Luckmann

There's multiple good reasons to be naked. First because when you're naked, you know that there's no gear screwing with what you're seeing on the screen. Second because your Action Speed is affected by your Armour. In the game currently, there doesn't really appear to be any clothes, only Light, Medium and Heavy armours. So if you value Action Speed over survivability (and the fact of the matter is that currently, you win by killing whatever is trying to kill you, first, because there's no way you'll soak up what some of these opponents are dishing out), you strip down to your skivvies and deal with it.

... There's no excuse. Really, just the fact that there are combat and non-combat actions strikes me as weird, because there's so many abilities you might want to initiate combat with, but can't.

I've seen you say elsewhere that Weapon Focus grants +10, and you say it in the OP here too, but trying it out, it only grants +6. I tried it out with a starting character with a basic Longsword, with Weapon Focus Knight, and it's only 6. Am I missing something, or are you operating on old intel?

While I generally agree, I see no reason for the game to make that decision for me. In fact, I would find it even more infuriating as to why I can't get a Toggle when the game would already Toggle for me based on landscaping.

I haven't played the beta, but from what I could gather I had also mentioned the walk (fall back) / run toggle as a possible remedy to engagement a couple of times. (Even before the beta was released.) I agree with you that you should be able to reposition by slowly backpedalling without inducing any AoO. It makes sense, it is how real fights are also fought. AoO should only be initiated when you try to run away (turn your back to the enemy). I don't know, it seems to make a lot of sense to have this thing and it would probably solve a lot of the negative stuff associated with engagement. I guess the additional thing for the devs to do in this case is to add the backpedalling animations and maybe it is too late for it now. Highlight mine. And yes, that's also what I thought. When I was playing, my intent wasn't to run away; it wasn't even to quickly rush and help a comrade. I was simply trying to reposition myself while walking backwards and then I realized that, of course, I couldn't. It felt incredibly odd, and after playing I can see why people would have a problem with the Engagement System as it is. It's very jarring to practically not be able to move at all, even reasonably, in a way that should "just work", compared to most other games I've played. And I'm not even raising the issue of using powers that makes the characters move (even though you didn't expect them to) and whomp, Engagement Attack! I'm not sure it needs any backpedalling animations, really. I mean.. well.. actually.. I just assumed that there already were walking animations for moving backwards.. you might be right. Not that it matters much to you, since you have a tendency to argue for the sake of arguing without any merit to anything that rolls out of your mouth, but fighting while moving backwards has historically been so prevalent that most keeps and castles have taken it into account when structuring it's fortifications, such as spiral staircases that leaves the right arm of the retreating defenders free. When you face an opponent liable to stab you in the eye, the only way to reposition safely is to retreat backwards. Precisely because if you don't, you're just going to stand there and get stabbed in the face, and if try to run away, you get stabbed in the back. Hell, most streetfights today still go about the same. I was once in a fight that was more or less a dodging retreat slowly backwards over 100m. The reason for this was precisely because we couldn't turn our backs without getting smacked on the head, and we didn't have any solid weapons to defend ourselves with to actually parry effectively (they had branches/clubs, we had practically nothing). In other news, I have composed a guide for everyone on the forum. A "How-To" to reduce the amount of white noise by at least 90%: http://i.imgur.com/gTG521z.png

On Hard, when there's more enemies than party members in encounters, you often don't control the battlefield. Which is, of course, a problem. While I think there's a good argument in that it makes perfect sense that it would be hard to control more opponents than you have allies (or even just melee allies), I think it can (and will) lead to frustration amongst players when they feel they have no way to control the battlefield. Hence the suggestion.

More important? Maybe; after all, I'm really just touching on the allotted skills for a single class, really. That said, I find it more important that the bonuses make sense, since they are largely conceived as fluffy bonuses rather than on min/max diversification in an even spread. You should start a thread on which Cultures and Backgrounds should get what bonus and why. I can see The White That Wends giving +1 CON, but I have no idea what'd grant +1 PER. There's no Athletics/Survival Background, that could go straight to the Drifter. Athletics/Lore for Aristocrat? Arguably a stretch, but it could work, I mean, Aristocrats have the best food and so on. On that note, I find it more important that human subraces don't have any mechanical effects at all, and odd that they'd all share the same.

It's a mistake to say "European" keyboard, because even between the two of us (Swedish/Danish), there's differences. On my Swedish Keyboard, it's located on "Ö", so I would assume it's the same on a German one. The location of the "Ö" on a Swedish and German keyboard correlates to the location of the "Æ" on a Danish keyboard. Unless I'm mistaken.

I noticed this yesterday, probably the same house in Dyrwood, too. I wasn't sure if it was a bug or if I'm just functionally retarded, so I didn't report it yet. I wanted to see if it's the same with other traps, and judging from what Nakia and Cluas said, it's game-wide.

I'm not sure how hard they monitor these boards, honestly, but you should probably post your saves for reference. Might help them to track down the issue. Since you (we) have no idea what causes this, we can't expect them to.

Each Class starts with a number of bonuses to a number of skills. For reference: http://pillarsofeternity.gamepedia.com/Skill#Skill_Bonus Do note that I'm not sure that is still correct. I only checked the one I reacted to in-game yesterday, the Paladin and the Fighter. The Fighter gets 1 Athletics, 1 Lore and 1 Survival. The Barbarian gets 2 Athlethics, 1 Survival. The Paladin gets 2 Athletics, 1 Lore. Does anyone else feel this is odd? The Fighter, I would think, would be more likely to be the Athletic guy compared to the Paladin. The Barbarian's starting Skills are spot-on, whereas the Paladin's is.. odd. Out of all of them, only the Paladin and the Barbarian, which I would expect to the on opposite ends in thematic physical combat prowess, gets Athletics 2. My suggestion would be that: The Fighter gets 2 Athletics, 1 Lore. The Barbarian retains 2 Athletics, 1 Survival. The Paladin gets 1 Athletics, 1 Lore, and 1 based on his Paladin Order. Athletics: Goldpact Knights Stealth: Bleak Walkers Suvival: Kind Wayfarers Lore: Darcozzi Paladini and The Shieldbearers of St. Elcga. Yes, this means that the Paladin setup isn't unique (for example, a Goldpact Paladin and a Fighter would have the same), but there is already precedence (Chanters & Wizards) for that. Also, is there any reason that Class bonuses show up upon levelup, when investing in Skills, but other bonuses do not? It's confusing and strictly speaking, the Class Bonus to skills isn't more mechanically relevant than bonuses from any other source, such as your choice of Culture & Background (or Talents, for that matter).

I think this is largely due to the limited scope in character building. There's not a whole lot of options as you go along (well, the options are there, you just can't take enough), and in avoiding "need-to-have" Talents and Abilities, the system ended up being very forgiving. Hell, a lot of the BB Companions doesn't even have a Weapon Focus. Anything I ever build by-the-book (which, honestly, is going to be basically nothing; I'm always going to start with at least a fluffy Weapon Focus and an extra low-key Talent) will be severely Talent-starved. Some levels, some Classes don't even get to do anything besides place Skill Points. That means that either Talents have to be wildly overpowered (resulting in very likely "must-haves") or rather weak, meaning that you'll likely survive without Talent A or B.

You probably know best, but the way I've understood it, Multiplayer would require a lot of work. I realize that you probably realize that too, since you say "go through all the trouble", but saying "[it] can be modded in" makes it sound so easy. Otherwise, I'd be all for a co-op mode.

Unless they have full-blown tritanopia colour blindness, Yellow should work. Blue is usually used because everyone can see it, but yellow shouldn't be mistaken for anything else anyway, I think. For reference: http://i.imgur.com/roggTPV.jpg I still really wonder why they thought it'd be a good idea for all non-hostile NPC:s to show up as Allies. With Green for Allies, Red for Enemies, and Cyan for Neutral, all they'd have to do for a Colourblind Mode is to switch Allies to Yellow.

That's the idea, and that's why it's terrible. I don't think that's the intent. I think the intent was to allow you to control the battlefield, to create choke-points, to hold up opponents, and so on. I think that the complete lock-up is an unintended side-effect that they don't know how to deal with appropriately, and they feel they have to choose between two options that are both sub-optimal. On paper, with the rationale given, I really like the idea of Engagement. The mechanic itself is good, but I think that some of the effects of it is grating and jarring, as in, why on Earth can't I move at all. It locks things up way worse than it actually has to. But more to the point, how'd you feel about meaningful Walk/Run toggle(s) and interacting with the Engagement system? We all know you hate Engagement, but apart from it's complete removal, any ideas?

I just thought of something. It has to do with Engagement. Please don't kill me. I've been playing the Backer Beta a little, and while I like the idea of Engagement, I'm finding it nigh-impossible to move around once the pieces on the board is "set", and generally speaking, it just ends up being a big cluster where it's hard to even see who's engaged with who. My first idea was to move all the pieces around, get some distances, but, obviously, Engagement wouldn't have none of that **** from me. I couldn't do what I'd do in the IE games; simply move slowly, facing my opponent, to move them towards me. I did this a lot in the old IE games, opening up choke points or just moving someone away from my squishier friends. What if.. what if we have a real Walk/Run toggle? R to Toggle, hold Shift to Run/Walk on movement command. Or something. And what if Walking didn't trigger Engagement attacks, because you are slowly walking (backwards), pulling the opponent with you? And Running (maybe slightly faster than now?) always did? So you could still cut-and-run, or quickly try to assist someone, but you'd have to take the consequences. That way: You can tactically reposition slowly in combat, moving opponents away from eachother or towards eachother. Or plan ahead to move towards a friend that needs help as you are finishing off some mook. You maintain the intended functionality of the Engagement system, to re-value melee and tanking, to create choke points. In fact, it would arguably make it better, since you'd endow them with the power of battlefield re-positioning. Running and Walking wouldn't just be cosmetic, but have meaningful implications, tying the "immersive" aspect (that we don't want to friggin' run everywhere all the time) into the mechanical. Obviously, movement penalties/bonuses would apply the same on Walking as on Running, so if (for example) Walking would be 40% of current Run (Default, ATM) speed and Run would be 120% of current Run speed, being subject to a slowing effect would act independently on the two. So walking while slowed wouldn't just be slow, it'd be really slow.

I just thought of something. It has to do with Engagement. Please don't kill me. I've been playing the Backer Beta a little, and while I like the idea of Engagement, I'm finding it nigh-impossible to move around once the pieces on the board is "set", and generally speaking, it just ends up being a big cluster where it's hard to even see who's engaged with who. My first idea was to move all the pieces around, get some distances, but, obviously, Engagement wouldn't have none of that **** from me. What if.. what if we have a real Walk/Run toggle? R to Toggle, hold Shift to Run/Walk on movement command. Or something. And what if Walking didn't trigger Engagement attacks, because you are slowly walking (backwards), pulling the opponent with you? And Running (maybe slightly faster than now?) always did? That way: You can tactically reposition slowly in combat, moving opponents away from eachother or towards eachother. You maintain the intended functionality of the Engagement system, to re-value melee and tanking, to create choke points. Running and Walking wouldn't just be cosmetic, but have meaningful implications, tying the "immersive" aspect (that we don't want to friggin' run everywhere all the time) into the mechanical. In the interest of not derailing this thread I'm going to repost this in the discussion on Engagement, since it tends to raise a lot of ruckus.

Sorry, I had it wrong in my head. I understood it as them having blank names for some reason, but they don't. They're all named Piglet. What OP is talking about is this: http://i.imgur.com/Q1UvG0h.jpg Notice the dark box, as if displaying hovertext, yet there is no text. I propose a hearty "Oink", alternated by "Wee, wee", followed finally by "PoE sucks without murderhobo XP".

There's also the typical "Hold mouse-button down"~ Divinity: Original Sin uses that, and depending on where your mouse-pointer is in relevance to the characters they will walk or run (close to the character = walk, further away = run). Though, that might be a bit difficult, because scroll panning and camera control. Your solution/idea much better That sounds terrible when it comes to managing a whole group, though. I agree that double-click for running works the best, because the current "double-click to flick around the map like mad" is an infuriating functionality.

I noticed that, too. The solution here is obviously to name all of them after forum members.

This might actually be the best option. Perception giving Interrupt would potentially still make it very powerful, capable of harrassing at range. A fast ranged harrasser would essentially be Dex/Per, which makes perfect sense on every level.

A toggle, obviously. But Walking should be the default. Also, sheating, because goddammit.

Worth it if just for the Cyan selection circles for Neutral NPC:s. I seriously have no idea what they were thinking when they thought it'd be a good idea to make everyone that isn't overtly hostile show up as an ally.

I can't replicate this. I mean, I can *see* it in your recording, but I thought "Huh, weird." and started creating a character for myself, and it's not happening to me. At first I thought it was maybe the head or the Hair, so I made sure it was all the same. Head 1, Hair 10. Nope, can't replicate. I'll try to create an "Adventurer" in the Inn next, because the background is different, so the lightning might be different too (I assume you are using the Inn in your recording). Edit: Tried. No dice, I'm not getting the same effect.

Are you complaining about spell selection or spells per day? I don't remember IWD that well (it's been a long time) but neither was such a big issue in BG. You could easily buy spells from Thalantyr in High Hedge and rolling a specialist mage (why not?) gave you a decent amount of spell slots. And of course there was an easily accessible Ring of Wizardry - pretty big deal at low levels but some people would say that using it amounted to cheating. Well strictly speaking, it's not about Spell Selection or Spells Per Day, it's about what a Wizard can do at any one time. I don't think his objective was to complain, but rather to highlight the important differences.