Luckmann

All Casters: Max INT followed by MGT or DEX. Tanks: Max RES followed by MGT or INT. Everyone else: Max MGT, DEX or INT, or a combination. Done. Speaking specifically for classes, you should max about what you'd expect, it's pretty clear-cut. There are some non-intuitive combinations, though, for example Barbarians does amazingly with extreme Intellect, and unless you're building a very, very tanky Paladin (and nothing else) you will do poorly with Resolve. There's really no reason to assume that PER or RES will be used more in dialogue than anything else, especially if we take scripted interactions into account.

There's always pigs, but never otters. D: fgdsasfhgasdhasd! O_O YOU BETTER NOT BE JOKING, BAdler! You don't play with my feeling like this! Don't you.. dare.. *breaks down* I love you all so much. Q_Q

But.. why?

Unless I'm mistakenly informed, you would assume wrong.

You will absolutely not want to use your fists as your primary weapon, since you can't enchant your fists. So you're golden.

I mentioned it. It's just that those different numbers doesn't actually matter enough. Like. At all. Much like the different weapon types except for very select opponents (from what we have seen). Which is also why I suggested ramping them all up.

Well it could. But unless things change.. yeah, no.

Sounds good. Quick survey on Google looks like there is not anything up yet. Not even a 'hey I got my review copy today, I will let you know what I think soon' A couple reviewers on twitter boasted getting a game key. https://twitter.com/jasonschreier/status/577969924850737152 https://twitter.com/jasonschreier/status/578247624190504960 https://twitter.com/botherer/status/577890617528823808 (Also, check out the comments at the last link. They are hilarious.) Augh, they supplied a review copy to Rock, Paper, Shotgun? Pre-order cancelled!

Doesn't matter. The system encourages (albeit through force) different kinds of characters to use different kinds of armour, which, again, was my entire point. There is a meaningful choice in what you want to play and what kind of armour you can and will use. Yes, thieves WILL not be able to wear plate, but leather WILL be used if you have a thief in the group, and part of creating a thief was the knowledge that you would only use leather. And so on. PoE mechanically encourages no different use of armours except as heavy as possible or none at all. For everyone. That's still not an argument. The most fundamental argument so far has amounted to "Because". There no accounting for personal taste, we're talking strictly about a mechanical, fundamental level here. Like I said, I'll be playing a heavily underoptimized character myself, simply because I will enjoy doing so, but I'd never be able to formulate a coherent argument as to why anyone else would or should do this. I can say "Hey, this is a lot of fun", but it will always be followed by "But remember that it's underoptimized as hell, you will be shooting yourself in the foot". And if someone still wants to do it, no-one cares, just like no-one cared if you decided solo Baldur's Gate or play a Paladin/Barbarian/Bard in Icewind Dale II. If someone wants to gimp themselves, that is perfectly fine, but let's get the facts straight on the matter so there can be a honest discussion. It is a real issue in this system that there is absolutely no incentive to use anything between Clothing and Full Plate beyond "Eh, it's shiny". It's boring, predictable, and binary.

Hahaha, oh dear lord. No hope for the human species.

It's because they needed a third Attribute to recommend and tanky chanters is a popular build. There really is no other reason.

In AD&D, maybe, but I didn't say AD&D specifically. The point was that there's different armours, and all of it will get used, based on what choice of class you are and so on. The Min/Maxing will be different based on what you play. There is no such distinction here, which was my whole point. In AD&D, Wizards will use robes, thieves will use leather, and fighters will use full plate. In PoE, anyone that isn't a tank will do best in clothes, and the tank will be best supported by people capable of killing things before the party is violently murdered, which armour interferes with. I would not trade the PoE system for the AD&D system for all the butter in Småland, but my point still stands.

Maybe I do not get the distinction. I very rarely ever pickpocketed for this reason. It was not needed except in very rare occasions but it was incredibly overpowered and broke the game. I have yet to see an implementation of this mechanic that isn't. I just do not understand the point of having a feature that ruins the game when used without even exploiting. Man it gets really stupid in the Elder Scrolls series. You can "pickpocket" people's clothes off their back. I think D:OS does it pretty well. There's quests that can be solved in part thanks to pickpocketing (as an alternative) and pickpocketing merchants and such isn't great enough to destroy the game economy, even when pickpocketing is maxed out. Granted, it's got some weird artificial limitations that I think could be done better, but it's sorta like pizza, even when it's bad it's pretty good. The main problem with D:OS is that it's not that heavy on the roleplaying and as far as I've gotten so far, there's like one questline that actually has some ambiguity and investigation to it. D:OS also has the nice mechanic that allows you to actually inspect people before you attempt to steal their loot, which was sorely missing in the IE games; before you tried to pickpocket, you had no idea to know whether it was worth the risk or not, and once you had pickpocketed, you were SOL if you failed. You basically risked your neck for anything between 5 gold pieces and a level 7 scroll. Elder Scrolls is probably the worst offender when it comes to pickpocketing wat-ness. Really good pickpockets CAN pretty much steal the shirt off your back, but you shouldn't expect them to not notice once you walk away, and, like, full armours? Just. No. The distinction I wanted to make with what you quoted was just that a very common complaint about Pickpocketing in the IE games (primarily BG2) is worthless, a gimmick, and doesn't really affect anything, and so on and so forth. I merely wanted to emphasize that while Pickpocketing had issues, the most-oft mentioned issue wasn't it, and there's nothing saying you couldn't do that better. Yes, there were issues, but the issues weren't what people think they were, and all those issues are solveable. The inclusion of pickpocketing through scripted interactions and dialogues is great. Amazing. Something the IE games were sorely missing aside from maybe 1-2 encounters throughout the entire series (I have this vague memory of it appearing once or twice in PS:T, and maybe once in BG1 or something, but it's vague at best). But I hate the exclusion of pickpocketing beyond that. Argumentum ad populum. The amount of people that engaged in it is immaterial. I can only say that I and many others engaged in it extensively, when playing rogues and thieves and that it was a mechanic that added positively to the game. Obviously, those that did not engage in it nor found it interesting or did not realize it's potential won't be fazed by it's exclusion.

Usually these days it's all the way up until the release day, really, yeah.

hmm. I tried to build a dual wield ranger in the beta. but all his modal's and alot of his skills ranged only, right?, like wounding shoot etc. Seemed like a waste. how would you do it?. I'm the wrong man to ask because I haven't done it myself, but I've seen it done and it's been discussed in the forum. I'm sure someone will chime in with some suggestions.

Oh, VtM:B. The best, most amazing, most wonderful buggy piece of crap I've ever put down money for. R.I.P Troika. D: I really wish VTM:B would've gotten a lot of official patches and at least one spin-off or sequel. Maybe one day someone will build on the concept. The OWoD setting has a lot of potential and is sorely underexposed when it comes to gaming.

Two points here. The complaint isn't really that things are "are being" min/maxed. The complaint in general is that the game promotes and rewards min/maxing, so to the point that it's hard to even make an argument as to why not do it. All games reward min/maxing without exception. Min/maxing is the idea of exploiting the game mechanics as much as you can to trivialize the content. Except.. they don't. There are a lot of games where the choices aren't nearly as black and white as in this situation. It is entirely true that many games have a potential element of min/maxing (which I thought I acknowledged in my post, but I now realize that I was a bit vague). There is a difference between there being min/maxing and the game actively promoting and rewarding it, and a lot of games where it is possible to min/max, the way you min/max is different based on what you want to do or what you are. DnD is a perfect example of this, where min/maxing is alive and well. But two characters will likely never be min/maxed in the same way, because the game is structured differently. Not specifically to avoid min/maxing, mind you, but it simply is. But when it comes to PoE, min/maxing is blatant, obvious, and rewarded. The choice between the best armour is binary, independent of what what class you are, independent of what build you are. For the best possible outcome, unless you personally for whatever reason choose to actively gimp yourself, there are only two choices; the heaviest available, or none at all. This is not a good system, again, unless we can come up with better arguments to use the in-betweens than "I want to, because, uh, reasons". There should be practical incentives to engage in game content and game mechanics beyond "This looks fancy", "I like the look of it" or "I enjoy gimping myself". I'd even go beyond dismissing these arguments as acceptable, but downright counter-productive in that they're aimed against attempts to balance the game further. Edit: Ninja'd by Gkathellar.

Two points here. The complaint isn't really that things are "are being" min/maxed. The complaint in general is that the game promotes and rewards min/maxing, so to the point that it's hard to even make an argument as to why not do it. Second, the comparison to the broken game economy isn't apt, in the context of PoE, because you will loot everything there ever was. I'd see this argument in some games, like D:OS, where there could be an argument that if you loot everything that isn't bolted down, including random cups and such, you're going to "break" the economy by using it in a way it was not intended. In PoE, however, you have an infinite stash that you can access anywhere at any time. If you don't loot everything, the question really is why. The thing is, just because you do something one way, even to the detriment of yourself, doesn't mean that there's no issue. Yes, it's entirely possible to gimp yourself and still play through the game. Yes, it's entirely alright if someone wants to limit themselves for the sake of roleplay or a fun idea. I should know; my first character is likely going to be a duelist Paladin specializing in Resolve, dressed in nothing but cloth. And that's fine. I realize that this is sub-optimal, and I accept it as it is, because I'm willing to bite that bullet. But it doesn't mean that there's no issue. Just because I say "I'm going to use one-handed light weapons even though it's objectively terrible, because I like the idea" doesn't mean that being a duelist isn't inferior, or that light weapons aren't bad by comparison. And it's the same with armours. Just because you will be using medium armours doesn't mean that medium armours are balanced. When someone comes onto the forum and asks us "What armour should my character pick?", there should be an argument, there should be a discussion. What does he want to do? What does he want to be defended against? What does he hope to achieve? What kind of character is it? X is good at Y but Z is good at A, B, C, but you might want to consider Å, Ä or Ö for rape prevention. But today, it boils down to "Nothing" vs. "Full Plate", depending on whether he's a DPS/Caster or a Melee Tank. If the only argument for the in-betweens that we can collectively come up with equates to "Chill out and do whatev, like, man", that is a problem. Yes, you can probably make it through the game, it's not like you're pulling the trigger to your head, but you could probably "make it through the game" playing as a murderhobo vagrant with a pogo stick.

I wouldn't be so sure. The market is a lot bigger now, and we should also remember that BG2 has been sold for many, many, many, many years by now. This is not to say that PoE is better than BG2 or anything like that, but 1,5 million copies is not what it once was.

You'd think, but once the patch is released from the developers, GOG needs to repackage it into their own installers and they also do internal testing. Part of the issue (as I've come to understand it) is that GOG's processes aren't actually developed for new releases, which means that they've got a patching process that goes pretty well and beyond something you'd expect. GOG was built for Good Old Games first and foremost, so they've got some legacy issues since they started selling modern games and completely fresh releases. Which is also why I keep saying that patching could be delayed - it's entirely possible that it won't be, by the time PoE is released. I definitely would expect the "Day 1 Patch" to be no problem as GOG probably has all hands on deck to make sure it goes smoothly.

You are correct. There is no pickpocketing outside of conversations, scripted dialogues or events, no. Well, while PoE is good in many ways, if you are expecting it to be a lot like the IE games, you'll be severely disappointed indeed. Some for better and much for worse, PoE is a strong departure from the IE mechanics and gameplay formulas. While this isn't enough to make it a bad game, it's not wrong of you to feel betrayed on the topic of BG/IWD similarity, since you are again correct in saying that it was largely pitched as a "return to form". But in many, many ways it is not. A lot of the core mechanics, especially for rogues (now that I think of it) are completely different, and if you are looking for the rogue experience as according to the Infinity Engine, PoE doesn't offer anything like that. Stealth works completely differently and anyone can specialize in it, there's no pickpocketing, trapfinding and disarming can be done by anyone (and lockpicking; same skill for all three of those functions, which can potentially result in the funny situation where the one that stealths actually can't scout for traps). I... want to say that you're wrong, but you really aren't. Now, again, I think that PoE will come out as a great game, I really do. There are many good points to the game, and a lot of things can be improved upon in expansions and sequels. As it is, I still recommend the game, and I'm still convinced that the storyline and the storytelling will be second-to-none, as we've seen in previous Obsidian titles. Hopefully they'll keep working on it and next time there may be other leads in development, or they'll continue to iterate and evolve the system, mechanics and such based on relevant input. That's just not true. Pickpocketing in the IE games wasn't working properly because it was bad, but because it was utterly, utterly and completely overpowered. With high pickpocketing, you could steal everything that wasn't artificially nailed down, sometimes stores even allowed you to steal from them and then sell it back to the same store. I'll be the first one to say that Pickpocketing did not work well in the IE games, but it was not because of the popular argument that it was bad or not useful. If anything, it was because it was too useful. There is no reason free-form pickpocketing could not work in PoE, if it had been included and accounted for from the beginning, and I can't think of a single game to date that actually plays well with pickpocketing (Although Divinity: Original Sin certainly did scrape the surface in part of the Cyseal questline). It has a tremendous potential to be a fun and engaging skill that encourages creative problem-solving and quest interactivity, but it can be hard to pull off well and to balance. That is still no excuse, however, to not include it. It would be different to say "We just didn't have time to do it well", it's another entirely to say "It can't be done" or "It had problems in game X, so we're not doing it for Y".

Really? I find that doubtful, since it's fairly well-established in CRPG circles that respeccing is the devil. Josh Sawyer have explicietly said he wanted it in the in the past, as long as there was a non-trivial cost associated with it. However, he recently revealed on the SA forums that it would cause some complications with the character/leveling system and because of that, the feature was cut. Sawyer will never cease to amaze me.

"This is my stick and my soldiers will beat you with it really, really hard if you don't do as I say".

Given a choice, I would always go with the DRM-free solution. Yes, it may maybe involve having to wait a day (sometimes two) extra, especially for frequently updated, newer titles. But when all is said and done, when the frantic period is over and when push comes to shove, a GOG version is your forever and future-proofed. With Steam, you'll always be at the mercy of Steam, whether it's a question of it being online or not, if the servers are up, what the current pressure on the system is, or if the company is even alive anymore, and so on. Not all of those issues are immediately realistic in the foreseeable future, but they're still there. GOG is the DRM-free lover that just keeps on lovin'.

Robes should have no penalty, honestly. Clothes have no penalty, and robes are basically clothes. The distinction between them is ridiculous.