FlintlockJazz

+1 million. + another million I'll see your 2 million and raise you a gazillion! Hey, romance is already in the game! It just skips out on all that unnecessary "getting to know them" and jumps straight to what the player really wants: to pay for a fade to black. The Salty Mast has romances for all! On a side note, I'm surprised no protest group has made the claim that Pillars is pro-prostitution: you not only have the chance to engage in the activity but you gain a game bonus if you do, without any of the negatives (like crabs).

I'm not sure on where people seem to be finding all these bugs? I mean, I've come across some but no more than most other games these days, I've had worse, utterly game-breaking bugs from other games (including one that forever ****ed a playthrough, because due to the nature of the game you could never have more than one save) and they never even got patched out in the end. Baldur's Gate still has bugs to this day (not counting unofficial patches to try to fix them), at least Obsidian is still patching it.

So, it's not just a money sink. It's annoying money sink you can't opt out from It was another resource management, and a minor one. One that would have added to the atmosphere without being too intrusive mechanics-wise. Yet had you spoken with the backers back then it was like Obsidian had asked them to shag their own mothers. Now you have players asking to replace a straightforward magic system progression with one that will drag out mob fights while actually making boss fights easier despite their intentions to the contrary. People are weird.

Too many threads here I think. Any mention of something would be lost in the mass and a real nightmare to search for later. SA only has one thread dedicated to Pillars of Eternity and you can get a list of all posts by one member for any specific thread, so searching is easier. That and I think the developers (of any company) quite often avoid their own forums due to the number of haters that seem to frequent them. After Pillars was released the amount of hate that came from posters here about anything and everything, including personal attacks on the devs themselves. I noticed the devs seemed to become less present over time during development too, partly because they were working on the game but also I think some of the responses they were getting from backers kinda put them off. It's like when people put videos up on Youtube: you never look at the comments if you value your own self-esteem and sanity.

Hey, don't blame me back when it was still being debated I was pro-mana system over Vancian! Though I wanted to keep the ability to find and scribe new spells, but dunno if that would work with a mana system. Anyway, there were some decisions the backers made that I have to admit were rubbish, such as the protests against the durability system that was proposed when most of them clearly had not even read about the system being proposed (it did NOT destroy or break weapons as most of them were crying about, it actually provided a very minor penalty when the durability ran out, something like -1 to accuracy or something, and it's main effect was that it was going to provide a cosmetic effect of the weapons and armour looking worn out, which would have been cool when deep in the dungeons, so basically people cried about a cosmetic effect).

Oh, and people will of course then feel the need to respec their wizards when this change hits, but with the fact that all learned spells get lost and they have to spend money to re-learn them...

Obsidian merely just merged and then implemented both of them. Thank Bob they didn't go with the first suggestion purely, then the spellcasters would have gotten EIGHT spells per level (one per encounter for each spell plus the four resting ones). Not at all broken for boss battles....

She actually does that if you 'fail' her quest I believe.

This is my thought too. Trash mobs I won't waste the per rest spells on, which means this change is going to drag out the mob fights more as I conserve the spells for the important stuff while being made more powerful for the actual important fights... I'm totally sure this will add sooooo much tactical depth...

Yes, that is exactly what I'm saying. Assuming that Josh was communicating clearly, what this means is that casters' level 1 spells will go from 4/encounter at level 9 to 4/rest + 1/encounter at level 9. Which means, in practice, that in the most important fights - the boss fights that you rest up and get prepped for - casters are going to be stronger. i.e. they won't be able to nova more often come 9th level any more, but their nova will get bigger instead. That's... a really good point. I didn't think of that, and assuming they don't put their mastered spell in the grimoire either then they will also increase the number of spell choices they get to make too to five. This also makes the suggestions some people made in the other thread also potentially even worse (I include my questions about increasing per rest spells amongst that).

It's a gift of mine.

I believe it replaces the nova rather than adds to it. About that: Emphasis mine. What you're saying would be more reasonable, yes, but it's not what Josh said. Wait, am I understanding you right? I think you were saying that they would continue to be able to blast out spells per encounter in addition to this change, but from my reading the quote says " the current switchover of low level spells to per encounter is going to be changed. Instead, the "Vancian" casters will pick a spell of that level or lower as a mastered spell." with the bold bit indicating this is a replacement not an addition.

I don't understand your question. Are you talking about the number of casts for one spell-level or the number of spells you have access to for any given level? I mean will the number of spells per level per rest go up for the lower level spells or will they be limited to the maximum of four plus talents per level still. i.e. will it go from 4/rest at level 8 to 3/rest + 1/encounter at level 9, or 4/rest + 1/encounter? I read it as the latter. I meant is there any sign that the per rest spells will increase in number now that they are no longer per rest? Currently all spell levels seem to max out at four spells per rest/encounter, with the lower levels switching to per encounter instead of increasing in number. Now that they are no longer going to switch to per encounter I sure hope they will increase in number beyond four per level now.

I believe it replaces the nova rather than adds to it.

I don't understand your question. Are you talking about the number of casts for one spell-level or the number of spells you have access to for any given level? I mean will the number of spells per level per rest go up for the lower level spells or will they be limited to the maximum of four plus talents per level still.

Apparently you shouldn't underestimate a developer's willingness to take the player's shiny things away. In case Something Awful acts up again, here is the quote : Interesting, does this mean the number of spells per rest will go up for lower level spells once you get to level 9 then? And what about the Druids and Priests: they don't need a grimoire anyway so it won't be as big a deal for them.

If you increased your pledge by $8 when backing the game then you can put a request in. If you didn't then I don't think you can.

I did wonder why her 'body' was just a breastplate and didn't give anything special. Maybe

Embrace Pallyhood my friend. I have a warm set of Plate armor for you and your pick of the litter of shields, weapons and 2handed weapons. Being an almost unkillable asset to the team is fun. Also I used to play very defensively with the Paladin and its boring. With full faith and conviction and weapon and shield style (I only switch to it when I am heavily focused, fighting a big hitter like dragons or blocking door way) your defenses are more then enough even on PoTD. So spec (if you want) for some righteous kick assnes and help your squad slaughter their foes with your awesome buffs! and heals! Oh I fully intend to! Paladinness has returned to call to me like it did in the old days of BG1 and 2! Onwards to glory!

Just to provide an update for those who might be interested: While I intended to create this character after my current playthrough with my ranger, I found myself with just my laptop over the weekend which did not have the latest game save for my ranger (and the most recent one lost at least 20 hours progress), so I decided to start my Nature Godlike Kind Wayfarer Paladin then. I must say he is beyond awesome! :D Will be progressing him when I'm just with my laptop until I finish my ranger playthrough, but it is a struggle to fight the urge and give in to Paladinness...

One thing to consider as well: this is White March Part One, it's one half of the expansion pack which doesn't even have Zahua's questline. I would not be surprised if there are 'upgrades' you are intended to get to her body, perhaps as part of her questline that is not yet in the game (people have said her questline seems rather short, maybe it's not actually finished yet). Either way, she seems fine to me, perhaps not the bestest rogue evar, but she gets the job done.

I have to agree, if they take up the same cost as two weapons or weapon and shield they should provide equivalent benefits. I never got the urge designers seem to have to penalise two-handers with speed or whatever penalties in order to make them 'equal' to a one handed weapon when a two-hander is already being penalised for having to use two hands on one weapon. A two-hander SHOULD be better than a equivalent one-hander because you are giving up a shield or second weapon!

I've never seen one before - no one has - but I'm guessing it's a white hole.

I didn't even know you could fight her at the Fox and Goose, the option never seemed to come up despite my attempts at agitation. Maybe I just ain't a good agitator. :D

thieve's should start with a bonus to it. There isn't a thief class though, it's Rogue which doesn't necessarily have to be a thief. As I said, it could perhaps be included in stealth, in which case Rogue's would still get a bonus to as part of their bonus to Stealth (as would Rangers and Ciphers and other classes with a bonus to stealth, but then there isn't any reason why they can't be thieves).