Sherab

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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).

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.

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.

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!

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.

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!

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!

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?

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!

And what do you mean by this? I would say this story is quite linear - you are about to chase Adra collossus through Archipelago to find-out his plans, and meanwhile raport to gods about what you have findout. Quite linear to me. Actualy, personaly, I do like when there is properly long, deep, and interesting main story. And for me, the story in Deadfire is not so deep (however it "pretends" to be) somewhat interesting (discovering new "lore"), and rather short. From other hand, if we "invest" highly into main story, we have to answer a question - do we want the game to be fully driven by main story (somewhat limiting other content of the game as "less important", like in Dragon Age: Origin, to give an example), or we want to make it in such a way, that it leave open possibilities (from role-playing perspective) for exploration and side-questing (Morrowind-like, but with better writing, perhaps)? I preffer the last one option. But both options works fine to me. I've enjoyed DA:O very much too. By the Dedfire's story, I'm not really convinced. As I wrote, for me, the story is rather short, and our hero is somewhat too "minor" in it, so to speak. Yeah, it is somewhat interesting, when it comes to filling the "lore" gaps, but I haven't that feeling of being a part of great adventure or heroic tale. With one exception maybe - Magran's Teeth. Final part mostly, but whole location was quite fun. Oh, and after maybe first two "trips" to Berath's realm, those "over-written" descriptions of said "trips" started to be a little bit annoying, to be honest. At the same time, while not so "invasive" like in Oblivion, or Skyrim, the main story "wants to be followed", so to speak. But this are only my private opinions, of course.

Thank you for answer! Yes i'm familiar with Requiem - it seems fine at first sight but it not solves all Skyrim problems + adds some new. In case of Deadfire, even in Normal difficulty, i'd like to know full info of abilities. When i playin' a tabletop games, like D'n'D, Pathfinder and so on, all abilities have very presice descriptions - so why we not deserves it for PC games? Heh. Well, as I said, I like to know the details of the mechanics anyway, so you can count me in.

Hmmm... While I mostly agree with you, because I generaly like to know details of game's mechanics, I can also see, that this may highly depend on individual approach to the game as well. For example, I don't know are you familiar with the Requiem mod for TES V: Skyrim? In this mod authors intentionaly do not give (at least not within the game itself) you any numbers really. And the reason is because this is all about role-playing. Well, in my humble-opinion, only by changing descriptions and mechanics alone it is hard to make real RPG from Skyrim... I would say that Requiem is more like grind/farming fest (but still, only way to play Skyrim for me this days). ;P Anyway, I think that in case of Deadfire, we don't really need those details also, if we play on "normal" difficulty levels. However... if we are fans (I'm not really) of so called "power-gaming" and we absolutely need to play on PotD to have sattisfactory challenge, then yes - knowing details of the mechanics would be most appreciated. I would appreciate it anyway, since, as I wrote, I simply like to know them. My point is, that from "certain point of view" (as Obi-Wan would say) they are not really that neccessery, because on "normal" difficulty levels, one will be fine with any builds one will create - hence, one choose such talents/abilities, with best suits one's playstyle and hero (regardless of damage output, or whatever).

My refference was based solely on one rewiev of the Icewind Dale, since, as I wrote, I 've not played it yet. And in all honesty, I haven't played most of the Infinity Engine games (or similar), hence I'm not very familiar with abbrevations. From my standpoint a game don't need to be linear to be "fully" involved in the main plot. As I wrote few times by now (maybe even in this thread, I don't remember now ), despite generaly bad writing of Bethesda's games, I really like it how main plot was handled in TES III - Morrowind. Near the begining of the game, following main plot, we were instructed to get more experience in any way we like, and only after that to return. We could of course proceed immediately with the main plot. But by this single sentence, from the role-playing perspective, we had all the excuse we needed to do everything we wanted. And when we finaly get involved into the main story, it was quite interesting (at least for me) and keep to "drive" the rest of my first playthrough. Both subsequent titles of the Elder Scrolls abandoned this solution, and main plot is very "intrusive", so to speak - however, there it is not as a big problem, because the game do not end after finishing the main questline - in oposition to PoE.

Hmmm... that's funny. Well, I do like Eothas as interesting character, but still, I rather consider him to be a dangerous fanatic, as I wrote elsewhere. He has good motivation, possibly, but still, I consider him a fanatic. For some reason he thinks that destruction of the world as we know it, is the only way to expose gods' true nature to the Kiths, and perhaps to remind other gods, what their job should really be. And in the same way as he did during the Saint's War, he can easily accept all the destruction and death he brings to the world on his path.

Well, this is obviously an off-topic, but besides my relatively yong age, the original Star Wars saga was the first, I've felt in love with. Then, I was rather dissapointed about "the Old Republic" trilogy. Ok, those were good movies in their own terms, lots of special effects, and so on. But there was missing that "thing". I've only liked McGregor's and Neeson's play. Now, I have the feeling of getting back to the origins. Ok, the story has it's flaws, like lack of the background for Snoke, it seems that most (now all, from neccessity) old heros returns only to die (and you don't kill Han Solo, simply don't ! ), some copy-paste schemes from first trilogy. But in general, I was watching those two last (three if we count in "the Rogue One") movies with true pleasure, and I really like those speciffic relation between Ben Solo and Rey. Getting back to PoE. As I wrote before somwhere, I think that yes - both games - the first PoE, and the Deadfire, have indeed big issues with writing (and I would argue, that when it comes to main plot, Deadfire is even worse than predecessor). But still, those stories were good enough, to keep me interested and enjoy both games (mosty the first one). I can only complain, that while our developers created entirely new world (no D&D universum), the so called "lore" is rather shallow - and for me personally this is mportant to really get immersed into the game's world, and enchance my role-playing experience.

Hmmm, based on your description, I think rather of some more common ideas, such as: - rogue + cipher, - rogue + ranger, - ranger + cipher, - rogue + mage, - rogue + warrior - warrior + cipher. You wrote that in Deadfire he is mostly like a spy - someone who rather preffer to act in the shadows (?). If so, Rogue class feels to me to be most obvious choice. You've also mentioned playing tricks on enemies mind, hence I thought that combo with cipher would be nice. But mages/wizards also posses some CC spells obviously, with do target the will, so this is propably perfectly valid option too. You've mentioned also firearms profficiency, hence ranger proposition, but I assume, that this is rather secondary choice - and you haven't mentioned any furry friend of your character. And finaly, he was close to royal (ducal?) guards, hence he could recive some military training - hence possible worrior combination. I can't say for sure for Deadfire - I've played to less so far, but In the firts PoE, while there was some single refferences to the class of our hero, mostly there was none. I think the choice of the background and origin had bigger (however still small) responsivity. Btw. we can choose Old Vailia only - there is no possibility to choose Republics, and this is not exactly the same. And of course, you should (if you are role-playing) remember, that your hero have also experiences from the first PoE behind him. Anyway, I would argue, that class choice and it's build defines only (well, mostly if not only) what our hero do in combat situations. But it has a very little inpact on role-playing and interactions with NPCs. Hence I would rather choose something that more-less fits my role-play, but in first place I would rather wonder about the role my character is going to have in my party in combat situations. Don't take me wrong - I like to consider the class of my character in my role-playing too, and it is very important to me personally. I only meant, that from point of view of NPCs responsiviy, class has minimal meaning. Best wishes!

Hmmm... I personaly think that Deadfire was intended to be less (main-) story driven in the first place. I mean - in terms of actual gameplay. The story itself is rather short. But I think this is because the game is simply about side-questing and exploration. And (pehaps) this can be somewhat surpriesing to us, in the era of strongly story driven games - even those open-world, like Skyrim for example. Despite you have plenty of options what to do, the main-story gives you such feel of urgency and "must", that if you are actualy role-playi just a little bit, you don't really have a choice. And I think that "construction" of the Deadfire resembles more the Icewind Dale (from what I've read - because I haven't play it yet) - in that way, that yes, there is some main-story to follow, but in general this is all about "adventuring" - exploring new locations, finding interesting (or not interesting) loot, and in case of Deadfire, also about doing side-quests (after all quests remains main source of XP). And, as noted, most signifficant side-quests are related to big "factions" and their political/economic/cultural conflicts. Said all this, what do I think about main story? Honestly, I don't really have a clear idea. Why we actualy follow the collossus? Two possible reasons (initialy) - we don't really have a choice if we want to stay among the living - Berath is quite clear about this. And I would risk to say this is main reason. And second one - we propably want to regain part of our soul stolen by Eothas, and perhaps we seek of revenge too (but this last part quickly starts to be rather un-reallistic - Eothas seems to be in-destructible). So this is our initial background. After all, we find Eothas to be a fanatic - with propably good intentions, but still fanatic. It seems that he think that only way to expose gods' true nature to the Kith, and perhaps also to remind gods what their job really should be, is destruction of the world as we know it. And it seems, the same way, as he did during Saint's War, he don't care much about death and destruction he brings to the world meanwhile. And only thing our character can do is to almost fully passively observe Eothas' work. Yeah, we can try to convince him, but still... We don't really have any tools to stop him. So what should I think about such a story? From one hand, I suppose it is about further exposition of gods' secrets - we learn more about their lore. From other hand - I think this is also about making the player to think about Eothas' agenda. Well... method itself - I guess we can wonder about it too. But I think more about such things like "gods' true nature", "the role of the gods in people lifes", "do the Kith really need the gods?" "What is the potential of mortal races?". Of course we do not recive answers to those questions. But I think asking them may be the main goal of conversations with Eothas. Hence, whole main story is a kind of pseudo-philosophical debate. But it don't really have any "practical" goal. EDIT: Oh, and aside of what I have wrote, I largely agree with Wormerine.

Really? I kind of thought getting off from the Wheel of Saṃsāra is the whole point of Buddhism. But I am not a religious person, might mix it up with something else. Sorry, this was propably my bad English. It is as you wrote. At least in Therawada Buddhism. In Mahajana there is more focus on achieving full enlightement to be able to help others to achieve liberation from Samsara. But ultimately this is about making ourselfe and others free from suffering. Well, what can you expect when you - without any explanation! - disrupt the order ot the things people used to? I think even the artificial origin of the "gods" still is not really known among kith. On the other hand, destruction from Eothas is a common knowledge (you can even help to stage the play about it). So, help to that murderer must be seen as something very bad. Yes, you are right, of course. My point is, that in Deadfire there seems to not be any "faction" - nation, culture, etc. with would see the Wheel as something "bad", like Samsara in Buddhism (this is a little bit more complex, but I don't want to make big off-topics here). Hence a player is also supposed to see destruction of the Wheel as something bad. I mean, the event itself. But of course, at the same time, one can agree for this "small" evil, for greater good, if one will become convinced by Eothas agenda. Well, yes and no, from my standpoint. Yes - you are right, there is no need to all people be united to invent something. In this case, re-invent, perhaps. Still, I wouldn't call reasonable to expect that US will invent nuclear bomb, and because of this expectation, to start II WW. Metaturtle has already answered, but in that quest there is a group of godlike pirates (!) and we see there right away 2 Moon godlikes - a captain and a simple sailor (very simple) without any special connection with Ondrah. Even more so, simpleton is killed right away (again, without a hint of Onrah interest to the evens). Thanks. I simply had no access to this info in the game itself. This may be interesting part of the game to explore - I love to get deep into the (so called) lore. :D

Ok, thx. My main hero ported from first PoE never recruited Pallegina in Defiance Bay, hence I didn't even have the option to recruit her in Deadfire. This will gonna change in my upcoming playthrough - but this will still take some time - my Vailian dwarf tries to open Durgan's Battery right now. Anyway, thx. for explanation.