Jump to content

Sherab

Members
  • Content Count

    54
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

21 Excellent

About Sherab

  • Rank
    (2) Evoker

Profile Information

  • Location
    Komorowo, Poland.
  • Steam
    sherab1986
  • Interests
    Nature photograpy, animal's etology and behaviorism, RPG games, "farming" (mostly in form of my garden's vegetables and fruit trees), firearms (sport usage, never for actual killing), fantasy lore (books, game's lore etc.).
  1. The game (at least original one - PoE 1) is Reneissance inspired. I don't remember how this was exactly in this period IRL, but in Medieval, or earlier, horses were actualy quite expensive, and used mostly by nobility and for war. For work on farms rather bovines were used. But I don't recall any one would ride on their back. Hence, I guess, walking was quite normal way of transportation for most of people. Just on the margin. Anyway, we deal here we Archipelago of mostly small islands. Hence, I don't think horses fits here that much. Some would use them for sure - and we have examples of this in the game. Still, I think that actualy first game's setting would be better for horses. I miss something else - I'm mostly "role-player" and for me it is somewhat unimmersive when my party is on constant run (well, at least when it is not sneaking). Hence, I would like to see some "walking" pace button. But I somewhat agree about the naval battles. I haven't played games OP is mentioning, but I guess something like in Empire: Total War (or better) would be nice. Those text based battles are not bad as such. But for me they quickly started to be rather boring if not annoying even. But... I treat naval battles as something additional - not the main focus of the game. And I guess doing them to look like I would like to, would be rather expensive and time consuming - too much for additional content of the game. Hence, I accept them as they are.
  2. We don't see all of the Archipelago in the game (Naasitaq is further south from the map, for example). So it is possible there are other groups that include different races. If you are not an Aumaua but come from the Deadfire, just assume you lived in another area or visited Neketaka once. You'll even know their language. I believe that Naastiaq dwarves make totaly different culture, hence they are not Huana. I think the problem is that the game tries to treat same way "country" or place of origin, as cultural affinity. Still, Archipelago seems to be highly Huana dominated (as natives). However, while they theorethicaly hail from Old Vailia, I would say that we can treat also the Principi as native "culture". Naasitaq and other (boreal) dwarven societies make for another separate culture, but we don't have (sadly) much of access to them (aside of one northern (?!) island of some cultists) - before release of the game I was hoping, that we would be able to visit Sagani and her family.
  3. Reffering to the Original Post: 1) I agree fully! Well… almost… I rather like changes to enchanting. However devs could left „quality” upgrades also for non-unique equipment – especially, that there is no equal distribution of unique equipment of different types. For example, there is pletora of swords, but only two maces, for example. Also finding ready, upper-quality (but non-unique) weapon or armor of some types seems to be somewhat harder. For example, I had hard time finding above exceptional arquebus (with aside of a trigger, by all means looks more like a flintlock musket ;P ) With my second playthrought, I’ve just started (and I’me near the end by now) to appreciate some aspects of new combat system. But while I can say I started to like it, I still preffer the old one. 3) Even if I like them, I was never good at games in with there is so many skills/spells/abilties aviable to single character. I easily get confused, and I’m preety sure that I don’t use my party members to their best. Still, my first playthrough, at „veteran”, with scaling turned off, was also quite easy. However, for me (in current, second playthrough) it was enough to turn on up-scaling to make things challenging. However, I’m rather role-player, and I don’t really like „power-gaming”, hence my heros might a little bit under-powered instead. 4) Agree! I’ll risk to say, that main story is the most badly written from them all. Many side-quests, or even faction-quest-lines are written way better. 5) I have problems with saving. I had this at the begining of the game. I don’t know what is causing this, but after some time of playing, while I can do quick-save, I’m unable to make hard-save. I thought this was because of Steam Overlay, because it has dissapeared when I’ve turned it off. But recenty it reappeared after I’ve deleted (from within the game) some older saves. But again, after some time, problem dissapeared again. 6) Well if you rise relation with your companions to 2, they start to flirt you or show affection in other way – but beware – they are all bisexual, so they will flirt with you regardless of yours and their gender. ;P I have nothing against sexual minorities, I mind you. But every single companion? But I think those are mostly one-time events. I think also that companions inter-relations between themselves affects random dialogues between them. 8 ) At the begining it was a little bit difficult for me, but after I’ve learned, it is not so challenging (and our crew gain experience quite fast). For me, it quickly started to be boring and annoying, to be honest. I rather avoid sea combat if I can.
  4. I can understand people who simply likes a lot of fighting at every corner, and simply to clear-out dungeons. But I do not belong to them. I preffer shorter ones as a rule of thumb. However, I can appreciate some bigger-ones if they are smartly designed (multi-solution, multi-ways), offer really unique enemies and/or loot. And prefereably, they should be (for me) "supported" by good story. But from my perspective, there shouldn't be too much of such bigger dungs. And there is a point, when they become really too big - like Endless Paths in first PoE.
  5. Thanks for advice. My first playthrough was on "veteran" difficulty level. Now I've just started another, but with leve-up scaling enabled. This is ("veteran") because I'm not that good fighter as a player for PotD (well I was good enough in the first PoE, I guess - but let's say this was more than I needed actualy - especially for DLCs), and mostly, because while I want some challenge from a fights, they are not most important part of the game to me (role-playing my character, following stories and doing quests are). Anyway, I definitely will try to take closer look on all buffs and de-buffs in the game to put them to better use.
  6. Hmmm... I guess, that my impression on Deadfire's priests is somewhat distorted by the fact, that I don't really understand new affliction system. Ok, I understand it better now, than I was starting the game. But sill, I don't "feel" it. If I would, maybe I woul appreciate priest's spells more. But right now, aside of healing spells, I don't really feel that any spell realy give me something in a fight. And healing spells, why obviously can save a day, due to limited in-combat resources (with is something good in general), they are not that useful either. Hence, in my opinion, AoE periodic healing is way better in on-going battle (more precisely, we need both types of healing). In PoE 1, consecrated ground was very good at this. But it feels soemwhat crappy in Deadfire, and it became static to make things worse. As I wrote, this opinion is propably largely biased, however. From other hand, I agree that at least some priest's spells from PoE 1 were over-powered, so to speak. But at least I knew that many of them (even those not-so over-powered) are actualy useful. And generaly, having a party without priest was possible, but not really smart. Ok, maybe this new approach allows us for more versatile party composition, making priests less... hmmm... mandatory, so to speak. But from other hand, they feel so "weak" now, hence I don't know... As i wrote, this is propably very wrong at my side
  7. One thing that's super accurate here is the contrarian nature of Deadfire's writing. This really became apparent doing a second playthrough. But the writers just seem over-eager to always go against type. One example of this is the abundance of monster type creatures who are actually intelligent and can be civilized. This kind of twist works well with restraint. For example, Viconia stands out in BG, especially to DnD fans, partly because she's the only classically evil being that you can recruit. But in Deadfire this kind of twist is used ad nauseam -- there's an ogre you can recruit, a xaurip, an imp, a vithrack you can reason with, a lagufaeth you can reason with and on and on. For one it kills the special nature that these twists would have had in a more restrained game. If there were only one or two non-kith crew members, that would make them special. Second, it also breaks much of the previous world building. If these "monsters" so frequently become civilized, why are there so many hostile, wild groups of them? Third, it's a cheap trick to make a quest, encounter or NPC interesting. I mostly agree with house2fly. I would like to point out, that this do not breaks anything from previous world building. This is true, that in the first PoE we didn't have so many of peaceful interactions with Wilders or other intelligent or semi-intelligent species (however there were such interactions possible - let's take Beregana's clan, to give just a one example). It seems, that term the Kith is quite "antropo-centric", so to speak. It contains only most intelligent species, with in terms of intelligence and social behaviors (and largely anatomicaly too) are very similar to human. But I would say, that many of Wilders are not that much less intelligent than the Kith, despite of their "wilder" nature. From other hand... there were some inconsequences in the first game already. For examle, Delemganas were described as being on good terms with rangers, and generaly they are about only to protect their sacred places (more-less), hence not being agressive, or hostile by nature. But in practice, even if my hero was a ranger, only Delemganas I recall, that didn't want to kill me on sight were sisters at Twin Elms (well, at least one of them didn't want to kill me at sight).
  8. And Aloth, who continue to be in adventures between the two games forgot all the higher level spells. All good points. Well, I would say this is more about the feel of continuity, than immersion in this particular case. After all, my hero have developed in some speciffic way in PoE 1 (well, for someone who for example didn't play first part this is totaly different story, I guess). And also his friends have chosen some speciffic paths of their own. I would also argue, that while our companions in the first game were not "blank cards", so to speak, they were also not that special. One can say, that Eder was only one of many veterans, Pallegina one of many "brothers" and so on. Well, maybe Durance was somewhat special. Anyway, by the end of the story they all are also heros, right? They could single-handly kill a dragon by this point... Or maybe not... EDIT: Oh, and our own hero wasn't "blank card" either, btw. With Odema points out on the begining of the game. He could be some mercenery, for example - hence he can have same or greater combat experience than Eder. END-of-EDIT. When it comes to "classes", I have troubles with understanding them from the first game. What I mean by this, is should I treat them as purely mechanical solution, or as a kind of "proffesions" or "ways of life" that actualy exists on Eora (especially, that we separatly choose our background)? In the same way, what should I think about all the skills, talents and powers my hero and his companions learn during their adventures? In practice, at least some classes, or even powers (like spells) have responsivity in both games' dialoges options, or events. But for the most part they seems to only designate how our hero (and his companions) deal with combat situations. And out of combat, all those classes somewhat (for the most part) stops to exist. Anyway, I would like to point out, that this is not some major problem for me - devastating my game's experience, or something like that. But I simply say, that totaly new story wouldn't have this problem. From other hand, I can appreciate that I can import my old hero from PoE 1 to Deadfire and to meet some old friends. And as I wrote, I don't have problems with this from role-playing perspective.
  9. From one hand, I don't see a big problem with being the Watcher from Caed Nua also in Deadfire - at least not from the perspective given by Somnium_Meum. This is because we are about to role-play a character that was put in speciffic circumstences if not against his/her will, than at least without realy having a big choice. Hence, Gods force our hero to do certain things, but it dosn't mean he/she needs to like this. And actualy, nobody really force us to be a pirate, adventurer, or whatever, at the same time. Of course, there is that marine theme strongly present in the game. But there is no really any reason for our hero to stop to be the same guy/lass he/she was in the first game. Out of neccessity we need to travel by ship, and we need a crew to do this, but this don't need to change our hero's character or some of his other features. Same thing was with the first game in my opinion. We start as "common guy" with suddenly becomes a Watcher, right? Does that mean that suddenly he needs to start to be some "very serious guy"? Yes, he/she is a Watcher now, but at the same time he/she may stay a careless rogue (for example), as he/she was before. I think this is same way in Deadfire - and there are actualy dialoge-lines to choose, with are aligned with that approach. From other hand... I wouldn't mind if our developers would create completely new story, only set in the same universum. Hence, with completely new hero. What bother me the most, I suppose, with "continuation" of Watcher's story, is that for some reason he/she have losted all the experience he/she gained in his/her pursue after Thaos. Ok, in his/her case this might be justified by near-death experience, perhaps. But same thing goes for followers from the first part of the game too. And this make me feel like all the "classes" are not really a part of Eora's lore, so to speak, but they are in the game only for mechanics' purposes - and this is in contradiction to some dialoge-lines and descriptions from both titles. Hence, I think that new "from-zero-to-hero" story could be indeed better, but from different reasons than Somnium_Meum presented.
  10. Plenty was said already in this thread, from what I see. So I will only say that I rather belong to those with never really felt being forced to be a pirate. Well, yes, I can agree, that there is obviously strong presence of piracy along the Archipelago. And the Principi are the faction with is presented very early to the player. But I don't know how this could force us to be a pirate. Just personal opinion on the subject. Best wishes to all!
  11. Yeap, I agree with others, that from mechanics' perspective priests have been highly nerfed. No only in their universality, but even as heal+buff-bots they seems to be much worse in my opinion (while still somewhat useful). But I have to admit, that I had biggest problem with main character being a priest from role-playing perspective. After all, priest or not, our hero is the Watcher from Caed Nua - he/she know about god's true nature. How this knowledge influenced his faith? Those "beings" are still quite powerful, obviously, but their "artificial" origin makes me hard to justify real worship and deep faith - and as we know, those faith is a source of souls' energy for priest's spells. From other hand, Durance was abale to use Magranic faith for some time after discovering the true about her. So I guess this may be more complex.
  12. 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. I never tried playing without up-scaling, but I imagine that if you don't turn it on some areas will be too easy. Thx. for advice. I guess I will try my next playthrough on "veteran" + up-scaling only. Actualy, I don't even level-up as fast as some of you, because I try to involve only into quests that suits my current role-play. However I want to make my next hero more "adventurer" type - actualy, he already exists, but for now he is occupied with Thaos in PoE 1. Personaly, I don't mind if some areas starts to feel relatively easy after our party have grown in power. But I mean - some areas, not practicaly all of them. And I haven't even hit level-cup, when I've reach the final area of the game in my first playthrough - and as I wrote, only there I had some real troubles. So something is wrong with balancing, I suppose. Meanwhile, I started next playthrough with my old hero, but on PotD (but level-scaling off), and yes... the starting island was challenging, but in the way I don't neccessery like - "artifficialy" incereasing stats and so on. And fighting is supposed to be challenging and interesting for me, but it is not that important from my perspective too. Hence I'm thinking rather of "veteran" + up-scaling next time, as I wrote. Anyway, thx. again! Best wishes!
  13. 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. I fully agree. And this concept of not gaining XP through combat was something I actualy appreciated much in PoE 1 already. But same thing - in my first playthrough at "veteran" difficulty level (level-scaling turned off), I had the feeling that most encounters quickly started to be relatively easy. Hence my question - how about your experience, guys, when it comes to level-scaling? I consider to turn-on up-scaling in my next playthrough. But is it worth it? Best wishes!
  14. Personally, I consider Skyrim to be one of the worst RPGs ever made. However not because classless system or level caping. Anyway, from one hand, I belong to those that preffer to chase the bunny, than catching it. I also like the fact, that if my hero (party) is not experienced enough, it will be smashed if will go to wrong places too early. A the same time, there is that feel of "accomplishment" if one manage to deal with a fight with much toughter enemies than our own party. This is obviously a problem in open-world concept games, since one can easily become over-leveled for certain locations. Hence "level-scaling" idea. But level-scaling might be seen as problemattic too, since it kills a little bit the feeling of being "rewarded" by leveling our character - the feel of gaining power, etc. For me, the XP gain could be slightly lower I guess. Btw. I didn't try it yet - how well (or not) level scaling works in Deadfire?
  15. How many "alts" you play simultanously? Like for me, this character don't differ so much from this one: https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/105570-ill-describe-a-character-you-provide-class-suggestions/ My only problem with Nalpazca concept is that they are mortificators... That's one. But the other one is that they are somewhat zealous, judging by Zahua from PoE1. They searching for a kind of enlightement. So I'm not sure does mortification and spiritual enlightement, really fit your character from role-playing perspective. But this is to judge by yourself. From listed ones, Zealot seems to be most convincing for me. Despite the name, I don't recall Wael's priests to be specifficaly zealous. But they do like mysteries. Personally, I would propably go for rogue + cipher combo. Best wishes!
×
×
  • Create New...