Sensuki

You mean exactly the same as v257 right? That's *exactly* how it was back then. The only difference is that instead of Accuracy on Dex, it's Action Speed and Per and Res give +1 Deflection. It's a step backwards IMO. Either way like I said, I'll try them but I am pretty sure I can already see how it's going to go.

Thankfully, because it was useless. I like the Intellect with AoE and Duration. It's a strong attribute. Strong attributes are good and most of them should try and be strong.

Sword and board sucks. Dual wielding spears is the way to go.

I have a feeling they will change it though as I don't think the upcoming implementation is going to cut it. It is nice to see Interrupt back though.

I have a feeling this implementation might be just as bad, if not even worse than the v257/278 Attribute system. Now if I want to make a DPS character, I can safely ignore everything except for Might - that will now be Maxxxed on everyone who wants to deal damage, and after that probably Dexterity now, assuming that Action Speed increases now actually work. For casters - INT maxxxed, and then Might for damage dealers, Dex for Priests. Can safely ignore Perception and Resolve again (and Constitution too).

I actually think accuracy is overvalued because of the multiplier system. It's important to get good attack resolutions because results are woeful on grazes due to the whole result being multiplied by *0.5 and crits are super good because the result is multiplied by *1.5 If multipliers were additive, damage stacking would result in less crazy damage, and grazes wouldn't be as bad. I don't think they've examined the problem of why accuracy is so good, other than what is obvious at face value - which is that it is required to hit on all attacks. So perhaps a bit of a lazy implementation / bit of an oversight. I will try it, but I can already see exactly how I'm going to build effective characters and essentially ignore a few attributes already.

It's not just the mixing that's the issue, you need different volume sliders to control different areas of the sound - one for VO, one for Environmental FX, one for combat sounds - that kind of stuff. I also agree about the lack of background walla/NPC VO callouts. I think they recorded some, but it might not have been implemented or just not very high volume. Those really add a lot to the atmosphere APPLES! APPLES ONE COPPER!

Yeah I hope they keep working on this issue as well. Keep bumping this thread, and PM a dev with it if you need to (it works).

Looks like there's no longer shared Endurance at least, going by the stream.

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh Good to see Interrupt back in, but I'm not sure removing Accuracy is going to solve the problem. I think it will just create more. Attributes are easy to change though, so I will try it and see how it goes.

This got added to the fix list

Once again, you're basing all of that off a misconception because you didn't read the paper properly. The difference between a 1% chance of a 100% increase and a 100% chance of a 1% increase was illustrated and accounted for in Matt's formulas. Their changed designs also did not please me and were not a result of that paper. Something else you conveniently keep ignoring for some reason. Just like you, I wanted interrupt to stay in the attribute system.

Nope. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/69277-333males-and-female-image-choices/

No, it was deliberate. Confirmed by QA.

The last paper was based on in-game testing and 'engineering'. You wrote it off the moment you saw it, and I'm 100% positive you read almost none of it either. I have however enjoyed how you've been blaming me for all your problems with the game Pretty sad of you to request a refund over it though IMO.

Hahah. Nope.

Player controlled Wizards are a good and useful character, but yeah as Karkarov said, they are squishy as (and also not super fun to play either, but yeah). That is the problem though, because of their squishiness - enemy wizards are super vulnerable to being just flat out taken out at the start of combat which doesn't feel very Infinity Engine. They should at least offer some more resistance than that. They can probably make it a little bit better with AI tweaks and stuff, but some of the problems are systemic/design.

Just ignore nipsen archangel. He's only come here to ruin the thread most like.

I was not asking you to. The you I used in that post was you (plural). The point is the same as a previous post I made, a point which you either skimmed over, or are just plain ignoring. Pre-buffing is still useful, and an alternative to casting in combat with an opportunity cost (sometimes it's better, sometimes it's worse - depends on the game, spell and encounter). It could have been better balanced absolutely, but just flat out removing it is simply listening to the ignorant portion of the fanbase only.

Yeah it does. The current topic of debate when you arrived was pre-buffing. My playthrough is relevant if you want to see how to win some encounters in Icewind Dale without pre-buffing (eg. Malavon).

It's not mindless though. It's just that people are lazy and can't see the difference between casting Recitation out of combat and only getting 3-4 rounds duration of the buff, or casting it in combat and getting 6 rounds of the buff.

Incorrect, see my previous posts on the subject. Also incorrect. You don't have to apply more buffs to kill everything. You can use different weapons, different items, attack different targets first, interrupt enemy casters, switch aggro mid combat - all sorts of stuff not related to pre-buffing to win encounters. You can pre-buff too, but it's using a per day spell slot, and you can usually game around using them. Once again you missed the point (which seems to be a very common occurrence). There are people on this forum that think that Infinity Engine combat pretty much consists of cheesing the game to win, and are not even aware that there are so many things that you can do strategically or tactically to win encounters without cheesing, abusing rest, using exploits or anything like that. It doesn't matter that you don't care that I have a Let's Play - I have shown it to various people on the forum who previously didn't know that you could do some of that stuff and they have been educated by it. What's more, that particular post that you quoted the first time was not aimed at you, either. I did not post that I had a Let's Play in response to you.

I agree, they do seem a bit high. Could hurt in the long run.

Well they could change it, it would just require *teh effortz*

It's double as annoying with the male and female portraits together, can't scroll right through without having to go through a whole other sex worth of portraits :/ Bit of a convenience compromise for inCluSiVEnEss that could be solved by just having the choice of a male or female portrait to begin with, and then cycle through them for easy browsing.