Rostere

First when reading this: Uh, you mean Minsc? Okay. You mean Kivan. Yeah, he's definitely one of the more beige ones.

I would have agreed to this, this really sounds like something I would agree with, however now we are talking about the BG1 characters, who I found great. IMO they best of them were the extreme BG1 characters re-written in BG2 (Minsc, Edwin, to some degree Viconia - not Emoen Imoen however). Slightly more realistic, but just as funny. There's also the fact that there were 25 joinable NPCs in BG1. If Obsidian had written 25 NPCs for Pillars of Eternity, I think the sheer amount would have made everyone find enough interesting companions. It would have been interesting to see Shar-Teel, Tiax, Alora, Safana, Xan, Xzar and Montaron as more subdued joinable NPCs in BG2. Eventually we met them, but it would have been fun with more content. And let's not even get into the PS:T companions. They were pretty much as extreme as you can get. AND better and more realistically written (considering their conditions) than any of the BG companions. Which brings us to Chris Avellone writing characters again...

Yes. Also with a strobe light on, and with a dwarf whispering the entirety of "The Hobbit" backwards in your left ear.

LOL. Look, I think there's one thing this thread is completely failing at. People say that "Hmm... I don't like A, ergo, their enemies B must be good guys". Lay it off. You are adult people (I think). You're better than that. I have no idea what is so appealing behind that line of thought that so many otherwise intelligent people succumb to it. People like to sympathize with those who share in their criticism, I think. So when people who like to criticize country A and see that country B also does that, they are inclined to think better of country B. It's also a trick you see often in politics, sadly. I guess that only goes to show how stupid people really are when the let themselves be controlled by emotions.

There's a huge difference between writing and plot. A good writer can take a banal plot and turn it into a memorable experience. In stories there are of course also micro-plots, the smaller plot parts of the main plot. To clarify what I wrote earlier: I think PoE has a far better general plot than BG1. If you were trying to explain the plot in BG1 to someone they would believe that BG1 was the worst kind of kitsch fantasy story that does not take itself seriously at all. In a way, BG1 is of course not very serious but humorous and kitschy, if you look at the extreme companions for example. If your main villain has a skull for a helmet, glowing eyes, and the story starts with him killing your father, then you're literally not above this level: The parts of the BG1 story who actually were interesting were not very well developed. As it was to be, these themes were increasingly explored in BG2. IMO the story in PoE is slightly above the story of BG2. However! I am now only making a judgement on the general story concept and not the small parts like joinable NPCs, non-joinable NPCs and so on. I think Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 and great voice acting (complete with OUTRAGEOUS accents), with voice actors really acting out their roles. More of that please (if you have voice acting at all). The companions were very unique and interesting, and even some with only a few slices of dialogue like Shar-Teel or Tiax have personalities that you remember very vividly. Admittedly I am playing PoE with a custom party in my main playthrough and so I have saved all companions except Edér and Aloth (both of whom I eventually kicked out around the end of Chapter 1) for later, so I can't really talk a lot about the others except for what I've seen in "Let's Play" videos. My impression of the joinable NPCs in PoE is that most have far more subdued personalities than their counterparts in the BG games (noting also that the new companions in BG2 were typically more beige than the BG1 companions). IMO Edér has a great premise considering the PoE world lore, but his personality is just a tiny bit too bland to be considered among the BG greats. Same with Aloth, they should have taken the same concept but turned it up to 11. A lot of people have said they thought Durance was the best NPC in PoE, that is possibly because he would fit in better with the BG crowd of companions with extreme personalities. IMO this is also one indication that Chris Avellone should have written all the companions of PoE. Now here's what a typical party of mine in BG2 could look like: Player Character Minsc (likeable village idiot with a hamster) Anomen (pompous ass) Viconia (psychopathic drow supremacist) Edwin (narcissist and megalomaniac) Jan Jansen (overly talkative mythomaniac) That's a merry band of fools with enough personality for half a dozen sitcoms. The intra-party banter you get is hilarious. From what I've seen thus far from the PoE companions they're good, but not with sufficiently extreme personalities to be counted among the best of the BG series.

Two words: don't worry Shapeshifting is good at low levels but not really at high levels. Druid spells are good though.

You really underestimate the power of guerrilla warfare, while your point still stands the could cripple the Southern Lands economically (Although I doubt they had the presence of mind to stick to guerrilla tactics) Even if I did, you can only really wage war effectively in that fashion if you are on your own land where you know where to find food and how to get from A to B. Especially if you have the support of local populace whom the invaders do not want to massacre. At worst, the Wildlings would be a threat to the northernmost lords. Anyways, people who have the population density of hunter/gatherers in a frozen wasteland won't be a realistic threat to people who have the farming technology of medieval Europe simply from a numerical point of view. IMO something which would change this would be if the Wildlings had efficient fishing technology, and were herding lots of reindeer and the like on land. Still they would need a much larger area of land to accumulate the kind of numbers that would make them a military threat.

Now I just can't stop thinking about how awful the story in BG1 really is. Instead of just staying the **** away from trouble (and specifically a not-so-subtle evil dude with a skull for a helmet and glowing eyes) you're all like "I just got orphaned - better fix the iron shortage now!". The good stuff about the BG series was always the fun exploration and characterful NPCs. BG2's main story had a pretty awful opening (completely saved by NPCs and Athkatla however), but eventually got better once you got to Spellhold. Specifically the constant nudging to save Imoen is very irritating. The main motivation for going to Spellhold instead of doing all the other fun stuff you can do is pretty much to hear more of David Warner's excellent voice acting.

Whoever thinks that BG1 had better main story is just wrong. There was a ton of great flavour in BG1, but the main premise and story arc was just plain boring and painfully cliché. So you are the son of the God of Murder and then there are other siblings, and one of them in particular (who looks like Badguy McEvil) goes about killing everyone because that's apparently how he plans to become the new God of Murder. Plus, other evil stuff. You fix all the bad stuff and then find out that Badguy McEvil is behind it all. Games such as PoE and Torment have far better plot than BG1. I do agree that PoE could have had more colourful NPCs, though.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=difPkqg1lO8 IMO the best scene in the series I really hate the trope of "dangerous indians", when in history organized, well-equipped (not only with weapons, but also horses and so on) forces have always inflicted embarrassing defeats on rabble. During the entire series the Wildlings have been hyped as being so dangerous, when they have no horses, no resources or logistics and no technology. How they would ever be able to be a serious threat to the southern areas is beyond me. So this scene pretty much confirms that the threat is merely psychological. BTW, in spite of reading humongous amounts in general, I actually haven't read any GRRM.

A lot of people, me included, are still waiting on their stuff to be shipped. So, you just need to stay put.

If I were about to dream about that I wouldn't be able to sleep... :S Yep, so we've been told. Paradox gets to sell physical stuff though. I wonder exactly how the agreement looks like. In other articles I've read it appears Paradox widely considers their deal with Obsidian to be a prestige thing, although they do apparently earn money from it. Well. The Cities: Skylines devs has had a traditional publishing agreement with Paradox. That means that Paradox funds the development, but they also get most of the money when the game is sold. Just like with every title Obsidian has released up to this one

Paradox may feel they've proven themselves. As one who has yet to receive discs, box, or even an email saying when these are likely to ship, I'm not seeing it. I would also not support another Obsidian Kickstarter unless this situation changes in the very near future. Delivering on one's commitments is good. Tell me about it. I don't really think we know who we can assign blame to, though, seeing how Obsidian is late with both the documentary and Avellone's novel. Although it does worry me that I've heard a person say that the PoE cloth map is "a bit blurry".

Our adversary don't will use this. Some reverse situation for best understanding. It's really not about whether or not specifically the US will use nukes, it's about whether any side will do so. In this case, the answer is a clear "yes" if any of the parts are rational actors. It is always going to be in your interest to strike first, and the longer you delay, the higher the likelihood is that your adversary strikes first. It is unthinkable that Nicaragua, Cuba and Venezuela would join a Russian war against NATO. That is why they are just friends and not anything more. In fact, I don't know if there is any nation which would join Russia in a war against any other major nation. In this case, we are lacking comparisons in the modern era. Better examples would be an American intervention in, say, Romania during the Cold War. That would probably elicit the same reaction as if Russia were to invade a NATO country in Europe. That is, global nuclear war. I don't understand. During the Cold War, every major population center was targeted for nukes. Although we have left behind the inevitable feeling of war, a lot of people have completely forgot what nuclear war is all about. The numbers have changed, but the fundamental calculus has not. In the case of a nuclear war, all population centers are targeted for nuclear annihilation - from Cold War plans we have seen that it makes no difference if you have 0 or 100 nukes in an area as long as it has strategic assets (people, industry, power generation...). You nuke people to cause strategic damage, not just because you're upset that they store weapons there. Both sides have more than enough nukes to not be picky about what they bomb. You can't threaten someone with something you've been doing all along. Are you saying that Russia would attack a NATO country, but not at the same time start a global nuclear war? That's really stupid, because it allows for NATO to have the first strike. Putin could as well pull down his pants and bend forward in front of Obama. Having the first strike is hugely important, which is one of the reasons why an early warning system is the most important technology in modern armies, apart from the nukes themselves of course. It's absurd talking about "suicidal idiots" since everyone will be suicidal in case of a war like this. NATO nations who have nukes are just as targeted for annihilation as Russia which has nukes, yet that does not stop Russia from developing nukes, right?

Paradox interview about Cities: Skylines and Pillars of Eternity. My translation: So if we have not seen another Kickstarter yet... Is Obsidian's next game a joint venture by Obsidian and Paradox? What does Paradox' long-term commitment constitute? How does their collaboration put Paradox on the map "working with really big titles within our genres of interest"? Anything can happen in the next episode of...

I think the problem is in part that there are too few enemies which are dangerous ranged specialists. In games such as BG1 you would be swarmed by archers (kobolds, bandits, hobgoblins...) and thus charging into battle to enter close combat became preferable to trying to win a ranged fight. Otherwise, it would always have been preferable to initiate BG1 combat with a ranged volley as well. In BG2 ranged weapons became less powerful in general because of HP bloat.

Obviously this: More companions added retroactively to the base game. More expansion content for all characters (think Throne of Bhaal). More reactivity - I don't care if this means that specific backgrounds get more content.

Sigh. There should really be some cool reaction to killing both... :/

Haha, exactly what I thought. And don't forget that guy you first talk to in Gilded Vale, sounds just like Brother Poquelin from IWD

Yup. Probably just a bug. That said, Fighters are THE tanks to go with currently. That said, that is also all they do better than anyone else.

Use pikes + hiding behind tanks for avoiding aggro.

NPCs are **** for powergaming, just like in BG1. PoE is just keeping the proud tradition of gimped characters.

Wizard. Clarification: Wizard using crowd control spells which give status effects. Also, keep in mind that the squishier characters you have in the back, the tougher characters you need in the front. And the more imbalanced squishiness vs. toughness is in your party, the more important positioning is.

But shouldn't scouting be a no-brainer if you want to be efficient IRL? I play on hard and have had no issue with the "problems" you mention. What do you propose as an alternative to scouting? First off, make absolutely sure you are playing on "easy" if you have trouble with the game. Are you playing on easy? Otherwise there is no way for people like me to know it's just not you who suck at the game. What attributes does your party have? I'm interested.

This was how I always did to split stacks in the IE games...