algroth

The only reason I can see that the misuses of real world science are different to the misuses of animancy in Eora is because of the prevalence of a belief in souls in our world. If, like me, you don't believe that I (or any one else) has a soul then the abuses of science are just as evil as those of animancy. Of course, if you believe your essence will go on after your death then that all changes. As a side note: as I understand it souls in Eora aren't really like those described in, say, Christianity. When a person dies in Eora their soul, eventually, returns to the wheel where it is very often broken apart and recombined with other souls before being born into a new person. In general the "person" ceases to exist after death, with awakenings and such being the exception rather than the norm. Basically whilst the soul is fundamental to living creatures, it is not their immortal essence. You could say a soul is a real manifestation that harbour their individual person and sense of self - in that sense there is a parallel to the neurosciences and these do have a history of despicable procedures and experiments that either killed or radically altered the patients and subjects they worked with (not to mention the occasional malpraxis as well). Again, I don't really think these disciplines reduce themselves to this either.

how could it not? real monsters. real souls. doesn't matter how many parallels there is to real world sciences and scientists when there is such fundamental and salient differences as we discussed already. unfortunate, previous experience tells us the inability (feigned?) to recognize how real monsters and real souls changes the basic discussion is making progress impossible. HA! Good Fun! I've given you the example of a real monster: the atom bomb. You'll argue that it's not a monster, it's a weapon, but it's a device designed with the deliberate intent of mass destruction and I see its use as monstrous (and it has been used before). It's real, and it's more frightening than any wicht or construct or Frankenstein's monster. But I do not use its existence to argue that the entirety of nuclear physics or technology is wrong, and so when I see animancers in the game itself using animancy positively and with the intentions of the betterment of kith, I do not assume animancy to be bad in and of itself either.

*Some* animancers, that is. And that's really the problem. Animancy is the game's stand-in for science, and this could be used as much for trapping souls in constructs as it could for helping fractured souls to find their 'twin'. The issue here falls down to individual practices of animancy and not animancy in general, and I do think that is made pretty clear throughout the game's length. Again, though, the alternative presented is really just superstition, and from the present day rationalist perspective, science will trump it every time. I don't recall how the hollowborn crisis was interpreted by the animancers, but it appears that Waiden's Legacy was the price to be paid for the practice of trapping souls. It isn't a superstitious belief when direct evidence of the consequence of animancy becomes available via the player's agency. I would expect that information to spread throughout the culture like a meme, transmitted in part by some of the party members, and eventually shaping everybody's interpretation of animancy. No, Waidwen's Legacy had nothing to do with the animancers of the time, but was blamed on them by the superstitious crowds as motivated by Thaos and the Leaden Key. The assumption from the masses as the Legacy carried on was that they were being punished for transgressions against either Eothas or the gods in general, and saw animancy as a forbidden study as it ventured into what they believed to be the gods' domain (namely, souls). Though yes, it is also true that the machines that allowed the Legacy to happen were created by Engwithans, and no doubt they possessed knowledge or theory along the lines of animancy too which allowed them to create these in the first place. The purpose was different, of course: these weren't made for the deliberate intention of wiping out a generation but, if I'm not mistaken, for gathering souls by the mass so as to build the gods that rule over present-day Eora. They were soul-magnets which were repurposed by the Leaden Key into the tools to create the Legacy. But as for the animancers and their present-day practices, none of that was a cause for the Legacy, just used as a target by superstitious groups like the Dozens and so on - the reason why things like wichts came about was because they were trying to find a *cure* for the Legacy after it begun, and as mentioned in the game itself, for a while it looked like the process of transferring animal souls into Hollowborn children did work (it's only when they grew up, years later, that things got awkward).

not true. the problem is animancy is a stand-in for real world science, but real world science, in spite o' the horrors o' which it is capable, does not require the manipulation o' souls. frankenstein's monster is a boogie man o' science, and a cautionary tale, but the monster's sin were... what? repost: frankenstein is the frequent used real world cautionary tale 'bout science run amok yes? were fiction. there never were no frankenstein monster. in point o' fact, ms. shelley's monster were benign for most o' the novel. dr. frankenstein creates and is horrified by the creature's ugliness and crudity. the monster is cast out and wanders alone 'til it decides to observe and aid a family kinda in secret. monster eventually learns french and befriends some old blind guy. happy days. everything is ok til family returns and sees the hideous monster and the 'beast' is again driven away. our misbegotten protagonist returns to dr. frankenstein and observes that he will never gain acceptance from people, and so he asks his maker to craft for him a companion. dr. frankenstein initially agrees, but then he starts to worry about the implications o' a race o' monsters, and so he destroys his female creation. the monster finally snaps and swears he will get revenge on frankenstein. if frankenstein's monster has gained a foothold in the collective consciousness as representing the dangers o' science run amok, what then o' the Real Monsters produced by animancy? how much more terrible and vivid is gonna be the nightmares attributed to animancy given that the poe science does require trafficking in human souls and may result in undying monsters? end repost is a fundamental flaw in using animancy as the representative o' tech and science. manipulation o' souls is different. create multitudes o' souless children and rampaging hodes o' undead monsters is the kinda scary nightmares the ignorant imagine is the inevitable end to which science leads. with animancy, the creation o' monsters and horrors is real. rip souls, which ain't an abstract such as in the our world but is objective and even tangible, from living bodies or eternity to power creations benign and malefic is not similar to the moral conundrums o' stem cell research or the environmental impact o' coal. deserves a new thread, but the problem o' poe/deadfire animancy is fundamental. science and animancy is different. HA! Good Fun! Animancy is not just about the manipulation of souls, however. It refers to the general study of souls, which can involve their manipulation as well as the observation and theorization of their characteristics, behaviour, etc. What's more, what some may see as manipulation others may see as treatment. Take the example of the dragon whose soul was 'bleeding' during White March. Transpose this to a kith, remove the possibility of them to know or meet a Watcher. An animancer may study this person's condition and through treatment - or manipulation - find a way to stop the bleeding. Alternatively, they may tell the person in question what is going on with them better than the person ever would themselves, and point them to someone who may help, namely a Watcher. And animancy *is* presented as a science in the game itself, and more importantly, it is the only science in Eora that the game explores with any real detail. This is crucial to be able to understand what the game is about in the first place, because it is about the birth of humanism and it is about the transition into the Renaissant period. That the game borrows so much from this period is not an accident. As such, animancy does exist in the game as a representative for the fledgling sciences of the time as well. And sure, animancy can create real monsters in the game itself, but I don't really see how that changes much in terms of its representational value. That it stands for something doesn't mean that it is the exact same thing. The history of neuroscience is no less disturbing once you delve deep enough into it, either, nor is the atom bomb's existence any less horrific than these 'real monsters'. Nor does it imply that every animancer is interested in creating monsters, and I think enough cases and points of view are given through the original game to show this.

These Origin Stories vids look very pompous and remarkably silly, with the ball-jointed mannequin-like animation hardly helping. I haven't played the first Divinity or seen much of the second, but are these at all representative of the game's overall tone? Might just skip them.

*Some* animancers, that is. And that's really the problem. Animancy is the game's stand-in for science, and this could be used as much for trapping souls in constructs as it could for helping fractured souls to find their 'twin'. The issue here falls down to individual practices of animancy and not animancy in general, and I do think that is made pretty clear throughout the game's length. Again, though, the alternative presented is really just superstition, and from the present day rationalist perspective, science will trump it every time.

Exactly this. In fact, personally I felt that the questionable acts by animancy were only included so as to make what is obviously the best and most sensible choice be tinged with a bit of grey. I thought it was a pretty clear-cut choice when the alternative was to stunt progress and vindicate the people's superstitions.

Thank the Heavens Urgot got a rework.

But... But it's a cat with a moustache and a top hat!!

Yeah, I reckon that one of the arguments towards prioritizing unique idle animations over a walk toggle is that few will appreciate the latter whereas all will see the former (as unique idle stances probably won't be linked to a toggle). The unique idle animations are part of the general aesthetic overhaul whereas the walk toggle is a very niche-specific optional feature.

Well, it's a matter of opinion really, but to me Hiravias was easily one of the best companions in the game, alongside Sagani and Edér. His perspective and personality were interesting, his quest was engaging, and he provided some of the best comic relief in the game without reducing him to just a "comic relief" character. I would go as far as saying he, as Wael in some ways, is deliberately designed to obfuscate through his eccentricities one of the most sensible points of view in any of the characters in the game (I mean his, not others'). That makes him a pretty layered and compelling individual.

I would have to ask, what approach/style? As far as I'm concerned he's just as workmanlike and not nearly as competent. Abrams at least does a pretty good job of evoking a nostalgic/Spielbergian aura to his work, and I for one really liked his work on The Force Awakens. I don't mind him returning even if I would have preferred a more auteurish voice the likes of, to stick to Star Wars directors, Rian Johnson.

Agreed. The devil and maneha were so jarring to me i could never stand having them around. Sagani was almost as bad. Didn't like eder that much either. Modern american accents don't feel very "colonial" to me. Neither Sagani nor Edér bothered me much personally but I can definitely agree with the Devil and Maneha. In general though, I think these two characters were all over the place in terms of tone and writing, so that it could be that either factor had more influence on my perception of the performances than the accent itself - still, I would agree that they jarred with me.

Yeah, just to make sure, I wasn't saying they should hire British talent because of accents - I mean, I wouldn't mind British accents either but in this regard I wouldn't put it past British voice actors being able to deliver a perfectly decent American/neutral accent either. My comment was meant more in jest, but it's true that usually they are cheaper and just as good or even better to the American alternative - that's all. I will say however that some accents did strike me very odd, mostly because they felt pretty region-specific and 'modern', even for a post-colonial setting. It all adds to the general feeling of amateurishness I got from some of the work in the first Pillars, like the actor in question was performing with the only accent they knew. This doesn't necessarily reflect on the behind-the-scenes reality, mind.

Looking at the log, would anyone else prefer something like?: Gunpowder Barrel activates Gunpowder Explosion. Gunpowder Explosion hits The Devil for x damage and knocked her out. Gunpowder Explosion hits Eder for x damage and knocked him out. Gunpowder Explosion crits Brine Imp for x damage and kills it. Or if pronouns are a problem: Gunpowder Barrel activates Gunpowder Explosion. Gunpowder Explosion hits for x damage and knocks out The Devil. Gunpowder Explosion hits for x damage and knocks out Eder. Gunpowder Explosion crits for x damage and kills Brine Imp. I mean: I'd like to see at a glance the damage that knocked down my party members. It depends on whether the explosion does a determined amount of damage or acts as an insta-kill, I guess?

I never thought of Hiravias as a horndog at all. Regardless I'm not sure how Ydwin would seem any closer to Edwin, similarities to their names aside: animancers are not de facto evil and her description paints her more as the shy kind of awkward type than the comically megalomaniac and power-hungry type Edwin was. Of the reasons given I do agree that her role as an animancer is what makes her character more interesting to expand upon, but to add to Sedrefilos' argument the hype for Ydwin hardly came about until her concept artwork was released.

I would be. I think a question regarding that was asked on one of the stream and the answer was no - it would take a lot of work to rework existing material and sidekick to reach companion level - better to spent resources on a new companion with new content. As far as monster and finishing - it looks like a feature that could be added on a later date, for example with an expansion. I don't recall seeing that question asked, but I'm not sure how much reworking would be needed, so much as expanding on the base that is provided by the vanilla game. I'm not saying that it *will* happen, mind, just that it seems perfectly plausible. Each additional companion they added increased the work needed for ALL companions by 50%. So for instance, we started off having 5 companions during the campaign, when they added the 6th then the work required for those pre-existing 5 companions increased by 50% as well. Thats why they had Ydwin so high up I believe, due to the increased workload they wanted to make sure they got tons of money for it. Why does it increase the cost of each pre-existing character so much? Because Obsidian are not doing them as separate discrete blocks, but in an interconnected webway of relationships. You add Ydwin, you need to work out what traits are being tracked by each of the other companions in order to determine how they feel about her, and vise versa, and the actions that may result from them. If you don't quite get that then imagine this: each character is a point with a line, or connection, going to every single other point. When there are just two points, you only have one line. Add a third, and each point will have two lines coming from it, for a total of 3 lines. Add a fourth, and each point will have 3 lines coming from each of them for a total of SIX! See how the number of lines escalate? Now imagine that each line is made up of mini-lines that make up that line, each one representing a different trait such as "Likes animals" (Eder's one) that defines what form that line will take. That is why certain writers in Obsidian probably blew a sigh of relief when they saw that Ydwin goal hadn't been met. Now, I'm sure the response is that they have added characters before in expansions, but these have not been built this way before, rather they were built in the old silo style where they ignore each other and only have eyes for their Lord and Saviour PC, which is probably the extent we'll get from Sidekicks like Ydwin (if we're lucky, they are using the term sidekicks for characters that they are not promising equalised content like with the companion, making them more uneven like with the Baldur's Gate 2 companions). Just to clarify, we are keeping in mind that I was only talking about expansion content, right? Because I don't deny that a lot of work would come into the creation of a new companion or the expansion of a sidekick to companion status, and would never expect that to occur for the primary release. All the same, even while considering the above which is all very true I do see it as a plausible endeavour for a future expansion/DLC. That's why it wouldn't surprise me. I'm not saying it *will* happen, or that I'd be particularly disappointed if it didn't, but it does seem like a perfectly feasible possibility.

They should hire more Brits. People like Stephen Fry have lent their voice for either a very tiny sum or none at all in the past (see Benjamin Sniddlegrass and the Cauldron of Penguins as an example).

Well, you don't need all three rubbings to access the spire. Those mostly serve as guides. I'm currently playing through the game again though going through the Rebel path so I don't have an answer. Technically, sure. But it still annoyed me. I ended up looking it up online because I couldn't for the life of me figure out what I was missing, and it turned out I wasn't missing anything, it just wasn't possible to get. It just felt wrong to "cheat" my way in, and it kind of killed my enthusiasm (that, and the fact that everything suddenly became all "go here, kill them" instead of actually being able to talk to and reason with people.) I do find it annoying that more than once there's a very logical and easy solution for a problem that is just omitted out of game convenience or "evil railroading". A few examples, which will be spoilery: when finding out Deya killed Phaedra following the attack on Lethian's Crossing, there is no option to charge her for murder, it's either take a bribe, let her go or kill her. This makes little sense considering your whole role in the game is as an enforcer of law. Similarly, in the Disfavoured path I hate the fact that we cannot choose to do anything *but* follow the Disfavoured plan when dealing with Cairn, even though that plan is obviously deeply flawed, unnecessary and goes against the interests of Kyros in favour of the personal interests of a vassal who we should not be taking orders from. Again, it ignores our role as an agent of the Court of Tunon (this problem crops up time and time again). Also during the Rebel path I dislike the way we are made to choose either/or between the Forge-Bound and Bronze Brotherhood for the absolute flimsiest reason possible: that one person insulted the other and they go on an "us or them" hissy-fit next. You would hope for a more diplomatic choice but no, there's simply none given. Oddly enough one of the best set-up "hard choices" in the game, that of choosing to either kill a baby to end an Edict or let it live and with it let the Edict endure, does offer a third option for a perfect outcome. I don't know, I just find these choices to often feel forced on the player by the lack of a more sensible response option to choose from instead of the game finding ways to genuinely put the player in an uncomfortable position. Sorry, a bit of a rant, but yeah.

Well, you don't need all three rubbings to access the spire. Those mostly serve as guides. I'm currently playing through the game again though going through the Rebel path so I don't have an answer. Also, just touched the Wound for the first time... It's a pretty cool location. So far the additional content has been pretty cool, though my worry still remains about it being too scarce. We'll see.

In Spanish "aleatorio" means "random". I would reckon that is how the OP is using it.

*SPOILERS* for Tyranny and Pillars. Some of these points are already being worked on whereas for others we'll have to see. For example: in terms of replayability, factions will be much more prominent to the overall story this time around, meaning that depending on the faction you'll choose to allign with (there are four total) you may have access to certain faction-specific quests or see a same quest be significantly altered by your allegiances. Much like Tyranny this ought to affect the content you can access in any one playthough and thus aid replayability - however they have also said that they won't make whole areas inaccessible via this mechanic as that just doesn't feel good for the players who *want* to experience the entirety of that world. Enemies won't spawn randomly or in random locations but they will be set to move and patrol this time around, meaning they'll not be always in the same spot. From what I recall of a Q&A they are also changing the way weapon proficiencies are grouped, though I might be remembering this incorrectly. The matter of whether expansions will be added as new post-campaign adventures or as part of the main campaign remains to be seen, but I personally don't have a preference either way and can also see how it might either make sense or not at all to blindly request this of the devs. In the case of Pillars I think a post-campaign story could have made sense and there was a way The White March could have been made into its own story, but it wasn't really an issue for me that it wasn't - in fact, I kind of enjoyed having the ability of playing through the main campaign with all the new abilities and items and such that came alongside the expansion. Now, in Tyranny's case, it would make *very little sense* for an expansion to be addressing the post-campaign events. The game finishes as it thrusts the protagonist into an all-out war against the forces of Kyros and, considering what this implies and the sheer vastness of the land currently controlled by Kyros, there is simply no way that an expansion pack would make that arc justice, it would have to be its own separate sequel. Yes, you can make a small campaign where the protagonist battles Pox, but that wouldn't really respond to what the players would have wanted to see at the end of the main campaign, so it's a possible addition but neither here nor there. As such, expanding on the content *prior* to that moment makes a lot more sense, while the sequel (or would-be sequel, it's hardly a given that there'll be one at this point) would deal with the campaign against Kyros itself. So, depending on where Deadfire ends at, one may be a better option than the other, but so far we don't know. Other points I don't really agree with or don't really understand. I'm not sure what you're trying to say about the backgrounds for example.

I would be. I think a question regarding that was asked on one of the stream and the answer was no - it would take a lot of work to rework existing material and sidekick to reach companion level - better to spent resources on a new companion with new content. As far as monster and finishing - it looks like a feature that could be added on a later date, for example with an expansion. I don't recall seeing that question asked, but I'm not sure how much reworking would be needed, so much as expanding on the base that is provided by the vanilla game. I'm not saying that it *will* happen, mind, just that it seems perfectly plausible.

Well, arguably Serafen would be even more comparable to Rocket, considering his background and weapon of choice.