jsaving

Though some key answers are never provided -- you eventually know where the brother went but never fully resolve why (or whether Eder made the right choice in not doing the same).

What most people mean by "importing a saved game" is transferring their items, gold, and xp for use in PoE2. This won't be permitted. Rather, a script at the start of PoE2 will scan your final PoE1 save and "flag" a limited number of story decisions whose ramifications will continue into PoE2. So if you convinced Aloth to succeed Thaos as head of the Leaden Key, his backstory and perhaps his personality will be different than if you convinced him to instead dismantle the Leaden Key. Alternatively, you'll be able to just set those decision variables yourself at the start of PoE2. Presumably this would occur either through a BG2-type dialogue method (where saying "how's life at the Leaden Key" tells the engine that you made that choice in POE1 whereas saying "have you destroyed the Key yet" tells the engine you went the other way) or perhaps through a Tyranny-like "conquest mode" where the "battles" determine the fates of joinable NPCs instead of the fates of cities.

GM and Durance sum up the pros and cons of having CA write those characters without much further involvement in the game. They have exceptionally well-crafted backstories that tie in to the lore of the setting and explore deep philosophical issues, but also have an almost complete lack of interactivity with in-game developments coupled with off-putting personalities that must be endured in order to reach the aforementioned backstories.

I sympathize with the notion that Obsidian creates more well-written characters in each game than will comfortably fit in your party. However, this is a good problem to have, not a bad one, and I wouldn't agree with solutions that reduce the number of companions in the game world just to prevent players from feeling like they have to choose between them. Every completionist wishes he/she could choose every option for every quest in order to see all possible content, but the devs can't (and shouldn't) accommodate this or else choices-and-consequences would be eliminated from the game. Similarly with joinable NPCs, the impulse to want all of them in the party to see all of their content isn't enough of a reason for the devs to make it happen -- that's what replays are for. That said, I do agree that the devs shouldn't provide a large number of joinable NPCs just for the sake of saying the number is large. I thought PoE (and Tyranny afterward) actually struck a reasonable balance as far as this is concerned, though I would have liked (even) more joinable-NPC content rather than less.

Actually, the animancy hearings were (at least for me) the highlight of the story. PoE did a lot of things right, but it didn't do a great job making you care about the critical path. OK, I've become a Watcher -- why should I care and why is it a bad thing? OK, the Hollowborn situation isn't good -- but I have no idea what can be done about it and no reason to believe I might be able to affect it through adventuring. OK, there seems to be a hidden group called the Leaden Key -- but considering the members themselves have no idea what the group is doing, how effective could they possibly be? etc, etc, etc, to the point that a large number of players just don't care about "winning" the game.

From what I understand, the PoE2 team is acutely aware they'll have to make some classes less front-loaded. As long as they do a good job with that, then the combinations people are talking about would be interesting without necessarily becoming overpowered. On the other hand, it would be a lot of fun to play a PoE1 wizard with carnage...

First priority - great story. Second priority - 6-person real-time-with-pause class-based system with friendly fire and NPC quests. On whether we should continue as the Watcher in PoE2 (and be able to import saved games from PoE1) - Shouldn't this depend on how PoE2's story develops rather than being pre-determined in advance of the design/development process? If the team comes up with a great idea for a Shadows of Amn type sequel, then by all means, keep the Watcher as PC and let us import PoE saved games into PoE2. On the other hand, if the Watcher-specific material would be a distraction in the sequel, then jettison the Watcher and abandon the idea of letting us import PoE saved games into PoE2. As long as PoE2's story lives up to the high bar set by PoE, I'd be happy with either scenario.

I enjoyed both games but, in my judgment, PoE is better than Tyranny in almost every respect. 4-person party, no friendly fire (even as an option), no companion quests, exceptionally short, woefully inadequate ending, a classless system that inexorably shoehorns players into a small number of builds (the very problem classless systems are designed to solve)... not good. Still worth purchasing at some point due to the solid concept/lore and some neat features like spellcrafing, but for most IE fans PoE is going to be the better choice.

All fair points. One other negative is the "you must purchase the sequel to find out how the game actually ends" approach taken in Tyranny. Deliberately unconclusive endings can be fine in some contexts, but not when the game itself is shorter than it should have been.

I think PoE's combination of 6-member parties and friendly fire encourages strategic thinking and I hope PoE2 doesn't change these factors to be more similar to Tyranny. I also dislike classless systems because they inevitably drive players to find broken subsystems and max out those specific skills/traits/etc, which ironically pushes everyone toward the same builds instead of promoting the diversity that classless systems are said to foster. Other Tyranny innovations like combo abilities work great in roleplay-light eastern games but in my mind just highlight the reduction in strategic thinking from PoE to Tyranny. I also strongly, strongly dislike time limits in RPGs and have ever since Fallout 1's (in)famous water-chip timer as they prevent me from fully exploring the world I paid to experience. Positives for Tyranny include the reputation system, the ability to build spells from scratch, and the novel idea that evil has won. But the devs were only intermittently successful in carrying out their theme, with players blocked from taking most of the good-aligned actions they might wish to try while most permissible actions have illogically graphic consequences whose sole apparent intent is to shock the player. Couple that with a shamelessly incomplete endgame -- another area where I thought PoE did remarkably well -- and I don't find a lot that I want the PoE2 devs to incorporate.

Random trash enemies work great in games like BG/BG2/IWD when you are allowed or even encouraged to generate as much XP/treasure as you like by spam-resting. But in PoE resting is something you earn rather than something you can spam, which eliminates the need to make it risky. Also, BG1/BG2 gives the player a lot of flexibility to level up fast through "rest abuse" whereas your xp path in PoE s supposed to be tightly controlled so the devs will know your likely level at any given point in the game (which admittedly didn't work out all that well but is still worth mentioning). I don't have anything against random encounters, personally, but some thinking would need to be done if they were to be brought into PoE/PoE2 when resting.

I like to ensure my main character's class is different from the NPCs I know I'll want in the party from a story/lore point of view. Eder and Durance are the two absolute must-haves as Eder has the best links to the actual plot and Durance has a *lot* of information about why recent history developed as it did. Grieving Mother and Aloth would probably come in 3rd and 4th place as GM has a great deal to teach about Hollowborn while Aloth aids in understanding the organization you're up against (and to some degree the main character's "condition"). Paladin and druid would fill the other two slots nicely though you can certainly win the game with whatever classes you deem best.

I'd add that the alignment of the factions isn't as straightforward as it first appears. The Crucible Knights present themselves as Lawful Good but have large numbers of Lawful Neutral and even Lawful Evil members in the mix who enjoy oppressing people under the guise of providing order. The Dozens, on the other hand, started out as Chaotic Good and still have some who wish to help people despite having numerous Chaotic Neutral and Chaotic Evil members who pillage under the guise of liberation. The one thing to watch for is inadvertently joining a faction. Being a completionist actually works against you in this context because you may not want to leave the Dozens or Crucible (depending on who you encounter first) quest lines without, well, completing them. And the warnings you receive about locking yourself out of the other factions are far, far too weak given the many instances in the game where you are able to talk/sneak/coerce your way out of similar situations. If the devs are going to deliberately bar you from any role-playing that might reasonably let you do quests for multiple factions, then there should perhaps be a DM window -- like there is in BG2 when you leave Athkatla in search of Imoen -- telling the player to think carefully before making this choice because it can't be undone and effectively locks out some content. There have actually been a fair number of players who didn't even know other factions *existed* when they bound themselves to the Dozens or the Crucible. From a design point of view, it probably would have been better for the faction quests to involve "getting to know the other factions" so players could make a more informed choice.

I would like to see them keep: * 6-character parties * well-written NPCs like Lady Webb * real time with pause * character classes (as opposed to a Fallout-type classless system) * an environment that reacts to player character choices * melee characters who have interesting combat options (as opposed to old-style D&D fighters who could simply auto-attack) * risk-taking in their class construction (the chanter failed for many reasons but I still appreciated the effort to do something new) * uncertainty about which factions/characters are actually serving the greater good * every stat mattering to some degree for every class (no "dump stats") * expansive world lore that tangibly affects the course of the game

A few of the Eothas dialogue options let the player voice his belief that Eothas is still around, though no "proof" is ever provided that he actually is. *** Spoilers follow *** Some people complained about those dialogue options at launch because they felt the game presents such compelling evidence that Eothas is gone for good. After all, nearly every NPC tells you he's gone and he is also notably absent from the "constellation room" late in the game. On the other hand, Eothas is the god of rebirth/renewal so it wouldn't be hugely surprising if he somehow found a way to return. It's also worth noting that he has a very good reason to stay hidden, as several members of the pantheon participated in the divine conspiracy to destroy Eothas and most of the rest indirectly abetted the conspiracy so Thaos' secret (which Eothas' crusade threatened to expose) would remain hidden.

I did what the OP suggests in my last run-through and it works exactly as he believes it would. There are enough "turns" in the game that I wouldn't suggest crimping your playstyle just to preserve them, but it does make sense to build out the stronghold as fast as you reasonably can (for example by cleaning out Raedric's castle early in the game while postponing bounties to the mid-to-late game).

Storm spells provide nice damage over their duration but can't be directed toward whichever foe most needs to be removed from the battlefield, which makes them less useful than their DPS might suggest. The druidic regeneration spells are kind of like this too, providing nice healing over their duration even though you have no guarantee when you cast the spell that the ally to whom you provide regeneration will be the ally who actually ends up needing it. The combination of storm and regeneration spells let the druid fill a genuinely new niche on the battlefield without overshadowing the party's wizards and priests. For that reason, my answer to the OP would be no, druid storm spells shouldn't be nerfed.

Druids are much better in this game than they are in D&D -- their call lightning spells are actually pretty good, their shapeshifting deals solid damage, and their regen spells are useful just before you land your first melee attack. A druid PC is also good because the joinable NPC druid, while funny, doesn't add much lore value to the game and can be safely disregarded in a first run-through. Monks are also solid choices, but a lot of people become disenchanted with them in the early game simply because it's so hard to get hurt in the early game, which means you aren't seeing much of the wound system in action. It also takes time to figure out how much armor you want to wear, as too much may slow your accumulation of wound points (and your ability to quickly use them) while too little runs the risk of creating a "glass cannon". Good luck!

Multiclassing should *never* be introduced just because someone decreed it "had to be done". It should only be done if it makes the game better -- and it should inform every stage of the class building process lest abusive combinations be introduced. Personally, I'd like to see a 3e-type system in which people can pick which class they want to level up in, every time they level up. It's true that people in 3e could create overpowered characters by grabbing low-level abilities like evasion and divine grace whose power was inexplicably untethered to class level, but that just means the 3e devs gave out those abilities too soon and made them too strong -- it isn't an indictment of flexible multiclassing as a whole.

Well, look -- it seemed pretty clear from the outset that many of 3.0's features (from spell mastery to knockout injuries) weren't needed for PoE but were instead introduced to see whether players might like to see them in PoE2. I'm glad to hear Josh taking small steps toward saying PoE2 is in the cards and hope it will be even better than PoE!

In BG2, you are captured for unknown reasons by a foe who kills/damages/tortures your friends and openly says he won't stop experimenting on you until he has what he needs. That gives you a pretty good reason to go after him no matter what alignment you may have. In PoE, you indirectly receive strange powers from a possible foe whose plans are unclear and who doesn't even appear to notice you at the time the powers are given. That isn't exactly the stuff from which epic antagonists are made, and it's the presence of an epic antagonist that at least in part fosters epic moments like those with Irenicus.

I thought PoE was a great game all things considered and did have some signature moments, with the "hanging tree" and the hearings being two of the most memorable for me. However, I do think the game sometimes struggled to keep the main character motivated to follow the critical path. It is unclear for much of the game that you should treat your "gifts" as a disease rather than a blessing; it is unclear for much of the game that the LK is worth stopping; and it is unclear for much of the game that it is even possible to solve the Hollowborn situation let alone that you could potentially be the one to solve it. Put those things together and it's no wonder most players don't feel a sense of urgency about advancing the over-arching plotline, which I think contributes to a sense that key moments in PoE "feel" less memorable than they "should".

In the case of Ondra and Abydon, the non-interference pact to which deities supposedly adhere was stretched to the breaking point, for sure. Ondra fired a WMD at the planet while claiming all deities but Abydon at least implicitly supported her decision -- a claim that seems at least partially vindicated by the fact that no one but Abydon lifted a finger to stop it. Then after Abydon "succeeded", Ondra initiated a memory wipe to serve her own interests and ensure kith would lose a protecter/preserver, which the other deities must have known about ("hey Abydon, why'd you suddenly drop the preservation portfolio?") yet did nothing to address. Waidwen/Eothas is an even clearer example. Toward the beginning of the game, you're told that Waidwen/Eothas turned to the dark side fifteen years ago and justified his warmongering with the lie that he was invading the Dyrwood in order to save it. Provided you have Durance in your party, however, you eventually learn that Waidwen's seemingly implausible claim was 100% correct and that the entire "turned to the dark side" narrative was fabricated by Woedica/Magran to knock divine do-gooder Eothas off the playing field and then Purge his followers for their mutual benefit. The other deities again stood by and did nothing, this time because they feared the collective lie about their divinity would be exposed if Waidwen/Eothas succeeded in stopping Thaos. Given all of that, you're right to say the non-interference pact is more appearance than reality. (And if Eothas really is marking Chosen in preparation for his eventual reappearance, as is hinted in one of the new legendary stronghold dilemmas, is it any wonder he wouldn't be too keen to announce his rebirth to the rest of the pantheon?)

I know several people who took Defiance Bay one area at a time, completing each quest in a particular part of the city before beginning to explore a different one. They've complained more than once that they found themselves barred from joining the Knights or the Doemenels before they even knew those factions existed, and think PoE should have had a pop-up window warning the player that completing the second Dozens quest locks you out of other faction content. I can sympathize with that, though I'd prefer a less immersion-breaking solution. One idea would be to have each faction demand a binding commitment from the player instead of vaguely saying the other factions may not like you much if you do this quest for us (which a reasonable player might assume he can evade through role-playing). Or alternatively, perhaps each faction could have required you to at least speak to the other factions before allowing you to accept the quest that cements your allegiance, which would ensure that players have at least some idea that this choice will have consequences down the road.

Durance's beliefs are weird to say the least, and I can understand why people wouldn't want him joining their parties. On the other hand, RPGs always take a lot of flak when their joinable NPCs have surface-level personalities so having a subset of the player base dislike some of the more deeply written characters may just be par for the course. Maybe the devs could have just stuck to characters like Eder and Sagani who have some depth and are genuinely nice people, but then the complaints about "not being able to have an evil party" would have been that much louder. In some ways it's a no-win situation for the devs, and my take would be that they did the best they could under the circumstances. Some of the particular issues involving Durance are easier to solve than some in this thread have let on. For example, if you get tired of clicking on him and waiting for his storyline to advance, just head to Caed Nua and rest repeatedly -- you'll finish his character development inside of ten minutes (same is true for Grieving Mother) and will then be free to take him along only when needed. And if you like the particular set of bonuses a priest provides while disliking Durance, you can substantially though not completely compensate for his absence by choosing the right mix of paladins/druids/chanters for the rest of your party, or completely compensate for it by creating a priest hireling, or more than completely compensate for it by creating a PC protagonist (since PC priests get special bonuses based on faith and conviction). A separate issue is whether the priest class is too strong in PoE (it probably is), and whether the devs should have considered doing without a dedicated healer/buffer class altogether (as some recent MMOs have done). PoE actually took a modest step in this direction by introducing the second wind ability, which was originally created for 4th edition D&D specifically to ensure cleric-less parties would have enough healing. On the other hand, even if the priest is too strong as a class, the game is beatable on all difficulty levels whether you have Durance in the party or not. That gives players the flexibility to make party-weakening choices for role-playing reasons -- a phenomenon with which everyone who shunned the disagreeable but overpowered mage Edwin in BG1/BG2 will be familiar.