Stun

I don't think I understood a word of that. lol Although on second read, there seems to be a complaint that a Level 6-7 party is plowing through the lighthouse while a level 4-5 party is getting their asses kicked. So.... the conclusion to be drawn from that is: a higher level party is more powerful than a lower level party. Yeah. Terrible design. It's like the game is trying to be an RPG or something. They really should fix that in the next patch.

heteronormative. Good word!

Because if you do, Your character gets the Merciless Hand Passive. (+30% crit damage Multiplier)

It would have to be a rather complex toggle. It would have to have a bunch of options. Because if they just remove all the backer content, the game will lose: 1) Several Inns 2) Several powerful weapon drops 3) Several Enemy party encounters 4) A bunch of the available character portraits And who the hell wants to lose those? In any case, I'm not seeing the "Broke my Immersion!" logic here. What are you guys doing, exactly? Ok, you see a tomb stone. you click on it. "Sh*t! what is this 4th wall-breaking nonsense!? Immershun broken! F*ck!"...... then, one dungeon corridor later: "Hey! another tombstone. Well, gotta click on it. Dammit! Immersion broken again!"

It did not. Crafting is a verb. In a video game, it is something you do. You don't craft anything in the BG games. And saying ' well, someone else does it, therefore BG2 has crafting!' is silly. When you call Dominos and order a pizza, you're not "cooking". You're ordering, or purchasing.

And even if they didn't have AI scripts, most encounters (at least in BG1), could be won by managing one character, and having everyone else just auto attack. In any case, I wouldn't want the game to play itself. And unlike some people, I don't view micro-management as a bad word. Tougher encounters should require you to manually decide every action of every party member. Moderately tough encounters should require that you pause every once in a while to give orders to your party members (especially your spell casters), while the easy encounters should be winnable by just selecting everyone and then clicking on the enemy and then just sitting back to watch the slaughter.

This isn't a bug. It's just something they didn't explain very well. When you go into your inventory, you get the option to highlight a specific item type (armor, weapon, consumable, other, etc) by clicking on the appropriate icon. However, if you click, say, the weapons icon, any weapons in your inventory will be highlighted and everything else in your inventory will be darkened.... to the point where you can't see that they're there. You've got one of the categories clicked. Unclick it. And everything will go back to being highlighted.

Nope. That's literally not the case. That Double Click bug is a *new* thing. It didn't exist in the beta, and the beta's been out for 7 months.

Not to mention the hundreds and hundreds of people that got access to the game a whole week before its release. But lets get real. This happens with every game. And really, there's nothing the so-called Metacritic "bombers" can do to influence a major game's metacritic rating beyond a few 10ths of a point in either direction. Eventually, as the weeks go by and more people play the game, then come online to rate it, the score stabilizes and settles at where it should be.

Well I wouldn't say Eder is that great. Because he's not. In fact, you won't realize how mundane his skills are until you get Pallegina and see how front lining is really done. Of course, "tanks" in general is probably not the ideal way to go about things. To correctly build a tank in this game, you have to sacrifice so much fire power on a character. Before I finally dumped him, Eder was averaging about 5-10 damage per hit. Worthless. But hey, he never died! But now I have Pallegina in my party. She's not as durable as Eder (but she doesn't need to be, she can instantly heal herself), but unlike Eder, she's a destroyer on the battlefield.

Steam has me logged at 33 hours. My party just now hit level 6. Also, as side note. This gave me a chuckle. As I was checking steam I looked at the achievements for the game. This one caught my eye: lol The triple crown solo achievement is that smug picture of Josh Sawyer. That's hilarious.

Um. I don't think you played the same BG1 the rest of us played. Perhaps not. I've only played the Original, not...the Enhanced Edition. Here is every weapon in BG1 that offered something more than just a to-hit and Bonus damage. 1) Dagger of Venom (+5 poison damage) 2) Long sword +2 (+1 cold damage) 3) Warhammer +2 (+1 electrical damage) 4) Crossbow of Speed (1 extra attack per round) 5) Twinkle (Drizzt's scimitar; -2 AC bonus) 6) Throwing axe +2 (returns to user when thrown) 7) Cursed Berserking Greatword +3 (its unique property is that it's friggin cursed) And...that's it. Unless you include the different types of consumable weaponry (darts of stunning, darts of wounding, arrows of fire, ice, acid, piercing, wounding). The Tales of the Sword coast expansion pack added the following: 8.) Bala's Axe (miscast magic on hit) 9) Flame Tongue/Balduran's sword/Werewolf dagger/ Hammer +1, +4 vs. giant kin (These weapons don't count because they merely do extra damage vs. creature type.) And that's all. But again, people criticize PoE for having boring loot itemization even though the first 20 hours ALONE will see about four times the diversity being tossed your way. Seriously, in the first HOUR playing PoE I found a sword that increases your crits. Since then, I've found weapons with bound spells on them. I found Armor that increases your Attributes (Wish BG1 had some of those!) I found figurines that let you summon monsters. TL;DR: PoE is a low-medium level compaign. So attempting to compare its loot itemization with BG2's is absurd. But it is fair to compare it with BG1, since BG1 is also a low level campaign. And when you do compare it, it totally holds its own.

And, more relevantly, they've forgotten BG1 - an 80 hour game where you can count on 1 hand the number of magical weapons that offer anything other than a simple to-hit and damage bonus. Nothing other than Modern RPG conditioning/brain washing can explain why BG1 never got bashed for its "boring" loot itemization, while we sit here and watch PoE getting raked over the coals for it.

This doesn't apply to PoE since the crafting enchantments can be added to any item you find.

The BG series didn't have crafting. It had scavenger hunting and commission-work. At the risk of sounding blasphemous, I prefer PoE's system, since it's actually a crafting mechanic. And you can choose which weapons and armors you wish to place enchantments on.

We would need a link to where that alleged bullet-point presentation of his came from in order to determine such a thing. Also I'd be interested to see what the context here is, since the quote has him saying he's been making RPGs "for 13 years". It must be a really old quote. Sawyer's been making RPGs for almost 20 years.

Nothing. Nothing is stopping you from building her any way you want in subsequent level ups. That is, in fact, the CORRECT way to go about things in a good RPG when you're unhappy with a build. You're adapting to the situation presented to you. And unlike respeccing, adding skills to a character doesn't step all over believability or the story. (I am in fact, currently giving Sagani some talents to make her better in melee when she levels up. And it fits storywise. Most adventurers pick up new skills as they continue adventuring.) Not at all. And this isn't ludo narrative dissonance. There's a HUGE difference, story wise, between having a character adapt to new challenges (giving a born archer some melee skills every time they level up because of party need), vs. Friggin rewriting that character and pretending that she never had the skills she came to you with in the first place (respeccing). Lets not pretend otherwise...or claim it's "nit picking" when it's a giant distinction that separates good RPGs from crap ones.

That's just about everything. Everything up until the moment that the game lets you control them. So you wouldn't be able to change her Archery talents either, since her narrative, her banter AND her storyline revolve around the fact that she's a L33t archer. You also wouldn't be able to re-allot her skills either since her narrative dictates that she's a Hunter (good at stealth), not, for example, a Lore master. So what's the point of respeccing your companions again?

In that case, my Sagani scenario can occur.

Choosing your Animal Companion IS one of the level up benefits of the ranger class. So, yeah, you'll need to edit your 'proposal' to say: "3. Respec will essentially just let you choose every level up benefit again, but will not let you choose a new class or race, or any level 1 benefit. And then come back here and explain how respeccing will solve the "bad build choices" problem, since those can still be made at level one, after you've already chosen your class. Otherwise, stop pretending that my Sagani Scenario wouldn't occur with a respec feature since it absolutely would.

Ha! Literally nobody even suggested doing that! Therefore you just made a textbook strawman argument! Logic is hard! Really? ^that's Literally the poster I'm responding to and the specific issue I'm responding to.

Ha! who's doing the selective responding now? Did I not cite rebuilding Sagani as a better ranger and giving her a different pet? And how it would go against her story, her personality, and the game world's lore? It does no such thing. a character who decided to max out Lore and put no points in mechanics, will not be able to disarm high requirement traps, or open high mechanics required locks.... on ANY difficulty. That is the consequence of Build choices - a consequence that's rendered completely NULL if the game gives you the option to respec your character so that you can reassign your skill points, so that you can give yourself a high mechanics score, so that you can disarm those traps that you didn't anticipate. I'm not complaining about the ability to create a whole party because even that option carries a consequence. It's a choice you have to make. If you create a whole party, you are consciously choosing to pass up using the Developer created NPCs, who come with their own banter, their own stories, their own quests etc.

What? It has Everything to do with the grand design. No, more than that. It has everything to do with Josh Sawyer's entire philosophy behind gaming. Respeccing is degenerate gameplay by definition. It's a 4th wall-breaking exploit that isn't much different at its core than save scumming and metagaming. Josh spent the last 2 friggin years trying to design a system with perfect balance, where there's no bad builds, No trap build options, and no dead-end consequences. And he did it for no reason BUT to insure that a respec feature wouldn't ever be needed.

Incidently, to tie up some loose ends here... Bull sh*t. 1) The game has named NPCs who were specifically designed by Obsidian and are tied to the narrative. A Respec feature, which allows for the player to respec these NPCs, would change those NPCs. Sagani is a ranger. The game treats her as a ranger. Her backstory is about her being a ranger. Her Pet is fleshed out - its name given, and species defined. Now here come the Creslin321's of the world: "hey, I want Sagani to be a mage!". "Hehehe, I just respecced Sagani and made her a better ranger with a different pet!" 2) Choice & Consequence Eliminated. PoE has a remarkably dynamic character building system where build choices are actually tough to make. Every choice has a consequence. A Respec feature eliminates that. Ok, You could argue that this would only apply to people who decide to use the respec feature. But a game that offers optional easy-outs like a "reset-yer-stats" button has already done its damage. Its Choice & Consequence element has been cheapened because the consequences are meaningless. Whether the player uses the respect feature or not, he knows that he doesn't have to live with his decisions if he doesn't want to and that he doesn't need to start over if he wants to try again. if the game allows you to bypass the consequence, then there's no friggin consequence. 3) Replay value is changed. Already discussed on this thread so I won't go into details. People who would have eagerly replayed this game with a different class, or with the same class but without the 'build mistakes" they made the first time around, will no longer feel the need to, because they were able to change classes/fix their build mistakes the first time they played the game.

5th time now. We are not discussing mods. We are discussing actual game design. We cannot have a debate when one side does not understand what is being debated.