Wormerine

Ever heard of Gorecci St.? I didn;t find it too bad. I thought that the fight before meeting Aloth was much more tricky - I had to use some cheap tricks to get past this one.

Personally, I would like if challenges wouldn't turn off mods. It is a single player game, and if someone wishes to cheat when doing a challenge its not really my concern. But I am liking the enhanced UI mod a lot, and if other like that appear, I would like to use them with the challenges, not one or the other. Some if the challenges look interesting - I will probably try Abidon and Galawain challenge on my next playthrough. Personally, I am more interested in interesting gameplay additions rather than pure difficulty spikes like Margran's one.

Doesnt it? It sets up a problem that need to be solved. As of right: I would expect Watcher in whatever installement comes next be a driving force for making that change. Isn’t an open-ending an undefined one? (Is Dicaprio at he end of inception dreaming or not, etc.) Deadfire has a very defined ending with serious implications for whatever comes next. It feels more like a set up to me, than a resolution/ending of a journey. If they go for a “Watcher trilogy” then directly trying 2&3rd installements would be a tradition at this point, though IMO not a very good one. Actually about the ending (massive spoilers): Edit: as far as leveling is concerned, for the very beginning they made it clear that White March didn’t pay for itself and they were going to handle it differently. I imagine it is less of not thinking about it, and more deciding not to invest resources in the new level cap and just focusfocusing on the core of each DLC (story/combat/dungeon).

Part 2s are hard. They aren't as sexy as part 1s where everything is new and they aren't as satisfying as part 3s where everything gets wrapped up. Even good ones feel underwhelming. Absolutely. It always annoys me that creators go for "trilogies". Even StarWars, which inspired that trend as far as I understand fell flat on its face with the 3rd installment and 2nd one ended up with a horrible cliffhanger. Considering that Josh Sawyer doesn't plan on continuing as creative director for PoE it seems odd to me, to leave game hanging like that. Leaving a clean slate for the successor seems like a better situation. If Brandon were to help PoE3 right after Deadfire he would have a lot of dangling threads to deal with. Reminds me of The Last Jedi situation, though hopefully, unlike J. J. Abrams, Sawyer actually knows what he is setting up. Or perhaps my hopes are real, and the "...more to come" on the Deadfire timeline, fact that the different team of leads helm the DLCs, and that community quite decisively prefered a larger expansion might result in a larger campaign being developed behind the scenes. I remember sometime during development of PoE1, someone mentioning how cool idea was Final Fantasy6 with it's breaking of the world thing. If we were to return to Deadfire after the ending of main campaign it might make for some spectacular RPG goodness. Oh no, I am getting my hopes up again for an unreleased, unannounced content.

I don't remember there being any specific news about the Deadfire port (except that it is in the works). Port is done by other studio (just as was the case with PoE1) and people at Obs are currently working on 3 DLC for the main game (1st one being already out, 2nd one is out this coming tuesday and last one is planned sometime in December). I wouldn't be surprised if the port dropped once the 3rd DLC is out. Game should be quite complete by then with all the improvements and free additions/DLC. Whenever there is anything else planned for Deadfire or if the sequel ior spin off s/will be in the works is unknown at this point. Personally, I am keeping my fingers crossed for a bigger post main campaign expansion as I think Deadfire could one. There are quite a lot of "payoffs" such expansion could deliver. uhhh, one can only hope. As to the main game story - the plot isn't as coherent or satisfying as the original was. I am appreciating it much more now, during my 2nd playthrough. I think storytelling has improved a lot, although the story they tell might not be quite as thrilling or... complete?

What confusion? At no point did Obs indicate that they are planning to increase lvl cap. The only thing is the recent Brandon Adler response to question during stream that they might look intro xp distribution once all DLCs are out, to account for extra xp.

Now when we have skill tree preview, albeit a bit buggy one (thx anyway Obsidian!) we can complaign about other stuff. Something that I have seen mentioned many times before and that I felt a need for as soon as I started plaything the game, is being able to see what character abilities or statuses actually do. For example the new megaboss: Cool. So what does it do? I wouldn't know if I didn't read someones post on this forum. Same with many other monsters. Even in bestiary, which lists what abilities monsters have access to, doesn't actually tell you what those ability do.

You are probably fully aware of it, but the bug is still present in beta 3.0.0.0012 release.

How is this a weird criticism? I am genuinely very curious. It's a perfectly legitimate and logical criticism concerning a fault in the game. It is an excellent idea to go through all the text presented in the narration. You have, essentially, two choices: 1) Listen to the narrator, 2) Read the text yourself at your own pace. If you choose #2, which I want to do, the narrator is a constant pain in the butt while you read. She also takes a *huge* amount of extra time that provides absolutely no extra value whatsoever. So, how is this a weird criticism? I agree. Either listen to the performance or read faster and skip forward (I sometimes do the latter in Deadfire but generally not in the narrated parts because I think she is doing wonderful job painting images and creating an atmosphere.) I do find it a weird criticism, as it would suggest that the problem with the performance is that it is too slow, and if it were delivered faster the problem would be solved. It is an odd criticism. What is the problem then? Does she not convey thoughts and ideas properly? Is her speed distracting you from what she is saying? To me it's like saying: this song is bad because it is too slow. How so? Does the subject not for the performance? Is something special lost when performed that slow? You possibly read music or text on a much faster pace than the performer is performing it, but what does one have to do with the other? That's assuming that the actors performance doesn't add anything to the table and their only job is to read text aloud so you don't have to read it. You can criticise performance and dislike it - everyone has their own taste. For me having access to the script or text doesn't make voice acting invalid. Maybe it is because I always like to have access to written text as I am not native english speaker. But yeah, doring the narrator parts I don't look at text, just admire the artwork, listen to the performance and try to visulize the images - useful especially in surreal visits to beyond, or wherever Gods reside.

Me: like.

While I can understand someone not liking the performance (though personally, I disagree) this is the weirded argument to be made, and I see it pop up over and over again. Of course you can read it faster. Reading is faster, than reading aloud. Sure, she takes extra time, as she builds a scene, and creates atmosphere, but that is a weirdest criticism of voicacting I can think of. She is performing, not being a google translate "read" function.

Turn-based too! I am not sure I would want to go full turn-based, but I do think that *pause-decision making-pause-decision making* rhythm works better with a number driven game such as pillars. Defences, rolls, chances to hit etc. are easier to track and keep an eye on if game doesn't move forward. I do like the RTS element of it. For a while now I had an idea in my mind, inspired by a quick glance at PoE Paper RPG and Pit People. What if we had a real time combat but giving out orders would turn based? So the game would be divided into let's say, 10 seconds turns, and every character makes an initiative roll based on its dexterity. Than we start giving orders from the worst initiative to the best - trading power for fleibility. The way attacks are made would need to be changed completely - what Pit People does is that if you end by an enemy you smack him. The core of the idea is fine - one handed weapons get bonus accuracy, who handers to more damage, with two weapons to take a swing with each. But a decent RPG game would need a much more nuance than that - using abilities, deciding whom to attack etc.

A big fan that spells which Wizards has in currently equipped Grimoire are tagged when lvling up. Enchanting screen is much better. I think visually it could be a bit more clearer: a small filled green diamond for already purchased upgrades isn't the most visable. It would be lovely if items on the left would be somewhat organized: lets say: by items equpped by companions and after that what is in the stash/inventory. Something like: Pallegina: 1) Sword 2) Mace 3) shield 4) Armor Eder: 1)Saber no. 1 2)Saber no. 2 3) Club 4) Shield 5) Armor etc.

Classeless system!

Agree. While tying bounties to factions is a neat idea, not having any influence on relations with said factions feels off. Overall, I think the fact that factions use you for a while and ignore certain offences until certain point works fine. But faction system lacks a payoff. Using a narrative analogy: there is a lot of set up, some remainders, but all the payoff we get is the Ukaizo encounter and ending slides. I feel it’s not enough. If there only was a major post-main campaign expansion, which would deliver reactivity and needed closure.

Eh few thoughts: 1) romance is meh. I dont hate it as much now as the disposition gain is fixed and my companions don't automatically hit on my PC. Still i feel "a romance path" isn't enough to convert relationship, and I would rather has one romancable.companion with multitude of outcomes, or no romances at all. Overall, just not my thing. And I am not a fan that I have to constantly tell me companions that I am not interested in them. Quite awkward. 2) interactions weren't good? How so? Personally I really liked them. Having them have a say during conversations and respond to each other is really neat. 3) looking forward to naval combat patch if one is indeed in the making. I doubt we will see it again. 4) main plot isn't quite engaging. But deadfire, faction and quest design is rather excellent. Really well implemented lore.

Considering that WM1&2 didn't pay for itself and that DLC were always meant to be smaller and how companions are done (more on that later) I never expected to see new companions be added. I think what they did with Ydwin in BoW was very smart. I am liking Deadfire companion system more and more. But the downside is that you need a companion to be implimented throughout the whole game, as their developement happens by interactions with the world rather than in a self contained bubble. Addition of a companion to Deadfire would mean going back to the base game and adding a reactivity throughout the whole game. Sounds like a lot of work and a sure way to break something. WIth relationship system adding companions is very difficult and it is certainly a black mark against the system. Personally, I am torn whenever it was worth it. I am against it after my first playthrough, but right now, after my second playthrough I rather like it. I will have to go back to PoE1 in some time and see if I will respond to massive 15 minutes long conversation dumps with companions as "oh, I missed those" or if I wish I was playing Deadfire.

Adding to the above: I presonally like to do WM1 around level 8, usually in the middle of the "investigate those three places" point as this my least favourite part of the game and I like to break up the monotony. I usually go for WW2 after the hearing, but I am overleveled at this point but it is still fun.

Was about to report the same issue. Here are comparison screen shot of both Ability Preview and Lvl up screens. Oddly enough Passives are also shown in different order - I wouldn't call it an issue but it surprised me: Save: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XsQnzXthHT5HTDx53uo2xc9nJGRxEzhI/view?usp=sharing

White March is an "in-game" expansion. It adds content to the base game. It is not a seperate campaign. You can still play it as such though, by reloading pre ENDGAME save and doing the WM content. DLCs for Deadfire (Beast of Winter, Seeker, Slayer,Survivor, Forgotten Sanctum) add content to the base game as well. If Beast of Winter is any indication they gel with core game much better as well. Personally recommend to have those expansions if available on your first playthrough.

I felt that Vanilla Deadfire had a find balance as i reached max level when wrapping up the side content and getting ready for final mission. That meant that I spend time lvling up for majority of the content and reached last level with only highest level content to be done. It will break once all expansions are out but I hope Obs will give an option to rebalance xp once DLCs are out. The bigger problem for me is how many quests are available for the mid level range. This is a side effect of multiple factions, not having to complete all of those quests + many bounties/non combat sidequests etc. resulting in party being overleveled for majority of quests available. I felt in 2nd half to the game I have to search for those more remote locations (Nemnok dungeon, undead&vampires isle) to get fun gameplay.

I have done almost two playthroughs right now - both with level scaling: first one was on Veteran+crit path content scaling up only , and one (late game on hold due to bug which stops me from progressing the main quest in BoW) on PotD with scaling all up only. To be honest XP float compared to quest's difficulty is still an issue. I would recommend using it - things still feel to be pretty much designed to be around certain level. If it's better than without level scaling - I can't tell. I didn't sense much difference between two playthroughs - except 2nd one being less borken due to many balance patches which came online since.

Except Deadfire is designed this way precisely not to reward players for killing stuff. You fight, when it is appropriate for your character to do so. Even quest purely focused on combat (bounties) provide other rewards (items, cash) which make them worth doing even if you don’t need xp. I thought that base game’s xp was well distributed (I reached max level when doing late game content), however I felt that sometime around level 14 I become overlevel for majority of the content. The who next expansions might not even be an issue if they tackle levels 16-18 &18-20, as they should harder than what Is in the game already, making them pre-endgame content.

Fallout 2, Arcanum, Ultima 7, Gothic, Gothic 2, Ultima Underworld, Divine Divinity, Risen, Baldur's Gate... Didnt play Ultimas, DD or Rise. I always thought that main story line of Fallouts were more of an incentive for exploration rather actual storyline (very much like Deadfires). A smart thing that Fallout does is not telling you were to go and hints it does make you go on a wild goose chase. Arcanum was similar. Fun world, main plot itself was dull. BG1 plot was pretty badly paced, BG2 has great main story and side content but I always thought they clash with each other (oh... what was it? I was supposed to rescue someone? Sorry I forgot about the main plot with all the fun side quests I have to do). I thought Witcher 3 had a pretty great balance of main story and excuses to engage in side activities, with multiple plot point given to you as an excuse to not move the plot forward and just be the grumpy neighborhood witcher.