Luckmann

GOG never lists the full version numbers. I have no idea why. It's stupid. I've told them. They've confirmed that it's stupid. The GOG 1.0.3 patch is actually the 1.03.530 version of PoE. Please contact GOG support and tell them how incredibly idiotic it is for them to use their own version numbers instead of the actual numbers of the actual damn games.

step 1 is not exactly original ideas, and such stuff is actual commonplace in most crpgs. all step 1 accomplishes is folks engage in ridiculous extreme efforts to extract every copper from a map, and then they still complain 'bout the overabundance o' credits, gold, ring pulls, whatever. heck, Gromnir has done such over-the-top nonsense in a few games... though we don't complain when we indulge in such excess. small frame were a wonderful perk for fo:t that decreased carry weight but rewarded us with +1 agility. were a no-brainer 'cause we could encumber folks with literal tonnage o' material, but as long as they were standing in an exit hex, we could travel the wasteland. once vehicles became available, encumbrance became even more pointless. could do similar stuff in all the pre-bethesda fallout games, but fo:t had the most extreme maps for 1007 abundance. after the fo:t st.louis and kansas city maps, we were never in need o' funds, or ammo, or anything. is not the kinda thing we did in most games, but particularly given the expense and paucity o' .50 ammo for our brownings, we did resort to degenerative gameplay. the thing is, fo:t were not an exception. fo:t were the rule. the vast majority o' crpgs, particularly open-world crpgs, have broken economies. all the extra side-quests is offering rewards and 1007 proportional to critical path. there is necessarily gonna be enough 1007 on the critical path, so folks who do side-quests will always have more... everything. regardless o' the efforts o' developers to curb player excess, such exercises is doomed to fail. is not worth developer efforts to be fighting that battle. *shrug* obsidian showed wisdom by not adding ultimately useless features to poe. HA! Good Fun! Case in point: Step 2. You may applaud.

Changing the talent to change hits to crits instead of grazes to hits would be a huge improvement. I agree that giving the "I have high Accuracy" weapon style a talent that mitigates the effects of having low Accuracy is really stupid. I wouldn't mind it doing both; 20% Graze-to-Hit and 20% Hit-to-Crit, while having in mind that an attack that's been converted once will not be converted again (so a Graze can't become a Crit). I'm not sure how that would play out, but at least I'd consider it.

.... "with uppercase"? Do you mean Shift? The actual key you hold down when you want uppercase letters?

Report it as a bug.

Thing is, you'd need to expend Abilities or Talents to pick that up, and you're only talking about Rangers, which cuts out everyone else that wants to use ranged weapons, and then there's the rangers that aren't archers. With ammunition, you can not just have special arrows, special bullets or special bolts, with diverse and different effects (High-Accuracy Bullets, -DR Bolts, Gas-Cloud Arrows, etc), but they'd be available for everyone, not just Rangers, you could move them between characters, and you could switch freely between the various kinds (Fire Arrow, Frost Arrow, Acid Arrow, etc).

Step 1: Restrict size and access of Stash, impose encumbrance limitations and limit merchant gold. Step 2: Rescind order due to massive whining from clueless casuals that cries about convenience and how "hassle" gets in the way of gameplay. Step 3: Give them a happy meal and roll them into the ball pit at McDonalds, they'll still be as happy as ever.

FFS, does it always have to degenerate to this? I like Skyrim. A lot. For what it is, it's a great game. Doesn't mean I suffer a lower IQ than the rest of humanity. Jeebus. Yes it does. Or, well, no. You're probably within the 25 point margins of error, like most plebs. "The rest of humanity" is pretty damn dumb.

Oh god, what the hell? Seriously, what the hell? All of my what the hells. Like which? And asking for something doesn't equal asking for it to suck.

Am I the only one that thinks it's hilarious that he's not played the game for over three weeks, entirely because of.. well.. not thinking, reading, contacting, etc? He's basically not been playing for no reason at all, sitting in a closet somewhere simmering in indignant rage for no reason.

Wait, what? No. No. That's not how it works. The most fundamental principle is that you cannot prove a negative. You claim that something happens. Someone else says, I don't believe you. The burden of evidence is on the part that says something happens. The part that claims a positive. You literally cannot prove a negative. You cannot prove that something hasn't happened. You just linked something that you have absolutely no understanding of. Goddammit. No, you tool, that's a negative. You claim that people would curl up into balls because their companion bites it, in the middle of battle. He called you on it. You're saying it yourself: Wouldn't. Would. Not. As in a negative. It is no different than me saying that if I piss you in the face, a nuclear reactor in Siberia will not explode. That is a negative. I cannot possibly prove that something will not happen, or hasn't happened, or doesn't exist. Jesus H ****ing Christ it's not that hard to understand. Thematically, the PoE ranger has been described as far more shamanistic than most would describe the "regular" D&D ranger, and I wish that would come across better, and I've argued for a more shamanistic-influenced pet-focused Ranger type more than once. It is, of course, as you say; it is a game mechanic, and a pretty reasonable one at that. If someone absolutely needs to rationalize it - the animal companion and the ranger has a soul-bond. Ooooooh, look at that, I fixed it. Give me cookies and your worship. This is just getting sad. Stop. Please stop. I can feel the braincells dying just from reading this.

It's something that annoys the hell out of me too, especially since this is a pretty bad solution to a problem that shouldn't even exist. It's basically a band-aid. I wouldn't mind it at all, it's better than nothing, but I'd prefer it if it was explained in some fashion. I discussed it at some length here: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/76725-patch-notes-104-discussion-thread/?p=1649690 Ignoring the whole memorial debacle and the perpetually offended, the most questionable changes were probably; The change to Slicken to be single-hit, like a damage-less prone-making short-range fireball, instead of a Hazard AoE. Yes, it needed to be nerfed, but that one change completely changes the nature of the spell. The nerf to Chill Fog, making it FF AoE instead of Foe AoE, without anything to compensate. Me, personally, do not mind the actual change, since it never made any sense to begin with, but I would've liked to see it get a bigger radius or do more damage to compensate and keep it relevant. Wizards are already suffering in the whole AoE department compared to Druids, which weren't touched at all. The change to CNPC Attributes due to widespread acknowledgement that the previous distribution on most of them was objectively terrible. All that was did was acknowledge that the current Attribute system has some pronounced issues; but instead of fixing those issues, they compromised the character concepts. Like, what? Biggest ones I can think of right now. It was discussed extensively in the concerned threads. The 1.03 patch was fairly big, while 1.04 appears fairly small. At least the preliminary notes. Do you want to continue the main plot? Sorry, you need to rest 6 times before you can do so. Maybe try running 3 circles around your unlocked maps? (Why would you possible complain about that???) That's beside the point. If it's something you need to do to continue the plot, they should've reconsidered it and instead opened up the route through some other means, even if it would just be "The Steward influenced the Stronghold and the path now lies open". My complaint is specifically that the Eastern Barbican is repaired instantly and without explanation. I would have been fine with even a "The Eastern Barbican is closed and overgrown, it will take 8 hours to clear" and then a quick timeskip. Anything, really. The current implementation is jarring and it's integration into the main quest is clumsy. Another one of those little loading screens with a little story, like the one that the game starts with, maybe; "You exit Caed Nua, and take a deep breath, wondering if

It depends on the tier that a backer selected. For the $65 tier for example, it comes with a physical version of the game, and part of its tier on Kickstarter was to also come with a digital copy. Since we delayed delivery of the final discs, we gave all physical folks an extra Hero key so they could play on release. A number of people had already decided to give their extra key to a friend when they backed the game, so we wanted to make sure they themselves could play too on launch. If for some reason you don't see an extra key on your account and think you should, please contact us at support@obsidian.net and we'll be happy to help! Thanks, Darren So everyone who hasn't read that update is an idiot? I had to ASK to get my extra key which is bogus. Why did they not just do it automatically? I am very pleased with getting an extra key but I believe they could have handled this better. I don't always follow the updates and I never got an email saying the shipment was going to be delayed over a month. Yes. Everyone that participates in an economic venture and does not at the very least browse through the updates before going publicly bananas is an idiot. And they did do it automatically. That's why they explicitly say "If [...] you don't see an extra key [...] contact us [...].". You apparently managed to even quote it, despite still not having read it.

Yeah, that's a solid tank spread. Personally, I'd dump Dexterity and bring up your three good stats to max, though - using Sword-and-Shield style makes up the difference in Reflex, and you'll be a better tank overall. Unfortunately, Cruel/Aggressive/Deceptive largely come down to, "I am a jerk." Stoic is basically refusing to say anything. Rational tends to be ... actual stoicism, yeah. Clever falls somewhere between, "I make jokes," and "I am abrasively tactless." Passionate translates to, "judgmental ass." Diplomatic/Honest/Benevolent are, for the most part, all the same thing. None of the orders get a ton of special interaction - I'd just go with what interests you. The way "Cruel" is not really cruel and just kick-the-puppy evil, "Rational" is inconsistent, and "Clever" is just "dumb smartass" really annoys the hell out of me. Aggressive isn't actually that bad, sometimes, but I've yet to see a Cruel alternative that wasn't just meaningless jerk-ness, I think. I really liked the idea of Bleak Walkers at first, but in play.. they're really just Blackguards. They should've made them Favour Aggressive/Rational and Disfavour Diplomatic/Passionate. At least them they would've fitted the description better.

I think my Thrones: The Game game is broken. There's all this text and paper and **** what do I do? Is it ruined? Can I get my money back?

I'm still a bit disgruntled that you can't even put a tiny enchantment on a cloak yourself. It would have been nice if putting tons of points in Lore would have allowed you to put a few minor enchants on helmets/capes etc. None of the big ones, just minor things. Hoods. I would kill for some enchanted hoods.

Wait, what? No. No. That's not how it works. The most fundamental principle is that you cannot prove a negative. You claim that something happens. Someone else says, I don't believe you. The burden of evidence is on the part that says something happens. The part that claims a positive. You literally cannot prove a negative. You cannot prove that something hasn't happened. You just linked something that you have absolutely no understanding of. Goddammit. No, you tool, that's a negative. You claim that people would curl up into balls because their companion bites it, in the middle of battle. He called you on it. You're saying it yourself: Wouldn't. Would. Not. As in a negative. It is no different than me saying that if I piss you in the face, a nuclear reactor in Siberia will not explode. That is a negative. I cannot possibly prove that something will not happen, or hasn't happened, or doesn't exist. Jesus H ****ing Christ it's not that hard to understand. Thematically, the PoE ranger has been described as far more shamanistic than most would describe the "regular" D&D ranger, and I wish that would come across better, and I've argued for a more shamanistic-influenced pet-focused Ranger type more than once. It is, of course, as you say; it is a game mechanic, and a pretty reasonable one at that. If someone absolutely needs to rationalize it - the animal companion and the ranger has a soul-bond. Ooooooh, look at that, I fixed it. Give me cookies and your worship.

Wait, what? No. No. That's not how it works. The most fundamental principle is that you cannot prove a negative. You claim that something happens. Someone else says, I don't believe you. The burden of evidence is on the part that says something happens. The part that claims a positive. You literally cannot prove a negative. You cannot prove that something hasn't happened. You just linked something that you have absolutely no understanding of. Goddammit. Example: Phonyix declares that in a majority of cases as pertaining to the discussion, pet-owners and horsemen are struck with intense grief and anguish as the animal companion in question is knocked out during an altercation, and, because no-one can prove him wrong, his claim is therefore a valid one. It is not for Mangonel to prove you wrong. It is for you to prove that you're right. My pet peeve is people on the internet that decide they can make claims with no proof, and then calling for the other side to provide proof that they are wrong... while linking to the same logical fallacy they have pronounced, declaring the argument over unless you provide the proof they demand.. that cannot exist.

Or xaurip champions spamming Lay Hands. auuuuuugh Agreed. AI having infinite spells or abilities that aren't key to their physiology or something like that is just straight-up unforgiveable.

Speaking of morally questionable actions: You do know that this is a "NO SPOILERS" section of the forum, right? ...but.. he's using the spoiler tag. :|

This is correct, as far as I've managed to ascertain. This is.. not. I think.

The OP (and others) are expressing a desire for companions who are a better natural fit for such evil PCs, and/or a cynically disapproving complement to their good PCst. Characters the like of Korgan, Edwin, or Viconia - all perfectly believable characters, with less-than-kindly inclinations. Or, as the kids put it: jerkwads. Well I have a mild spoiler about Pallegina that I think most (sane) persons have missed. ... I am surprised, but not shocked. In her rare moments of characterization, Pallegina comes across as entirely devoted to her country, and little else. Even when we first meet her, it's pretty clear from the way she's ... ... that she is impressively merciless. Brotherhood of Five Suns ... Diplomatic/Aggressive, anyone? <inser obligatory quip about Sawyer's Snowflake and female passive-aggressiveness> ...but yeah, that sounds about right. Favoured Diplomatic/Aggressive, Disfavoured Clever/Honest? Nah, it's always the rogue. Make the Monk companion in the expansion heartlessly evil instead. I'd prefer to see the evil Barbarian myself. Oooh, but a Conan-style warrior-philosopher. Not a survival-of-the-fittest type like Durance ... maybe a sort of Hobbesian/Legalist believer in absolute authority and the merciless, violent assertion thereof, who defers to the Watcher as his personal Leviathan? All like, Pleasepleasepleasepleaseplease let us have another Vhailor.

Always been the problem for me. I always liked the idea of the Engagement system, and the pitch still gets to me, but it's just not.. good. It's easy to say that it's the implementation that is lacking, but during the course of the long beta, everything was discussed back and forth, and at the end of the road, I'm just not seeing a way it can be made good.

If there is any chance that there is a benevolent higher power of any sort, no.

The OP (and others) are expressing a desire for companions who are a better natural fit for such evil PCs, and/or a cynically disapproving complement to their good PCst. Characters the like of Korgan, Edwin, or Viconia - all perfectly believable characters, with less-than-kindly inclinations. Or, as the kids put it: jerkwads. Well I have a mild spoiler about Pallegina that I think most (sane) persons have missed.