Luckmann

Also, are there any otters? Inquiring minds want to know.

Pot, kettle, etc.

And I can change the unsummon animations of Baldur's Gate; if I do, does that mean that it's suddenly legitimate to give proper unsummon animations/spell effects of unsummonings in Pillars of Eternity? Is it then "Infinity Engine approved"? Because that's some ass-backwards logic.

But then you force them to specialize, instead of dynamically changing from melee to ranged (or vice versa). Building a skirmisher would probably be very hard.

Oh, I'm awfully sorry, but you're assuming that I'm some lone wolf with unique viewpoints, instead of one of the masses who wants things to be how they were in the infinity engine games. In this case, it's a pretty safe assumption. I loved the IE games, and I wouldn't mind if PoE was nothing short of a remake of any of those games, but just because something was done a certain way in the IE games, doesn't mean that it couldn't have been better. Most summons in at least BG actually has a little spell-effect when they unsummon, although I can't be sure about skeletons specifically. And those summons that simply vanish dead in their tracks all of a sudden are terrible, and should've been fixed then and there, 15 years ago, but wasn't - that doesn't mean that it's the greatest thing ever.

And all of 1 has a problem with people mentioning the issue of summons simply plopping out of existence without as much as a smokescreen, with the only stated argument of "B-b-but in IE...!". No-one asked for new animations, no-one said they should drop everything they're doing to fix this enormous issue, no-one voiced anything but a wish for something better, same as most of us, all the time, whether it's realistic to squeeze in at this point in time or not. Stop strawmanning, Stun. It's frankly below you.

..since the entire middle-of-the-road compromise they chose - between jumping the gorge, and wandering around the valley - wasn't such a huge success as some thought it would be, that's probably not the most risky bet anyone has ever made, at least. But it's because the system just isn't very good, it's not because the backers have super-special preferences. Some of you certainly have super-special preferences, and those views have been incredibly overrepresented. But that the general "demography" has unbelievably curious tastes is a myth. And I don't think you're right about how this won't bother anyone but the backers. Thing is that the combat as it is is boring. The challenge isn't finding the right strategy - the challenge is finding the right procedure, and then just staying with it until you fall asleep. "I'll challenge you to repeat the same process to defeat the same enemy over and over again - while I'll punish you for deviating from the obviously ideal recipe with expensive penalties, more boring grind, and failure" - said no successful game-designer, ever. I'm not disagreeing with you, but at the same time, we've seen time and again that young gamers are willing to happily eat **** while grinning, likely fuelled in equal parts hype and buyers remorse/post-purchase rationalization.

While I wasn't here for those complaints, I assume that it had to do with pigeon-holing classes into ranged or melee roles, which actually runs counter to stated design goals (afaik). With a single value for both Ranged and Melee Accuracy (Class-wise), Spell-Use is more consistent, and it's easier to build a ranged rogue or fighter, or a melee ranger, etc.

Yeah, I think there's going to be a lot of backers infuriated over the Engagement Mechanic (completely locking down the field of battle for the player, as opposed to the very mobile IE battlefield), the "Combat Only" Abilities (which constantly interferes with performing tactics you'd think would be completely reasonable) and the neutered Stealth mechanic (especially anyone that enjoyed playing an Assassin in BG2). By and large, I think PoE will be a success, and I don't think that the new generation of "gamers" will care overly much, especially those that aren't backers (and thus didn't really listen to the pitches) and those that haven't been around very long (i.e. those that haven't played the IE games or similar). But oh boy are there a key demographic that was completely sold on this product that are in for a rude awakening in regards to key mechanics.

There's more to it. The functionality is disabled in the beta. I have this sneaky suspicion that the main character can "read" souls. I've had it for a while, whenever the discussion of the backer NPC:s come up, I think of it.

I'd love a point-by-point list and description of major factions operating in the game based on what someone living in the region would know when the game starts (i.e. before we start uncovering things and changing things), and also a walk-through of the various deities (not just the ones Priests can choose) and the various Paladin Orders (not just the ones Paladins can choose). Beyond what little we already know, of course. I'd kill for a "Racial dossier" type of thing, with a walk-through of the racial, cultural and national aspect of each species and it's races, as well as a general overlook of the overall geography of Eora (not necessarily a map, but point-by-point descriptions of the various known regions and how they vaguely relate to eachother). It sounds more daunting than it needs to be.

Since we're on the topic, what resolution/size are you working at when you draw them in Photoshop, before merging and resizing? I work at 4800 x 7540 pixels 200 dpi But the portraits get shrank down to 210 pixels in width. ...any.. any chance we'll ever get to see the portraits at full resolution...? That's just.. glorious. I had to ask about that and the reply I got was "Very unlikely" I knew. I knew, but I had to ask. Q_Q

Are we talking about BG1 Jaheira? She only had a few lines. One of them was how 'better leadership' would help the party and man...that did not sit well. But hey this is just like, my opinion man so it may not be true in every case. I was thinking BG2 Jaheira, but really, either way it's the grating annoyance of the character, rather than 'questioning leadership'. We are definitely talking BG1 Jaheira. In BG2 I actually liked her because she finally had some depth and a personality/character growth. It says something when I would rather have a Drow Elf Priest of Shar in my party or an insane gnome than a Half Elf Druid with the same alignment as my character. That was BG1 Jaheira, she wasn't evil, but she was a full on whiny #$@#%@ and I didn't like having her around. Hell Khalid wasn't much better, he was the most wishy washy, cowardly, weakling fighter to ever grace an RPG. When Xan beats you in a manly man contest you know you have problems. Hey, don't you dump on Xan. Xan's awesome. D:

Here's a good question, though, somewhat related; Does Marksman increase Accuracy with Ranged Spells? It says "Ranged weapons", but I would suspect that the bonus is actually to Ranged Accuracy.

Unless I misunderstood BMac, it's entirely possible to have things that gives a bonus to, say, Ranged Accuracy, without having a Ranged weapon equipped, such as from an Amulet, using a Ranged Spell, while having a Sword equipped. Yes I do. I've told you, last time you asked. I've sent you files from the v392 Beta that you were missing, and I've even underscored that I also have v435 backed up. Seriously, man, what the ****?

I don't think the issue with Jaheira was that players don't like companions that question their leadership. I absolutely loathe Jaheira because she's an annoying busybody that whines incessantly. Compare it to Edwin, who practically calls you an idiot at every turn, and remains one of the best-liked characters of the series.

I first read this wrong, so just to be clear: For the purposes of individual classes, there's only a single Accuracy value (which differs based on class). In practice, under the hood, Ranged Accuracy and Melee Accuracy are separate, and may be modified individually by weapons, equipment, or talents (and theoretically, Attributes, etc). On the Character Record screen, only a single Accuracy value is presented, dependant on what weapon(s) you have equipped. If I got that right, I really have to ask; Why not present these individual values separately on the Character Record, to avoid confusion? Otherwise, you have to juggle weapon sets around to even know what your Accuracy "really" is. When it comes to Abilities and (especially) Spells, how do you know which value is being used? Say I find an amulet of +5 Ranged Accuracy (a staple of the genre, pretty much) - will this help a Wizard at all? And if it's Ranged Accuracy (which would make the most sense for most Spells/Abilities, I would assume), again, will I be forced to carry a ranged weapon just to see my correct Accuracy score? In one of the previews/trailers, Aloth even started with a sword, so it would be counter-intuative to give him a Sword, but to see his "actual" Accuracy with his spells, you have to get him a ranged weapon (just as an example). Also, in the future, it might be double relevant to list both, because there may be weapons that can perform both as ranged and in melee, like Daggers/Axes in Baldur's Gate II. Throwing weapons (along with ammunition, etc) have been an oft-requested feature, so just in the interest of future-proofing the Character screen, you might also want to list them separately. This is correct, sorry for any confusing wording! That change is on my list, but there's a lot of other stuff to do, too. In practice, juggling will still be required in a lot of cases because the weapons themselves will have inherent accuracy bonuses from Fine and whatnot. Perhaps we should include accuracy on the comparison tooltips instead. Interestingly, spells can use either melee or ranged accuracy depending on whether the spell happens to be melee (Concelhaut's Draining Touch) or ranged (Minoletta's Minor Missiles). Probably we should display an "effective accuracy" value on the tooltips for those, too. Or, if/when you get around to adding both Ranged Accuracy and Melee Accuracy to the Character Sheet, just mention what Accuracy it uses. But yeah, Effective Accuracy for the tooltips is probably the minimum necessary, because otherwise I think people are going to be confused.

Which one of these is true? If "values diverge", how can there be a "single value"? I don't understand. You probably misread it as I did at first. What he's saying is that there's only a single value for Class BASE Accuracy. Basically, a class receives the same Base Melee Accuracy as Ranged Accuracy. For the purposes of Class, there's only one Accuracy value. Does that make sense to you? I'm not sure if I explained it right.

Unfortunately, since it's such a basic UI function.

I'm trying to get a go-pro helmet cam set up before the end of the project. I think it would be fun to show what I see on a regular day. I foresee a clip-show of "Goddammit." ... "Goddammit!" ... "God. Damn. It." ... "Sigh. Dammit." ... condensed into a 20-sec clip, mostly as you look at the monitor, forum on-screen, with your face buried in your palms. No but seriously though, that sounds awesome.

The Class/Paladin is responsible for +150% of the bonus damage from that attack. A maxed out weapon only gives something like +100%, assuming Damaging 3 is +50%, Slayer + 25% and the additional damage type +25% (though superb weapon is +40%?, so max maybe +115% on weapon? ). So give a Paladin a maxed out weapon and they can deal weapon damage +250-265% bonus damage with one hit, Give it to a different class and they can only do +100-115% bonus damage... But that +100% damage has nothing to do with demonic/undead. Same flavor and something a bit more than +X damage would be nice x% chance to set the enemy on fire? x% chance to outright kills said enemy type? x& chance to panic the enemy? It doesn't directly relate to Paladins necessarily, but when it comes to these individual talents, I really like that idea. Something along the lines of: Beast Slayer - Increases damage against all Beasts by 25% and adds a 2.5% chance to cause a Stun on all Hits and Crits (Doubles to 5% on Crits). Primal Bane - Increase damage against all Primordials by 25% and adds a 5% chance to cause a long-term Corrosive DoT on all Hits and Crits (Doubles to 10% on Crits). Wilder Hunter - Increases damage against all Wilders by 25% and adds a 10% chance to cause extra Crushing Damage on all Grazes, Hits and Crits (5%, 10% and 20% respectively). Ghost Hunter - Increases damage against all Spirits by 25% and adds a 5% chance to cause a Short-Range AoE Freeze attack on all Grazes, Hits and Crits (2.5%, 5%, and 10% respectively). Sanctifier - Increases damage against all Vessels by 25% and adds a 2.5% chance to cause a short-term Burn DoT that also increases Accuracy against that target by +5 on all Hits and Crits (Doubles to 5% on Crits). This isn't tuned at all, and shouldn't be taken as mechanical suggestions, but conceptual ones. These Talents are currently underwhelming and fundamentally boring, and adding something extra to each might require some tuning, but at least it'd make them somewhat useful 100% of the time (as opposed to absolutely only when facing X opponent) and more interesting (in that they have a chance to cause interesting or useful effects).

I first read this wrong, so just to be clear: For the purposes of individual classes, there's only a single Accuracy value (which differs based on class). In practice, under the hood, Ranged Accuracy and Melee Accuracy are separate, and may be modified individually by weapons, equipment, or talents (and theoretically, Attributes, etc). On the Character Record screen, only a single Accuracy value is presented, dependant on what weapon(s) you have equipped. If I got that right, I really have to ask; Why not present these individual values separately on the Character Record, to avoid confusion? Otherwise, you have to juggle weapon sets around to even know what your Accuracy "really" is. When it comes to Abilities and (especially) Spells, how do you know which value is being used? Say I find an amulet of +5 Ranged Accuracy (a staple of the genre, pretty much) - will this help a Wizard at all? And if it's Ranged Accuracy (which would make the most sense for most Spells/Abilities, I would assume), again, will I be forced to carry a ranged weapon just to see my correct Accuracy score? In one of the previews/trailers, Aloth even started with a sword, so it would be counter-intuative to give him a Sword, but to see his "actual" Accuracy with his spells, you have to get him a ranged weapon (just as an example). Also, in the future, it might be double relevant to list both, because there may be weapons that can perform both as ranged and in melee, like Daggers/Axes in Baldur's Gate II. Throwing weapons (along with ammunition, etc) have been an oft-requested feature, so just in the interest of future-proofing the Character screen, you might also want to list them separately.

I also don't get it. He seems kind of contradictory as well. Like, as the God of Light, you'd think he's the Big Good Guy, right? But he started the Saint's War so... he's a kind of a douche? Pelor, the Burning Hate.

Since we're on the topic, what resolution/size are you working at when you draw them in Photoshop, before merging and resizing? I work at 4800 x 7540 pixels 200 dpi But the portraits get shrank down to 210 pixels in width. ...any.. any chance we'll ever get to see the portraits at full resolution...? That's just.. glorious.

Wow, just wow.Of course none of the mods will do anything about this blatant nationalistic statement... Good old double standards. 1) There's nothing nationalistic about that statement. 2) There is nothing wrong with nationalism, but even if there was, a comment being nationalistic is no cause for moderator interference. 3) Why would this constitute a double-standard? While moderation is largely hamfisted and seemingly arbitrary, there is no enforced double-standard. 4) Saying that you've never wanted anything or anyone from Poland, or anywhere near there, does not even constitute anything offensive or derogatory. I've never wanted anything or anyone from Poland or anywhere near there either. Nothing wrong with nationalism? Well Sieg Heil then mate! Double standards is when you penalize someone for alleged offensive statement of one nation but see nothing wrong with bashing other nation. I know that Polish people have the wrong skin color, so attacking them is ok in your book. Well Sie.. eh, I'd respond in kind, but honestly, I'm on my second warning here, both unwarranted, yes, but I don't think there's any reason to push. But yeah, nothing wrong; the fact that your response to that is to run straight into Godwin's Law suggests that your age is somewhere south of 11. And yes, that's exactly what double-standards are. And that's not what's going on here, which makes your claim ridiculous. No-one is bashing Poland, or any other country, nor is anyone endorsing the alleged offensive statements regarding one nation versus another. And.. Polish people, skin colour, what is going on here? Is this some reverse racism thing all of a sudden? What are you even on about, kid?