Valorian

Absolutely, the ultimate step. Reactive economy; much sophistication. However, one step at a time, that's too much pressure on Obsi.

New mode, eh? Including a 'no level scaling' option (unchecked) in the game menu would be a nice thing to do. If the player leaves it unchecked, he would still get the pop up question and be able to choose between 'standard' and 'high level' for these areas. If it's checked: no pop-ups would pop up while traveling and enemies would be kept 'standard'. Also, while we're at modes, I'd enjoy a 'dire global recession' mode so much. Hopefully, the mode would prevent the PC from becoming the richest person who's ever lived on Eora in a couple of in-game months.

Parrying dagger, I endorse you.

Stash = being able to conveniently stash away everything you find = good. Being able to transform these items into so much wealth that you could use endurance potions instead of water for your keep's fountain and high level scrolls as toilet paper = awful and heartbreaking.

Joshua Eric Sawyer, please. At least convert all items with per-rest abilities to limited charges. If, for instance, a summoning figurine or ring of domination has only a couple of charges I'd have to be careful when to use it. Strategic planning right there! Every single duplicate item with charges, as long as you need the ability, would become precious. Also, there's reeeally no reason to have a shop in Twin Elms where you can sell everything for twice the profit, given that you acknowledged the problem of having an excess of wealth in the late game. This would be an excellent start. Thanks Josh.

Perhaps I was misunderstood.. because I agree with the change. I was just pointing out that there's a very inconvenient way around direct nerfs that accomplishes the exact same thing with more work.

Would some of you guys feel better about balance changes if 8 other classes got buffed with +5 base deflection (through several patches) and all enemies with +5 to accuracy? So fighters would have 35 defl. and so on. [No nerf for paladins] Btw it's a good change, of course.

There's quite a difference between "challenging" a player's free time and challenging a player's strategic thinking ability. If their intention was to challenge the player's free time, why have they implemented the stash? They even made it possible to rest from anywhere once you reach the keep area to prevent "making the game less enjoyable" for those who wish to "abuse" extra free stats.

The majority of players aren't significantly (or at all) troubled by an excess of wealth just like they wouldn't be troubled by an insta-kill per-encounter ability as long as it's them who get to use it. That was never in question. It would nicely fit in "expert mode" though. Resting limitations are not a self-imposed, arbitrary rule - the game discourages player from traveling back into towns and rest spamming by making it inconvenient, which encourages player to complete as many encounters as possible while resting as little as possible. Yes, lack of convenience is also a form of restriction. Wrong thread. The title isn't "Resource management: free time in real life". It's about in-game resource management. That you'll have more or less time to read this forum by avoiding or not avoiding loading screens in PoE is irrelevant as it doesn't affect the game's difficulty or the lack of challenge when it comes to managing your per-rest resources.

I haven't sold a single unique item and kept a lot of exceptional and superb ones. In fact I have only sold items from the weapons and armor categories. I had potion splurges, scroll splurges, keep splurges, crafting and enchanting splurges (though I randomly selected only one companion to travel with me so there wasn't that much to enchant) and bought some items just to test them. Ended the game with around 250 000. I could've seen 500 000 next to "currency" easily. Yes, it's eitheir I impose restrictions myself or the game does it for me. I can agree with this observation.

Indeed, principles are important. Plot twist, I follow some self-imposed rules and have a set number of rests and reloads I'm allowed to use on a playthrough (If I rest with a used per-rest ability, talent or item that's -1 rest) to increase challenge. I keep track and write it down. However, after completing the game for the 2nd time yesterday, I asked myself why am I self-imposing these rules. Does it actually solve the problem? If having an absurd amount of valuable items (money) in my stash displeases me, should I just not pick up loot? Is the player supposed to fix a broken economy or broken systems on the fly? Is this enjoyable? I find this line of reasoning, just don't use it if you don't like it, as suggested by some people, a non sequitur. The question is not whether I like it or not, it's about offering the player an all-around challenging experience without the need to self-impose arbitrary rules in advance or during the game. Obsidian developed the game and set monster stats, for instance. They could also limit per-rest resources in a meaningful way, as an option. If "just don't use it/don't do it if you don't like it" was the design lodestar we'd never have modes such as trial of iron and we'd never have balance changes. I know, it is almost shocking. It's true though. I'll also reveal something you're perhaps unaware of, but you actually need to sell items from your stash to get in the 500 000 range. No, I have not slaughtered Dyrwood's settlements and Twin Elms.

Resource management is vaguely present in the early game, but it soon becomes unnecessary. The influx of money is absurd; between 500 000 and 1 000 000 copper coins. You can buy everything, craft and enchant everything. But, of course, it's not needed. Dragon meat dish before every encounter? Why not. It removes something I enjoy; the feeling of having just or barely enough currency, I want to think twice before using a potion, scroll or buying an item. I want it to matter how I spend money in this game. I will never use the vast majority of items found as loot. Please, make me happy to find the 5th "ring of x" by making money matter (ring = money). Please, -No merchant in Twin Elms who buys everything for twice the money compared to everyone else. -Drastically increase prices of level 3+ potions and scrolls (including crafting prices). 5x at least. -Drastically decrease sell values, especially those of fine and better items. The throng of small shields and spears etc. can keep their 5 cp value. -If you're not inclined to "force" this on everyone, include it in expert mode. Now about per-rest resources. There's practically no cost attached to replenishing all per-rest abilities/talents/items; the only cost, from time to time, is loading screens. It's a travesty. Rename them to "per encounter", because that's what they really are, and adjust them accordingly OR do something about it: -Decouple health and resting (Josh mentioned that fatigue mechanics will be changed). -In expert mode, the only way to undo health damage would be drinking standard healing potions; they'd restore health only outside of combat. This would be another money drain. -In expert mode, resting would restore your per-rest resources only. A limited number of times. Say, after you rest 15 times.. per-rest abilities, talents and items will not recharge any longer. It's brutal, but deciding whether to replenish per-rest resources or not would finally become a thing. Sure, per encounter abilities would become much more valuable. That's why I also suggest to take another look at some per encounter and passive abilities. Especially if they affect more than a single target and have a decent duration. Damaging, healing or inflicting status effects; I won't mention names and aoe-shame them, but they need to check their aoe privilege.

I like affliction immunities where appropriate, but damage immunities should be far less common. Ice blights immune to freeze damage, fire blights immune to burn damage etc.; obviously yes! Random slash, pierce, crush or elemental immunities; . If they want a certain creature type to be very resistant against a specific damage type they could remove the minimum guaranteed damage (20%) for that damage type when you attack the creature. For example, using slashing weapons against an earth blight or piercing against a fire blight; you'd still sometimes do 0 damage, but if you hit hard enough some damage would be inflicted.

It's far from balanced, unfortunately. The economy for instance. I'd love having to ponder whether to use an expensive potion/scroll or not because gold's precious and I'm saving for a nice item. Alas, you can afford everything. Also, sacred immolation recently acquired. Everything explodes.

Incredibly, this is still happening.

2.02 No change.

2.02 Swamp slimes, greater black oozes and disease puddings still suffer from an armor dysfunction.

Ogres still not attacking in 2.01.

Thanks for the update and no worries. I'm sure the programming team will be able to enable DR on these creatures by the time Part II hits online shelves.

I'd like some monsters to have draining, it's one of my favorite passive abilities in games. Also, perhaps drained endurance should be calculated after damage reduction (taking into account actual damage dealt).

Very nice! Also, I hope Carlos is romanceable.

Our slimey friends, are they partially damageproof at last?

Make fighters happy again. Base deflection: 30

Of course it should. Something that is always 100% invincible against all enemies that are slower/equally fast and melee, regardless of relative power, is not good gameplay.

I hope enemies chase properly now without giving up and becoming disoriented after a while.