Sensuki

Like I've said before, it does not matter. Damage is damage. The fact that PE uses a unified resolution mechanic and AD&D does not matter. I believe 'swingy' damage is not the intention of this system either. You weren't complaining about swingy damage. You were complaining about missing, even though you worded it as 'swingy damage'. ---------- Here's a made up example If Stamina was 1000 per character, and crits dealt in the range of 150 damage, hits dealt somewhere around 75 and grazes dealt around 25 damage, that's not so bad because the amount of damage a graze does is like 1/5th of a crit. The difference between 2 and 85 is smaller than 1/40th. An 85 damage crit can kill characters in a single hit, as well. Also before anyone comes in being captain obvious - Blizzard is OP atm, and I'm sure it will be nerfed.

In this mspaint image I have the inventory icon/slot for Belt with no item, and the inventory slot with an equipped belt As you can see, since the background icon is still visible when the item is equipped, it looks bad. I would request that when an inventory item is equipped, the slot is changed to be blank, so you can't see the icon until you remove an item. edit: This is also how it worked in the Infinity Engine games

I don't think that having different DR's for different damage types is a problem, it just becomes difficult to balance or bring the damage ranges into reign when you're trying to use values that probably don't suit the system. It seems like for the armor system and grazes to work and feel right, the system demands much larger damage and health numbers than are being currently used.

Expected Result: Default Split Item amount should be 1, like the Infinity Engine games.

That has nothing to do with the minimum damage on a graze being like 2 and the maximum damage on a crit being like 85 for the same spell against the same DR. You will also notice that I had high accuracy in those two screenies. The first one I just got real unlucky rolls vs 2 targets (single digit rolls), and the second I got four crits.

Oh absolutely, if you're up against an enemy with Magic Resistance or high Saves - Greater Malison and Doom work like a charm. Icewind Dale also makes it more 'fair' to use those types of spells (Status effecting ones). Exactly.

I'd be against changing how Priest and Druid's select their normal spells at this point. Choices in the gameplay matter more to me than character building choices.

Good question I guess. I've never been bothered by a status effect not working because I simply accepted the absolute nature of the situation. Most of the time it was because you were casting those spells on a creature with immunity/protection or something, and then there's also counterspelling to consider. That's probably also why I didn't use them very often. In BG2 one of the problems you'll run into in the game is that many spells are only useful in a certain scenario because many enemies/creatures are just simply immune to lower level spells or certain types of spells. That's just the nature of D&D and something I've always accepted. I have no problem with damage or affliction immunity, it's very easy to work around.

I'm interested in balanced choices. Deity specific spells would be a great fit for the off-level, but since Obsidian didn't implement them already, there's virtually no chance of seeing anything of the sort until the expansion.

*downvote* It's not practical at all.

In the next patch, creatures will be more balanced. It's more just general system-wide issues.

I haven't really proposed any solutions in this thread, I have just stated that because they're using percentages they are getting these results. I also would like a solution to be found in a similar manner, if possible.

Crits do only increase 'net' damage. When you crit with anything, the base damage of the spell/ability/weapon is increased by a critical modifier of x1.5, and bonuses added individually (I think additively). Since all increases (and decreases) to damage are dealt in percentages, the values are more severe the better or worse the result, leading to very low damage on bad results, and very high damage on good results. I recently made a dual War Hammer wielding Rogue, and was scoring 60+ damage on critical hit sneak attacks, but on a graze against the same target I was dealing 2 damage (both of these results were against DR).

I do not care why the design decisions were made (and I know why they were made). I care about results. I am giving my feedback based on those results. Those results include the facts that combat is more swingy than the Infinity Engine games, and blowing a per-day and getting a bad result sucks and encourages me to reload.

Anyone tried a Dual Stiletto Wielding Priest of Skaen with Prey on the Weak and Weapon Focus Ruffian? Kinda like having a Rogue with Priest spells. Pretty good. Hasn't got anything to do with that. Even D&D 4E handled this better, because on per day misses, the ability wasn't used up, which was a good design decision. The addition of graze and the unified attack resolution mechanics make it handle worse than 4E in that regard.

I'm finding the issue more serious with per-day spells. When you get a bad result on a per-day ability that's a much bigger deal than a bad result from a weapon swing. If I get a poor roll on an AoE opener, I just reload.

For me it's just because bonus damage is handled in percentages. When you roll a graze, the amount of bonus damage you get from the hit is significantly decreased, from all sources. When you roll good damage, you get heaps of bonus damage. Imagine how consistent damage would be if Might gave +1 damage per point up from 10, and Fine/etc weapons gave +X damage as well, and all that. That still wouldn't fix a lot of the issues. In those screenshots, my Druid had 10 Might. So that's purely from how the system works.

Battle Axes for some reason now do Fast Weapon damage instead of Normal weapon damage, but still have normal weapon attack speed. The values should be the same as a Sword, 11-16 damage. This is the same with all Battle Axes - Fine, Exceptional, Uniques.

That's one of the things I've said too. In the next version, enemies will do less damage. But yep, it does feel like we aren't given enough endurance/health relative to incoming damage. One of the problems with that though is when you start increasing those numbers, enemy parties will start soaking up minimum damage like a sponge. I try and avoid wearing armor on most of my characters simply because of the DPS penalty but if you're using light weapons/the wrong weapon type against an armor type you'll be doing single digit damage for the most part, compared to 20-60 damage per hit for the right damage type. I also don't believe these problems would exist if bonus damage was handled in integers.

@Rathlord, you realize the game was delayed until Q1 2015 right? It was posted on the forums, Kickstarter and pretty much every RPG gaming site on the net http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/68999-update-86-polish-feedback-bugfixing-and-goodies/ http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/68878-pillars-of-eternity-early-2015-beta-feedback-and-game-polish/ http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/content.php?1996-Pillars-of-Eternity-Delayed

Insects rule the world

Upload your save game file bro

Also yeah just as a reminder. If you're going to be doing any bug reporting, make sure you flip your Assembly-CSharp.dll file back to the original. I often find bugs when using the mod, but just in case I change back to vanilla (as it could be a bug with the mod). All bugs have been easily reproduced with the stock .dll, but just in case, you should always do it. The devs have released a few warnings about it as they don't want their time to be wasted looking for bugs that aren't in the base game.

Yeah Confident Aim is quite good, as are any of the percentile changes in attack resolution (Minor Threat, Dirty Fighting etc). Flanking is just -10 Deflection. When my Super Defender was flanked he had 105 Deflection. Enemies missed him more, but he did still get hit fairly often and it didn't make much difference to his survivability in encounters because combat went for longer because I wasn't killing things faster, and thus he took more damage because of it.

Nah I more meant about bad changes based on backer feedback. They've already technically did that with the XP changes IMO.