Luckmann

Goal-oriented experience is always superior to Murderhobo-oriented experience simply because it allows you to design a game with roleplaying in mind, rather than the experience doleout and discrepancies that arises from presenting a player with wildly disproportionate rewards. Let us all take a moment to remember Deus Ex: Human Revolution and how it changed Deus Ex from Objective-based Experience to Murderhobo-based Experience, and how you ended up killing absolutely everyone simply because it gave you experience, whether your character was built for it or not.

Each should have two, though, not just one each. Bleak Walkers get two (The Black Path and Remember Rakhan Field). Each could even be modeled after the same approach; one per-kill buff or debuff, and one affecting either Flames of Devotion or Lay On Hands.

Sawyer is a king sequestered in a tower of eternity, and Sensuki is the page delivering parcels to and fro' the monarch and the peasantry.

I really appreciate stuff like that, Sensuki, but damn it really annoys me that that is exactly the kind of conversation that should really be taking place here.

Is that why he's notably absent from the Obsidian forums these days? It just feels so odd that he'd have a larger presence when it comes to reporting on the game and giving feedback on a completely different, pay-to-participate (or even read) forum than on the dedicated forums meant specifically for playtesting and player-to-developer (and vice versa) feedback and discussion.

There'll practically have to be. I'm not sure if it's confirmed anywhere, but there really should be a lot more portraits. I especially like the ones that look-the-same-but-not-really, like the female Nature Godlike. I think that the entire library of portraits should be like that.

Sawyer? On a personal level, practically nothing. Like most, I don't think I know more than his credits and the general impression from interviews and such. Ultimately little more than his Wikipedia entry, really. ...actually a bit more than that, because his Wikipedia entry is shallow as all hell.

I actually have a lot more understanding for that as a way to curtail the flow of spoilers and whatnot, unfinished as the game still is and so on, than I do for "Combat Only"-abilities, the current Engagement system's ability to completely lock down combat, the silly everyone-or-no-one Stealth system, or Area Transition limitations. Come to think of it, there's a strong pattern of limitation emerging, which is worrysome.

AFAIK, no, there's no God Mode that you can activate via console (yet). My comment was meant in general, not specifically for PoE "as-is". As in, the ones likely to abuse the hell out of Area Transition in Combat are the same that will probably just cheat through the game anyway, via console, but yet the console isn't considered an exploit that they necessarily stomp down on.

Pretty much, word of mouth and insight is how I get my news since a while back. Maybe there are some other forums that discuss games more avidly than this one, on general (and if you have a strong stomach) I would recommend one of the chans (infinity preferred not that half one) since they act as a good filter for a lot of stuff and can even come up with some good content. They don't follow games as avidly and sometimes they just do it out of spite (most times) Other than that, I would say just watching for upcoming games. Ever since AAA has dried out the market there aren't that many games to get hyped for. While I don't really frequent any chans, Infinitychan is infinitely better than Halfchan. https://8chan.co/v/ is actually survivable compared to Halfchan.

What gets me with the things the Paladin gets - speaking Flames of Devotion here, because, honestly.. I never even really tried Lay on Hands, because it just seemed to really not add anything meaningful - is that you use Flames of Devotion, and you're done. There's nothing else you can really do for the rest of that Encounter. You're down to autoattacks. Even a Fighter gets to pick between an ability that needs to be tactically deployed at some point in combat to be useful, or two Knockdowns that are tactically useful. Flames of Devotion you go smack someone over the head as soon as possible and you're done. Meanwhile the Chanter gets flexible auras and powers that allows them to do make a range of choices (albeit not necessarily a wide range at lvl 1) in the midst of combat, from the get-go.

I have, I just haven't played it very much. My comment was on what the Chanter can do and is presented with compared to, for example, Paladins. Chanters have a range of options from the get-go that are easily comparable. I would never presume to comment on those powers individually until I've played more. The mechanic is flexible, fun and engaging. Paladins get to pick between Lay on Hands 3/Rest or Flames of Devotion 1/Encounter. There's a marked difference in what they get and how it works. Was my conclusion wrong or did I offend? :|

Our developers who arth at Obsidian, hallowed be thy name. Your concepts come, your games be done, on our battlestations, as it is in your office. Give us this day our daily nuggets, and forgive us our bickering, as we also have forgiven our fellow forumites. And lead us not into contrived mechanics, and deliver us from hairloss. Please pay attention to the Discussion Forum, even when we suck. Amen.

Too bad that the Josh do not see it as well. Screw the fans. Most "fans" can't tell their mouth from their ass and they're more fickle than a thayvian whore.

When did you scuffle with the Zhentarim in BG? I have it somewhere at the far end at the back of my head, but I can't actually remember it very clearly. There's a lot of dust and cobwebs back there.

Honestly, "in 10 seconds" is a terrible wording. It should always be "over 10 seconds" or "for 10 seconds". "In 10 seconds" almost sounds like it'll deal 50.7 damage after 10 seconds. "Over" would imply that it'd do 5.07 per second. "For" would imply that it does 50.7 per second. My guess is that "in" is basically "inside of" 10 seconds, so it's probably 5.07/second, but it could be much clearer. Or it should just be scrapped and reworded completely. "Deals 5.07 damage every second for 10 seconds".

Relatively speaking, I foresee it being rather easy. Now, adding good companions, though... I don't see that ever happening.

I think the comparison to Paladins in particular is very apt, because currently, Paladins are very rigid, very static in how they play, with very limited options, whereas the Chanter has a wide range of options that are easily comparable in power. I think it's a bit of a mistake to only show the Backer Beta in the level 4-5 range, because if we compare lower levels, Paladins will have practically nothing (not even auras), whereas the Chanter is already presented with a fun, flexible and powerful mechanic. I have yet to truly try out a Chanter myself, but they don't appear overly powerful. I think that if they are anything, they are the sweet spot other classes should be compared to.

I actually find the idea of a dual-wielding saber-ranger really appealing. Speaking specifically about the ranger, it needs: Higher flexibility in abilities to highlight that it's not just meant to be ranged. No other class is pigeonholed like this in concept or mechanics. Actually be better at ranged, paradoxically. It appears a lot of people have pigeonholed their thinking into thinking that the ranger was the dedicated archer class, while they obviously do quite good with other builds. So even though everything with the abilities and concept seems to hint at the ranger being meant to be ranged, he's actually not good at it. Drop the damn shared health pool. If it causes balance issues, find another solution. Add more nature-related aspects or abilities. Rangers in PoE aren't getting druid-y spells like in DnD, but the concept still seems to be very nature-oriented. But there is very little mechanical support for this. Per-Day Poisons or Traps? Per-Encounter Barkskin? Maybe throw some Shaman on the class. All in my own humble opinion, of course. That's what I've taken home from the discussion so far.

Highlight mine. This is the end result of the decision of "Combat Only" powers and it feels contrieved, like you're fighting the system, rather than playing a game. This is another one of those "I understand why they did it, but it's absolutely useless"-things. The way I understand it, it was introduced to stop people from abusing it in some way, by jumping in and out of combat and resting and so on. But again, this issue was always so minor that anyone that would take to use this as an actual tactic is the same kind of person that'll be liable to just turn on Godmode with the Console, and I don't think they've considered removing that (and if they have, they shouldn't, because it's stupid). In the ol' IE games, I didn't even know you could do that, nevermind use it as a tactic, but I do remember those few times I had to legitimately flee. Not realizing that it could be abused, it actually left me in a worse situation than before, because when I came back to the scene with the combat, they had repositioned and I could forget all about getting into position or do an organized pull, it was on. Both the "Combat Only"-restrictions and the "No Area Transition in Combat" really just feels wrong, and if I understood the purpose of the beta right, that's the things they actually want feedback on, bug-hunting being secondary at best. I really can't describe it better than that it feels like I'm fighting the system, like it's engineered difficulty, contrived and artificial, like I'm trying to do something perfectly reasonable, and the game just says no, for no readily apparent reason, because **** me, right? It's.. gah. Gnaah!

One does not exclude the other, though. The current double-click functionality (to move camera) is useless, anyway. I think we're straying a bit off-topic, but I've been thinking about that too. I think that it's great that Scouting works so well, because it's the first time in a game like this where Scouting really helps and where positioning can be so important, but at the same time, Stealth vs. Hostiles seem to be largely overpowered on average, where, as you say, it's easy to enter any room and position yourself very close to them before intiating Combat.

I'm not saying that the Cipher isn't powerful or even too powerful of an opener. I don't think anyone has argued otherwise. What we're saying - it's certainly what I'm saying - is that "Combat Only" is a cop-out, a terrible mechanic, and a very game-y, arbitrary and artificial restriction. I can't wrap my head around why it'd be there, because as I play, I feel "Why the hell can my character do this now, but not a split second ago?". It has nothing to do with balancing, really. It has everything to do with how it feels, and it feels absolutely horrible. If the powers were unbalanced or causing problems, making them "Combat Only" was a bad solution, not because it didn't "fix" the problem, but because it introduced a badwrongfun mechanic when what they should've done was rework the powers or find another solution that works better with the game.

In all honesty I think it is time the "soloists" wake up and smell the coffee. You won't be one manning this game with anything other than maybe a chanter. It was not designed around it, they didn't consider it, and it isn't being looked at. Yes Cipher has restrictions but in an actual party they are not huge. While I am in no way suggesting that there should be any specific "solo-play"-support, it should be mechanically supported. If it's an issue soloing, it's an issue in a group. Think of it like this way, instead: The Cipher has no way to initiate combat with an offensive power. Why would that be acceptable, whether you're soloing or not? I still fail to understand why there'd be such strong Combat-Only restrictions on powers at all.

Of course, I had just assumed it was obvious that action of walking/repositioning to pull opponents wouldn't count as becoming Disengaged. You'd still be very much in Engagement, still being attacked by your target, the target similarly moving with you (or at least moving with you if it wants to keep attacking you and not end Engagement). The more I think of it and the more input I get from other people, the more I really want to see this functionality put into the game. It'd make both Engagement and tactical movement possible, which is currently sadly mutually exclusive under the current mechanics. Additionally, I think it just makes a lot of sense from an immersive perspective, whereas the complete lack of Engagement (complete free movement on the battlefield, feel free to ignore the heavies) and the current Engagement system (complete lock-down, static cluster that cannot be moved without escape mechanics or being hacked to bits; both which will do jack squat to reposition the foe(s) both don't make a lick of sense. Also, icing on the cake that we'd get a Walk/Run toggle to play with.