited rules set, and maybe more if the DM is feeling generous. As you pointed out, the trade off is the needed abstraction of turns to control the utter chaos that various situations would devolve into. CRPGs can get rid of the needed abstractions of turn based combat. They can also show you visually what is going on, not just describe it with words and figures. But you are limited to only what the designer can envision and implement. Generally once you are done playing a game there no option to continue in that setting as a new player, dealing with the repercussions of your previous characters impact on the world. One method is not inferior to the other, they simply have different appeals.

Invocation is the name for Chanter "spells." Most classes have some kind of summon, though chanter gets a lot of them.

What bug has in the summons? Currently summons don't scale with power levels. So they never get better than the base spell.

Interesting. I hadn't given much thought to a wizard/chanter. Would answer the CC needs as well. The idea of magical suicide bombers also amuses me to no end. Also Boeroer the second wizard phantom does cast 3 spells of his own.

Super easy, that will be in the next patch. Proof Obsidian isn't done patching the game up. Makes me happy.

I'm finding that 2 off tanks generally seems to be the way to go in Deadfire. Especially if those 2 can still dish out enough damage to make them dangerous to disengage. In that respect I think Eder does a great job as swashbuckler, especially combined with Pallegina using a 2 hander.That was a nice try at pivoting I'm confused. What do you mean?

So I'm thinking of building a summon and pet heavy team. Thinking Pallegina multiclass for obvious reasons, Tekehu multicast as healer and support, Maia as gunhawk for some damage, and Eder multiclass for "main tank", though might switch him to dual wielding later. So I'm debating between multiclassing MC as chanter with either cipher or ranger as another ranged DD. I'm debating whether the extra pet or the CC is of more use\fun. Any advice? I'm not interested in a herald MC because I like min\maxing too much. When I play one I feel too obligated to pick the optimal dialog for disposition reasons instead of what's interesting or funny.

I'm finding that 2 off tanks generally seems to be the way to go in Deadfire. Especially if those 2 can still dish out enough damage to make them dangerous to disengage. In that respect I think Eder does a great job as swashbuckler, especially combined with Pallegina using a 2 hander.

The subject of this thread is not "what makes the best tank" it's "best ways to gear Eder specifically." If you're not going to stick to the subject at hand and just inject your own opinions, then you're better off not posting.

Self explanatory. Will most mods need to update themselves for the turn based changes? Or will existing items and system changes use the existing systems natively in the new turn based combat? I'm mostly thinking about how custom item mods will be affected by this.

Looks like the enemies resolve their turns rather quickly. Should help to keep the tedium down at least.