Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


29 Excellent

About SimonCharming

  • Rank
    (1) Prestidigitator
    (1) Prestidigitator


  • Deadfire Backer Badge
  • Deadfire Fig Backer
  1. If you need to dual-wield sabres as a Devoted, then I suggest dual clubs for your backup weapon slot. Covering Slash and Crush is better than covering Slash and Pierce, and club accuracy bonus and attack speed will help mitigate the lost accuracy. Their modal can also be safely ignored.
  2. I highly suggest swords over sabres as a Devoted. Swords have two damage types yet lack base penetration; Devoted's penetration bonus eliminates that flaw. In turn the dual damage types allow you to fight nearly every enemy without weapon switching, which is important since you will have heavy penalties for your Crushing Damage backup weapon.
  3. I don't think a discussion of this sort inherently breeds negativity. It doesn't have to. This is a specific topic that I have specific opinions about. It does not reflect on the positive opinions I hold towards the game's faction conflict, combat system, character-building mechanics, or any of the other numerous aspects I enjoy. My criticism is towards the Eothas storyline itself, not its author nor its advocates. I will admit I take issue with the assertion that anyone who finds the deity conflict flawed lacks the ability to recognize proper storytelling or themes. If the plot is meant to set up Pillars of Eternity 3, then I certainly hope we get it. Game development has many pitfalls; banking satisfactory resolution on a sequel that may never be released is questionable. I've seen it happen with episodic titles I became invested in. Obviously what's done is done, but the point of feedback is letting your thoughts and concerns be heard. I'm looking forward to Beast of Winter and the following DLCs. I'm looking forward to a potential sequel. I like the game and the series, whether others believe it or not. I'm just stating my opinion on a specific aspect of Deadfire.
  4. A plot that neither accounts for - nor derives from - realistic character motivations is a hollow thing. Citing freedom to not follow Eothas or to spectacularly fail in any attempt to stop him is intellectually dishonest; you might as well say "You're free to just turn off the game." While true, it only serves to deflect criticism, not dispute it. Other RPGs expect the player to complete quests and participate in the story, but few of them would resolve the same way without player intervention. Take Pillars of Eternity. Your character must find a way to control their Awakening before they lose their mind. On the surface it looks similar to Deadfire's plot device of retrieving your soul, but there are crucial differences: Most importantly, your character's Awakening is entirely unique. You were Thaos' personal inquisitor. No one else could have been in your place or Awakened the way you did, and if you fail to pursue him, his plan succeeds. If you intervene, you actually stop him. You are a central figure in the plot. Now let's look at Deadfire. You're a Watcher in the wrong place at the wrong time. That's it. That's the only thing special about you. If you refuse Berath, she turns you into a squirrel and goes off to find some other Watcher. You do not matter. Moreover, even if she doesn't find another Watcher while you're off gathering acorns, nothing would change anyway. Eothas will still do whatever he wants and succeed at whatever he wants. Deadfire's plot is unique in that the entire thing would resolve the exact same way, even if your character doesn't participate!
  5. What do you think "impact" means? The player only succeeds in everything they set out to do if those are indeed their only motivations. An RPG should allow the player some choice in that as well. That's the problem. The only guaranteed impetus for any of the Watcher's actions is getting shoved around by greater beings. "Chase Eothas because he has your soul." "Do what I tell you or I'll set off your spirit bomb." It's akin to a forced plot lead solely by Geas. No, not rising to that bait. I will say that you're assuming much about other peoples' abilities to recognize storytelling and themes.
  6. The Watcher's impact on local Deadfire factions and their own companions is not in question. Their impact on the overarching plot is; coincidentally, that's exactly the topic of this thread. If the issue people raise is that they can't affect X, it makes little sense attempting to counter with the fact that they can affect Y. It may not be clear from my previous post, but I generally enjoy Deadfire and I'm not out to stomp on it. That doesn't mean I don't find aspects of it to be flawed. If anything, the gulf between player agency in the faction plot versus the main plot makes the game feel even more disjointed. In all, the deity plot only weakens the game's combined narrative. That is a very interesting observation. Deadfire's narrative structure turns that convention on its head: it's nearly concurrent instead of consecutive, with the faction story running in parallel. Sure you might need help reaching your destination unless you trick out your ship, but it's a thin thread between the two plots. In other respects the two are virtually self-contained. One is a smaller scale story of mortals and politics, the other is grand in scale and runs your character through a gauntlet of deity-related "But Thou Musts." They did not combine well in my opinion, and one is more conducive to being the plot of an interactive game than the other. Talk about bifurcation.
  7. The problem isn't that you can't defeat Eothas in a fistfight; it's that the plot was deliberately structured around an unsolvable and ultimately meaningless task. A writer gets to decide the conflict, the players in the conflict, and the eventual ending. It's disingenuous to set the player up against an impossible foe in the Set Up and Confrontation phases, then pull out the rug and declare "Why did you expect to make a difference? You can't defy a god!" in the Resolution. If Deadfire was a novel, there could be some merit in examining how it deconstructs or subverts the traditional monomyth story structure. Hell, I'd read it. But it's not a novel. As a game, an entry in what is ideally an interactive medium, it's simply frustrating to take part in. Imagine a DM who wants to write an intensely specific story, and creates a tabletop session with intensely specific story beats. What the DM wants to happen, WILL happen regardless of the players' actions or decisions. Imagine being one of those players. Sure, it will be fun for the DM to get the story they want. But then, why invite anyone to participate in it? Why expect anyone else to enjoy it? The Watcher is a bystander in Deadfire, thus, so is the player. I for one expect more in an RPG.
  8. As entertaining as it would be, becoming a god was never in the cards. The theme of the main storyline seems to be that The Watcher (and by extension, the player) is completely powerless to effect change. Baffling for an RPG, and disappointing to say the least. But there you have it.
  9. Many of the game's abilities are designed towards and synergized around in-combat revival. Same with engagement. It's a fun easter egg, but not really a solution to the difficulty.
  • Create New...