Luckmann

Especially since a lot of weapons already add +Accuracy by default, which may make it harder for people to figure out just what Accuracy they actually have under certain circumstances with various weapons or abilities other than that specific weapon they just equipped just to check their Ranged (or Melee) Accuracy specifically. Really, just list both. And yes, I realize I just triple-posted, but it's not my fault.

Ach, ninja'd by BMac and my previous post is in the moderator queue, so I can't edit. You should really consider making them display as separate everywhere, just for clarity, instead of the interface opting on what to show based on what you're wielding. Then you could simply state the modifiers to Accuracy as "All Accuracy", "Melee Accuracy" and "Ranged Accuracy" (so we'd know what modifiers which).

As far as I'm aware, no, there is no separation between Melee and Ranged Accuracy any more. For better or worse.

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.

Unless GOG streamline things... yeah, probably, unfortunately. It's pretty much the only issue with GOG, from my POV. I remember one early Wasteland 2 patch that was neglected completely for days, if memory serves. Apparently GOG does some internal testing and recompile things for their own installer(s) and such, or something to that effect. That said, they better have all hands on deck come the release of PoE.

I can see issues with working out how in-combat Stealth would work (or wouldn't, as it were). Mostly it deals with detection and how someone would enter/exit stealth during combat, and how to get the AI to properly target things if they maybe only saw one of your party members from the beginning. Things like that. The way I understand it (or rather, had it explained to me) Stealth (or rather, "Scouting") is a specific Game State that essentially switches over to another state when combat starts, forcing everyone out of Stealth. So at least we know that there won't be any backstabbing enemies either, like there's been in all other games of this type. So I guess that's something. And you know that you're in combat mode because everyone with a modal that's "on" immediately activates them (Paladins activate their auras, for example, because Auras are now "Combat Only", so they spend the first seconds as soon as combat starts doing the activation animation; why are they Combat Only? Because pre-buffs, apparently. Auras are Pre-Buffs, Wall of Flame is Pre-Buffs, Modals are Pre-Buffs, apparently). You know that you are in combat because you can suddenly use half your abilities again. That being said, noticing you're in combat will never be an issue. It means that the enemy is engaging you, there's combat music, and there's clearly enemies on the screen, etc.

Not a bad idea, but it would allow pre-buffing (not really, but technically), so I don't think they would go with it. We need to stop treating "pre-buffing" or specifically "avoiding pre-buffing" as a serious argument in favour of the "Combat Only" mechanics. Not only is pre-buffing a non-issue by itself, but in PoE, it's a literal non-issue. There are no buffs, to the best of my knowledge, that can even be considered comparable to the buffing system of the IE games. Actual, systematized, long-term Pre-buffing is not an issue in PoE, and it won't become one just because the "Combat Only" crazyness is dropped. If you buff before combat, you are expending valuable time (because buffs are short-term) and resources (limited per-day spells), a very viable, acceptable trade-off. Now, there may be other reasons a "start/stop combat"-toggle might not work with the current setup (I can think of a few issues at the top of my head) but we really need to stop taking "But the pre-buffing!" serious.

That the weapon doing the heavy lifting, not the class. It's like having a mage class that doesn't have any magic skills, but rather a dozen magical items that each can cast a spell or two. I wanted to say that too; yeah, you can stack modifiers up, but the +25% Against <Creature Type> is still just +25% and nothing else. All the other modifiers you can get with or without those talents anyway, so stacking is really a moot point. They're still underwhelming and boring, and you still have to grab two of them (again, out of 6 total Talents) to get that "Paladin feel" right (Spirit & Vessel).

And what is more interesting about bonus damage that's always the same type, compared to a bonus damage that changes accordingly to the attack you use? Anything would make them more interesting than to add a flat +25%. I was thinking of something like adding a small amount (not percentage) of X type (where X varies depending on talent) that is added on all attacks, not just against Target Y (where Y varies depending on talent). That way, they'd at least do something when you're not facing the specific target type, and there'd be a reason too take multiples of the talent. Honestly it would probably still be pretty terrible, though.

Centre. The. Combat. Log.

I'd feel far better if the only things that were "Combat Only" were the things that currently need to be. It would be annoying, but understandable. But right now, it feels like there's a few things that need to be "Combat Only", and then they added a heap of others just to make it seem like a concept/development decision, like "Well, the Chanter's things need to be Combat Only, we can't work around it at the moment, so, hey, let's make these Auras Combat Only too so it seems consistent.. oh, and Wall of Flame, because hey, why the hell not, Hazard AoE is almost like prebuffing, right? Right?".

I really don't have much to add to what Sensuki said, but I'll sum it up thusly; I feel like I'm fighting the system to do completely reasonable things. Instead of doing what you'd expect to do in a given situation (when initiating combat), you end up trying to game the system, such as not actually initiating with those you'd think would be the best at initiating, and so on. To use Sensuki's example, what you'd expect to do would be to initiate combat by jumping in and using Knockdown, but you really want Reckless Assault to be active before you Knockdown, so you won't. You'd really want to initiate combat with that Rogue, performing a backstab, but you won't, because if you do, it won't have Reckless Assault on yet. Once you start learning the system, PoE takes a swing at you and forces you to fight it. The mechanics are not in line with what you actually want to do, or what you'd reasonably think would happen, or how you'd think things should work. It's inconsistent, jarring and frustrating, at times.

As of the current beta, nope, you can only get a "real" close-up of your character during lvlup. That being said, when you play the game, the inventory screen really is enough. You can see all relevant details and you can rotate your character. The inventory and the character display in the inventory could be a bit bigger, but it's not something you really think about when in-game.

Go home, Wafflebum, you're drunk.

No. Thematically, Paladins in Pillars of Eternity aren't holy warriors, they are more like oathbound knights sorted into orders professing an ideal or belonging to a concept of being. This ranges from the Kind Wayfarers, which is an order that is poor but protects wayfarers and travellers, to the Bleak Walkers, that are essentially blackguards that believes that the most merciful and efficient way to solve a conflict is to end it as quickly and brutally as possible - and they strive to enforce the widely-held belief in their brutality and mercilessness by never showing weakness or random acts of unhelpful kindness - to the Goldpact Knights, that are disciplined and focused mercenaries that hold to the pact of gold no matter what. Paladins in general is a rather far cry from the deity- or alignment-oriented Paladins of D&D and other settings, and I would go so far as to say that narratively, they're in a bit of a strange place, with nothing to truly define what a paladin is and isn't; why is the Bleak Walkers considered a Paladin order, instead of just an organization you'd expect to see Fighters in? What is it in the Goldpact Knights that makes it's members Paladins rather than mercenary fighters? It's a bit odd, but there you have it. There are, however, Talents that are available to everyone (not just paladins) that increases damage against chosen enemies. In Pillars of Eternity, "Undead" doesn't seem to exist as a general concept, and they are instead considered "Vessels" (as far as I know). That is, anything that has been endowed with a soul and animated (or simply had the soul made incapable of leaving the "vessel") is considered a vessel, and have given rise to the undead as they are in Pillars of Eternity. Currently, there's Beast Slayer, which increases damage against all Beasts, Primal Bane, which increases damage against all Primordials, Wilder Hunter, which increases damage against all Wilders, Ghost Hunter, which increases damage against all Spirits, and Sanctifier, which increases damage against all Vessels. Yes, I know, as another huge fan of Paladins, it's annoying as all hell that Ghost Hunter and Sanctifier are split up. If you want to be a true "undead hunter", you have to grab both, and you only get 6 Talents throughout the entire game (every other level, and there's 12 levels). Also, they are kinda crappy and boring. They increase damage by 25% against the given type of enemy, which is boring and actually really terrible, considering that it's only against a given type. I wish they did something more, like add some small amount of X damage of Y type or something. But they don't, so, yeah.

Since we're on the topic, what resolution/size are you working at when you draw them in Photoshop, before merging and resizing?

On a slightly related note, any chance of any of you ever doing a "Let's draw", walking viewers through the creation of a portrait? I realize that it'd be useless to most people, but for the artists amongst us and those interested in making their own portraits, it would be absolute gold. I realize it wouldn't be very cost-efficient, but I just thought I'd ask.

"(as opposed to an Arcanum LP, which would not improve Eternity’s quality), it’s worthwhile, and it’s rare that we have an opportunity like this." Bull. An Arcanum LP would definitely improve PoE:s quality, simply by tutoring the developers in what quality is and should be.

I don't even understand why antelope is even an option when you can have a bear or lion. Bears and lions are so far above the others. Wolves are pack hunters, an individual wolf is pretty weak, and against an armed/armored human would be kind of a joke. Antelopes and stags both just kinda seem too... lunchy. They're self-carrying ambulatory survival rations.

It is becoming increasingly common that Betas aren't actually Betas, but early access-type deals intended to create hype, which often backfires because the interest for the game peters out before the game is even fully released, or gets criticism from knuckledraggers that have no understanding for the fact that it's unfinished, and accumulates a bad reputation. Companies should be more careful with this, but there are also certain expectations these days, no matter how ridiculous, and this idiocy has been fuelled by Steam's "Early Access" program.

I don't mind the colour composition either, but it gets to me that it depicts CNPC:s that have regrettably been scrapped.

I never shrug anything off. I'm the man of a thousand chips. And I always read the manual.

Currently? Yes. But currently, Interrupt is broken.

I have something I need to get off my chest. People keep mentioning "THAC0" and "Lower AC is better?". Baldur's Gate was released in 1998, when I was 12 years old. It blew my mind and I had literally zero experience with PnP, Dungeons & Dragons or the Forgotten Realms, and understanding the basics of THAC0 (which I to this day call "Taco", because I had no idea it meant "To-Hit Armour-Class Zero") and that lower AC was better was never a problem for me. I was 12 years old and although I surely understood english better than most of my peers, we're still talking elementary-grade second language. I have no idea why people keep citing these things as issues. Yeah, it struck me as odd for about 3 seconds, and then I never once did think of it again. Now, in my later years, I've understood that these things are apparently huge clusterfudges in PnP D&D 2nd Ed., but in the IE games, it's all handled under the hood, and really, I have a much harder time wrapping my head around why this would be an "issue" to people, rather than just concluding that "Yup, negative AC is good, it counts downwards, go figure." People seem to think that you need some kind of intimate knowledge of the game, know the 2nd Ed. rules and so on and so forth to play BG1, and yeah, I'm sure it helps a bit, but it is in no way or fashion a necessity. You throw a fireball, it explodes, you equip better armour, you get harder to hit (actually, that was way more odd to me, that AC was a simple matter of getting hit or not, no soak or anything). I would argue that the 3.5 Ed. games requires far more knowledge beforehand, because there are far more rules going on "under the hood" that is in your face, what with the Feats and the "only every other ability score point matters" and so on, but it has the benefit of making those things known to the player; but in BG1/2, you didn't need to know those things to figure it out, but somehow every 3.5 Ed. game character turns into a spreadsheet when mapping out a character's life. Now, I'm not hating on editions here, in the end I know a lot more of 3.5 Ed. than 2nd Ed. even though I've played a mountain more CRPG 2nd Ed. than anything else. But goddamn, THAC0/Negative AC is not a hard thing to grasp in the context of a computer game, it's so ridiculously easy even a child would get it. I know, I used to be one!

Yeah, I agree with this. There's really no need to display the base values except during mouseover or something along those lines. I really like the "bullet list" (although I'd actually add bullets) mock-up.