Stun

Then by all means, go prostrate before your dictionary and leave us alone, already.

^ Because the game is still fresh and new for all of us, curiosity is going to be a significantly weighted incentive. Absolutely. What happens 14 years from now though, when we've all played the game dozens of times and we've memorized it? Will we still enjoy exploration (like many of us still do in the IE games)? My guess is: probably not. At that point Loot will be an overly weighted incentive. They better not f*ck that up at least.

I think the point is that people actually DID (strict) inventory management in the IE games, because it was kinda important, contrary to Josh's bizarre claim that they didn't. Thanks for missing it! You're the reliable sort, aren't you, Tart.

But it's not. And that's the point. It's not LARPy at all. It's actually quite the extra layer of intended strategizing that has a real effect on the game. In vanilla BG1, (where you can't pause the game in the inventory screen), your dedicated archers had to be *real* careful not to just recklessly load up their inventory with just anything they looted. They had to leave slots open for ammunition, or else they'd find themselves out of ammo in the middle of a battle and they'd have to 'find' more arrows from other people's inventories.

If Obsidian had announced a Mojo stat for PoE during the Kickstarter, I would have upped my pledge by $500. Just sayin'. That would have been groovy.

It's not arbitrary. They're hostile. They block your path.

I'm hoping this is the case. I really like seeing dumb-speak. It's funny and has deceptively high immersion and atmosphere value in the games its in.

18/00 lets you carry 400lbs worth of gear Hey, I just bought you an early Christmas present Tart, it's a best selling Kindle title. "Reading miscomprehension"- by Imus Points.

Back during the Kickstarter, in one of the Updates that Tim Cain did, he said that if you build a low Intellect character, they wouldn't talk properly. They'd get Idiot-speak Dialog like in ToEE and the Fallout Games. I wanted to see it, so I just rolled up a Rogue and dumped his Intellect to 3. Well, nothing changed. My rogue talks just as eloquently as my last character, who had 18 intellect. So have you guys scrapped the idea outright? Or just for this beta?

What? Inventory Weight limits were a *huge* deal in the IE games. Most people did not "just drop things in any available slot until a limit was reached and then start dragging things over to the next character." instead, it was exactly as infinitron suggested. You made sure your high strength characters carried all the heavy stuff, and your weaklings carried the keys and scrolls and excess potion stashes. <shakes head>

It seems like they went to great lengths to accomplish 2 things with this inventory system at the cost of everything else, including aesthetics, intuitiveness and functionality (the 3 things that *should* be focused on instead when designing an inventory system) 1) They wanted to make item swapping/comparing between party members be a simple 1 screen process - I applaud them for the idea, as it sounds so good in theory, but here we see the end result and its.... not as good as it sounded. In order to actually display a full party's inventory on one screen they had to: a) shrink everything down including the # of inventory slots per character. (<ugh> only 8 slots per character? REALLY?) and b) create a bunch of separate screens anyway. The end result is that we're back to needing to click on multiple screens to see everything. (character inventory, deep stash, crafting ingredients, quest items) 2)They wanted to remove the problem that often occurred in the earlier IE games where you ran out of inventory space while you were adventuring and had to run back to town to sell off the vender trash you collected. - again, a great idea on paper as inventory management was a serious pain in the ass in BG1 and IWD1. But now that I see it (and use it) in practice, I don't like it. And I don't understand why the deep stash isn't accessible except at camps and inns. If they were trying to create a 'tactical' element then why didn't they just impose weight or space limits and tie them to attributes or skills? I like *meaningful* complexity in my RPGs, Obsidian. Not Pointless complexity.

Intelligence isn't a dump stat, Unless you want your mage's fireball to be a single-target spell, and your barbarian to be no different than an underpowered fighter.

Nothing happens. You can kill the Ogre and he drops his head and some blood. If you're role playing a sicko packrat, you will have a valid RP reason for collecting that ogre head and placing it in your pack (you're a sicko pack rat!). If not, well, good luck finding a justification for your Meta-gaming/ESP. And that's it. You can then go meet the farmer for the first time, listen to his plight, and what he wants you to do, Then in that same dialogue you can show him the ogre's head. If you're lucky, you get XP for that. Welcome to fetch-quests 101. But make no mistake about this: If you go to that wilderness map before talking to anyone in the village, EVERYTHING you do there is unrewarded. No XP for exploration. No XP for clearing that giant cult dungeon. No XP for using your Might skill to force open the dungeon's entrance. No XP for slaughtering all the beetles and spiders that "block your path" to the ogre cave. No XP for entering that cave. No XP for dealing with the enemy party up north (even if you do it peacefully, which is an option). No XP for successfully Athletic-ing the Dragon Egg down from the ledge. NADA. Is this supposed to be anyone's idea of proper RPG design?

I love the attribute system as it is currently being implemented. I don't want any changes done to it, though I worry there's going to be some. As Brandon mentioned in the stickies, they're currently eyeing Perception and Resolve for tweaking because, apparently, play testers felt those two stats could be reliably dumped without much consequence (perish the thought! Be Gone with thee, unholy degenerate gameplay opportunity!) Although I'm wondering if those playtesters bothered engaging in this demo's numerous dialogues, almost all of which, painfully for me, contained Perception checks that my min-maxed Barbarian did not qualify for. But more importantly, I don't mind if 1 or 2 of the stats in the system are designed to be unimportant for a specific build of mine. the fact that just about all the rest of them are super important for any build is breath-taking. LOL I don't expect this game to show up on any 17 year old modern gamer's radar in the first place. Nor do I want it to. Some things should remain pure. Like this game.

Huh... interesting. I'm obsessive-compulsive when it comes to stuff like this in games. I cannot let hidden treasure go undiscovered. So, I guess I'll be starting another playthrough.

Hey I have a question. In the Ogre Den (in fact, mere inches away from where he initiates dialogue with you) there are a few things that highlight in blue when you hit the tab button. But... there is one thing, like, a little splotch on the ground, that highlights in bright purple. What *is* that?

No, because this is a video game. No one Crafts for basic survival in a video game. Instead, Gamers craft for a Power edge. If enchanting your sword with +20 Fire damage requires that you gather 15 infant scalps and 5 kitten tails, then put them in a pot of boiling nobleman blood, gamers will go on the same sort of psychotic murder sprees to gather these ingredients as they would for any XP rewards. So no, the system in place in PoE does not solve the "grinding issue". Nor did it ever intend to, contrary to the repeated arguments being made on these XP threads.

Yes, but I think it's a bug. I can't remember which encounter it happened in, but some animal I fought (either a boar or a lion) was not taking any damage from my fighter's greatsword (slashing damage) The combat log kept saying BB_Fighter grazes Boar for .8 damage. then 2 damage, then 00.00 damage etc), but on the other hand, my mage ( my MAGE!) was nailing this animal for 50-60 damage with his rifle. That gave me a chuckle

The engagement mechanic is relevant because you can engage those enemies currently charging your rear with your front line fighters to stop them attacking your Rogue/Wizard. Are you ever going to pay attention? Why cite imaginary scenarios that don't happen? Have you played the beta? The only time enemies ever charge your rear is when you've triggered an encounter from behind. And if that happens it's too late. An enemy will engage your mage, and he will keep engaging your mage, even if your fighter engages him.

wat The Wizard has ranged spells and rods to attack from range. The Rogue has a bow. You can engage enemies from considerable range. They then come straight for whoever hit them, which would be the Rogue or Wizard in this case. How can you possibly misread that, Stun? Try and keep up. We were discussing the engagement mechanics. You know, where if you've engaged an enemy and they try to break engagement to go fight someone else (like your mage), you receive a free attack against them that does massive damage. This only kicks in during melee. There is no such mechanic in place when you're 15m away and firing at enemies with a ranged weapon or spell Which means the solution will always be to make sure your fighters are leading your party, that way no one will ever try and get to your mage. The only time this will ever fail is if your party is already surrounded.

If your wizard is already engaging an enemy in melee from behind the front line, then discussing the tactical aspects of engagement mechanics is pointless. Right. The AI should be better than that. Because this just renders the engagement mechanics moot. Of course, this isn't the IE games where an unengaged mage is the enemy's biggest problem.

The last part of this is very true. The engagement mechanic is a terrific idea...right up until it is rendered pointless because enemies never try to bust through your front line in the first place Well, I can't speak for any bugs you might be experiencing in the game, but this is not the design intention. All actions in combat have recovery times. There's also the interrupt mechanic, which will further move things away from "instant".

You can choose to reject reality and replace it with your own all you want. Doesn't change reality. It IS reality that granting XP for kills will not automatically cause players to suddenly kill everything in order to win. You're doing nothing here but insulting the genre itself by claiming otherwise. PS:T has Kill XP. But I never kill TTO when I play Planescape: Torment, for example. Because engaging him in combat leads to the most unsatisfying ending of the game. I also never kill Trias unless I'm playing Evil, even though he's worth a crap ton of XP if you kill him, and nothing if you don't.

The bestiary itself is going to be massive. The beta is just 2 medium sized wilderness maps but there were many, many different types of enemies 1) Lions 2) Boars 3) Stone beetles 4) Wood Beetles 5) Spiderlings 6) Spiders 7) Widowmaker spiders 8.) Crystal Spiders (Erroneous name, but it was a giant white spider with a petrification/freeze attack) 9) Dragonlings (baby drakes) 10) Shades 11) Ogre 12) Wolves And of course, enemy humanoids of various types like cultists, druids, members of disputing rogue factions And I'm sure I'm missing a few here. Yes, almost all of them have some sort of special attacks whether it be knockdowns (most of the animal types have that) or poison, or fear spells, or hobble, daze, other spell effects etc.

There are a lot of ingredients you have to find just to brew the simplest of potions. I'm not sure one *can* engage in crafting in the beta. But I could be wrong.