Elerond

I though it was men right activist or what ever who said that people should boycott the movie because it is product of feminist conspiracy in Hollywood and etc. thing that is aimed to destroy the men and action films and so on and so forth, even though they weren't even seen it in first place.

Watch it on eternity.obsidian.net. That works only for backers not for those who bought versions of the game that included it from steam, gog or origin

Honestly? Stating they'd not only make an expansion but give it to you as a reward tier was a friggin' risky (and really stupid) move. I don't think I understood you since I didn't say they should give me anything for free. What I said and meant was that I would like them to keep doing expansions and / or sequels for the game. You even quoted me saying that they already charged for the expansion. Well, they didn't charge for the expansion, which was my point. They have always made it clear that the run-off funds and profit from pre-orders would go towards funding the expansion. As for you thinking I was attacking you or whatnot, I did not mean for it to come off as that. I was merely expanding upon your thought. That 'honestly?' was not meant to be hostile. They sold it as $25 add on to people that didn't got it as part of their reward or who wanted multiple copies of it. Which one could argue to mean that they charged already for expansion, even though they don't use that money to fund actual development of the expansion.

They do at least two expansions, which they have promised give both to people who bought expansion during kickstarter or via backer portal. But what little they have said about those expansions make me think that they will be stand alone campaign that don't necessary set in Dyrwood area. I would guess that total playtime through both expansions will be somewhere between 20-80 hours, depending on do they invest on quality or quantity more. Guess is based on estimate that they will release both expansions in next year and half and their team now knows how their pipelines work and they don't need to as much ground work and gameplay design.

It is your decision do it fit for your character, it is direct and it no-nonsense option that fits for multiple different characters. If you can't see that then I would say that problem is in you not in that option. It isn't option for character who has habit use profanities to emphasis everything they say, but it is option for character who don't not use them when there is reason. I would argue that lack of profanities in other conversations don't mean that they aren't crude, they just don't have profanities, which can be problem for some characters as using profanities is habit for many people. But lack of those options don't make that option any less fitting, but lack of those options make game not support characters that use much more profanities. Every option fits that player finds to be fitting for their character, so you to prove your point that option is not fitting you need to prove that any of the players of the game haven't find that option to be the one that their character would choose in that situation. And because it is option that I have found to be fitting to some of my characters, I would argue that you can't do that . EDIT: To point out you can be quite crude in other conversations even though you don't use profanities, like for Calisca's sister, who is pregnant, you can say to her, after she start crying when you tell her that Calisca is dead, this "Quit your sniveling. How are going to raise a child if you're this weak?" and this after she ask you to bring her potion from Ranga (who is some sort of midwife) that sort that would prevent her child to born as hollowborn you can say "Ranga? The aumaua? Last I saw her she was choking on her own blood.". And if you look bit more you will find lots of conversation options that are crude and that character that chooses to use them probably would also choose the option with profanity in Aloth's conversation.

I can confirm that accuracy number rise when you equip pet and then close inventory screen and unequip pet and re-equip it, it seems that you can't get it stack if game is paused and if you don't close inventory screen in between after unequip-re-equip, but unequip pet immediately accuracy resets itself and accuracy seems to reset itself after first attack done with stacked accuracy. Tested in 1.05. Saving also seems to reset raised accuracy and it is not saved, so I am not sure if it. EDIT: I can repeat bug only with one of my characters. EDIT2: link to savegame https://8iz1sg-sn3302.files.1drv.com/y2pMe7hvsdto1_9XKFveD-_RQP7faUuFZGss7PAqnHlPyl3SbxuR765GrpTkmwrLYq4nFp5kMG2Rk2-EhnVBUyndxwG4QOzVMATV4mNhUhSA6vKxZ3V2K7u2_HMRKLyarBz5XLXLdw7E2-wNSWmIS8gaB3NCYdyELe__z4RHynksNY/d996c2b15cd04c6c88fbb6c6122353aa%2020099223%20TheCelestialSapling.savegame?download&psid=1

Profanity fits fine. It is consistent with style that they use in other conversations around the game. I don't see how it don't fit in game's setting. If you're playing the game for the first time, how would you know what that style is? I've got no problem with profanity in the game. Just with the way it's used. At least let it make some sense. Complete strangers don't walk up to each other, start talking then all of a sudden start swearing. That's poor writing. It's also poor writing that the whole option isn't expanded on. Aloth claims a misunderstanding, you choose that option for your character and then the whole conversation dies. Nothing more is said about it. Then it's back to normal conversation and either having Aloth join up with you or going your separate ways. When your character doesn't swear at all before that situation and swears very little after it then that one conversation is out of place. You can't roleplay a character who constantly swears if he isn't constantly swearing. If you play game first time then in that point of time you can't anyway judge if it fits in the game, so it doesn't matter. Way it is used is fitting because it just crude alternative of insult that was used by Aloth second personality which your character don't know existing in that point of time. It isn't outburst that comes from nowhere, it is phrase that is used by your character to emphasis the point that Aloth insulted that man. Conversation dies because Aloth don't want talk about it more and tiers conversation to elsewhere and your character don't care enough to continue. This is because there is limits on how much conversation options developers can offer for the player. As I said previously it is just flavor option that gives you to play more crude character. Fact that your ability show similar crudeness in other conversations is limited is not fault of this option but how those other conversations are written. Although I would argue that you can play quite crude character that uses profanities where they fit in sentences without using them as additional emphasis, like "this ****ing game don't ****ing offer ****ing conversation options that I **** want ****!!!", but they are instead used in places where they naturally fit if you want to be crude but not use profanities as only to make your sentences sound more aggressive, like that "You did tell that one man to go **** his sister.", where profanity is where it should be if it is used as verb in this case. To make this sentence to use said profanity in way as it is used in modern language in those "locker room conversations" it would look more like "You ****ing told that ****ing man to, ****, to go **** his ****ing sister ****ing ****." And if they would had offered such option I would agree that it probably would not fit in the game.

Raedric kills Kolsc when he returns as a deathguard (if you didn't kill him yourself) and there is no way to prevent that from happening as far as I know and as there is no end slide for scenario where Kolsc is live if you have killed Raedric, I would say that it support my conclusion that Kolsc is doomed. Only option where he maybe life is one where you don't take part in the conflict and he is probably one that actually drives Raedric in full insanity.

Price paid in all options is high for Gilded Vale, but final option is most optimistic about future as general. Although option where you totally kill Raedric and Gilded Vale falls in anarchy isn't without optimism, as there is hope that rule of law will someday come back and it is probably best option for Eothasians and other people that Raedric hates.

It's actually kinda annoying (and sad) that most choices are so blatantly obvious. It would've been interesting if Raedric VII turned out to be the better choice if you actually fixed the whole crisis and returned the souls. Or killed himself in grief over having done so many in over something that changed nothing. Or actually was praised as having solved the crisis and stopped being a lunatic about the whole thing. And if Kolsc turned out to be a self-indulgent noble splerglord that couldn't rule effectively to save his life. Actually in my opinion ending slide show that supporting Raedric is best for Gilded Vale in long run Ending if you don't do take any part in the conflict between Raedric and Kolsc As you can see things will not end well for Gilded Vale. Ending if you kill Raedric and kill him again when him comes back as a deathguard This ending as you see brings Gilded Vale short time prosperity, but in long run things seems not go as well. Ending if you kill Raedric but don't kill him again when he is returns as deathguard As you can see this isn't very happy end for Gilded Vale Ending if you support Raedric and kill Kolsc As you can see Gilded Vale is starting to eventually get back what it was before Waidwen's Legacy and there is even hope for much better future than any other endings.

I don't know -- the break-in demo had very strong QFG vibes for me. It has some similarities as does combat demo, but mainly they feel like they are part of another sub-genre of adventure games. If I didn't know that they are done by Coles and that they are marketed using Quest for Glory series I would not link them with those games.

Well I only supported it on KS because Hurlshot said so No the real reason was the nostalgic factor, Quest for Glory was my first " RPG " I ever played But I am tired of paying extra for badly planned KS just because people are known in the industry It is possible to do a proper budget and stick to it if you are diligent and committed so these KS companies must start scoping the project costs better In my opinion they played bit too much with Quest for Glory card with this game as it does not resemble one, even if they finish it. And I will not give them more funding because I don't feel that game they are making is one that I really want to play. Even though I like Coles personally and respect what they have done in past I don't think that their current efforts are something that I want back. I hope that they didn't destroyed their financial future with this game with all that loan taking and risking their house. Also their plan to use freelance contractors to do most of the game seem for me to be very risky and as we see it was risky thing to do and didn't yield good results. Only reason why they have now product that has possible to get ready someday is because of some of their backers and fans were actually experienced developers themselves, who wanted to see game finished so badly that they persuade Coles to hire them to do it. But anyway best of luck for them in their efforts.

As has been said repeatedly. You don't have to use it either. It's up to you to choose a different option. From my perspective, it makes sense for certain characters and I did use it. Does it make any more sense for the player character to provoke the fight or say that it was actually fun to get rid of the villagers? These are options too, and fitting options for certain characters. That's not an elementary school play, but a roll playing game where you can evolve the character of your player and get the traits to show for your efforts. The point is the opition doesn't need to be there. How many times do you want up to a complete stranger and start swearing? It don't "need" to be there but that don't mean that it isn't good option to be there. As most conversation options that you can select through the game are there just for the flavor, meaning that most conversation options in the game aren't "needed", but removing them would remove lot of players ability to play character that they want to play. And I know lots of people that start to talk to strangers and friends using swear words, because it is habit that they have developed in their social circles.

Profanity fits fine. It is consistent with style that they use in other conversations around the game. I don't see how it don't fit in game's setting.

This seems silly to me. Gun prohibition or not the government will have guns. The only way to be able to put up any meaningful resistance at all is if your population is armed. Often? Can you name me 1 genocide that didn't involve a government? Whose are those that use those weapons that governments have? Whose are those that fund governments weapons? Whose are those that ignore it when government uses their weapons? Governments don't have power without people, either people from country itself or another country that lends/uses it power let people supporting the government to do what it wants to do. At least still now as we don't have robot armies. And it was not government that made Hutu people kill their neighbors. It was not government that voted to get Jews isolated in ghettos and confiscate their property. It was not government that decided to kill people that didn't give their lands to settlers, etc. And for example to you question Haiti's genocide of French Creoles was done by revolting slaves, but of course you can argue that leaders of the slaves had become government and that government was behind that genocide. Another example could be Caste War of Yucatán where Maya people fought against European decent people that had economical and political power and both sides committed genocidal actions, but again you can argue that leaders of Maya people were actually government. And so in the point, government is leaders of people, they can't do anything without people. So people owning guns can give people that live country ability fight against other people that live in the country and want to for some reason to kill them, but when we speak about genocidal actions then power difference between fighting factions is so big that it probably would not matter if those people that are systematically slaughtered have guns, as they are overpowered with too big factor. People owning guns make it easier to people to revolt, start civil war and create new government if they think that current one don't represent them as they should. And in civil war situation it is quite typical that military and it arsenal split in some distribution between every side of the civil war, because military consist on people of the country, which usually means that they are as divided about issues of the country as any other people in the country.

Most of if not all the genocides are done by majority of country's population that decided to kill one or more of country's minority populations or by occupation force of another country. Like for example how people of USA did several genocidal actions against native Americans, whose lands they conquered. Second example could be Nazi-Germany, where majority of population decided to first isolate and then kill lots of its minority populations, Jews as main target. Third example could be Armenian Genocide, where Ottoman Empire systematically killed its Armenian minority. Forth example could be Rwandan Genocide where Hutu majority population decided to kill minority Tutsi and Hutu population. So genocides aren't pure governmental actions but actions which governments often participate because of will of the people. And weapons and fighting back don't necessary prevent such, as it is usually larger and more powerful population that kills smaller populations/weaker populations, which is reason why they usually have support from their government for their actions. People owning weapons can help them to stop conquering force from another country, but most like they would just help in genocides that are committed by country's majority people against its minority people.

I pictured them to live Ice/snow castles, here a few pictures of what I was thinking about

Here advanced course to spoken Finnish... * Links were meant to only for Meshugger who in my knowledge knows Finnish and lives in Finland, which is why he referenced largest Finnish Newspaper , when he said that he didn't find any news about the conflict. ** Also i made English summary of those news in my post before those links *** Sorry the of topic Finland needs to abolish finnish and change it back to the swedish like the one Snellman talked. Just like God intended. Finnish can be a curiosity like Gaelic. @ Meshugger Do you and Elerond both live in Helsinki? I currently live in Tampere, which is third biggest city in Finland that locates bit under 200km north from Helsinki. I don't have any knowledge where Meshugger lives, but from his suggestion I would guess that he lives somewhere where those some demon language (Swedish) speaking bättre folk (Swedish speaking Finns) live. Asun suomessa jossakin...ja veden lähellä tietysti. Jos on lammen, joen tai meren lähellä en viitti sanoa. Guys remember most of us can't speak Finnish.....English please What did you say Meshugger ? He said: "I live somewhere in Finland... and of course near water. If that is near pound, river or sea I don't care to tell" (that specification that he lives near water dosen't narrow the area anyway as there isn't residential area in Finland that isn't near to water)

I'm going to be honest and say I don't know, I watch 4 major international news channels and only CNN mentioned it briefly...which is weird because normally this type of story is on Al-Jazeera at least...it may be now so I will check http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-32695909 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-32686628 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-32680904 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-32679984 http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/11/macedonia-violence-nikola-gruevski-government http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/10/macedonia-police-alleged-armed-group-balkans-kumanovo http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/05/10/macedonia-police-idUSL5N0Y00LP20150510 http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/05/11/us-macedonia-crisis-storm-idUSKBN0NW19120150511 http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/europe/article4436829.ece http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/11/world/europe/macedonia-22-killed-as-police-and-militants-clash.html http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_MACEDONIA_SHOOTINGS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-1235381 http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/05/09/macedonia-3-police-officers-dead-20-injured-in-clashes-with-armed-group-in-city/ http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/05/nato-eu-call-calm-macedonia-150510182019133.html http://www.wsj.com/articles/macedonia-clashes-leave-eight-police-officers-14-gunmen-dead-1431267177 http://www.wsj.com/articles/eu-nato-u-n-call-for-calm-in-macedonia-1431365446 http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/5-police-killed-clash-armed-group-macedonia-n356616

There's like 20 murders(of blacks) per 100000 blacks, so it's not exactly an epidemic there either. Most anti-weapons people are making a big deal over nothing. In my opinion that is quite high, as it means that in 10 years 2 per 1000 is died as victim of murder and in 20 years 4 per 1000, in 40 years 8 per 1000 and in 80 years 16 per 1000. Meaning that 1.6% of black people are murdered before they reach age of 80. Which in my opinion is quite lot and is something that something that society should probably at least try to deal.

Here advanced course to spoken Finnish... * Links were meant to only for Meshugger who in my knowledge knows Finnish and lives in Finland, which is why he referenced largest Finnish Newspaper , when he said that he didn't find any news about the conflict. ** Also i made English summary of those news in my post before those links *** Sorry the of topic Finland needs to abolish finnish and change it back to the swedish like the one Snellman talked. Just like God intended. Finnish can be a curiosity like Gaelic. @ Meshugger Do you and Elerond both live in Helsinki? I currently live in Tampere, which is third biggest city in Finland that locates bit under 200km north from Helsinki. I don't have any knowledge where Meshugger lives, but from his suggestion I would guess that he lives somewhere where those some demon language (Swedish) speaking bättre folk (Swedish speaking Finns) live.

Here advanced course to spoken Finnish... * Links were meant to only for Meshugger who in my knowledge knows Finnish and lives in Finland, which is why he referenced largest Finnish Newspaper , when he said that he didn't find any news about the conflict. ** Also i made English summary of those news in my post before those links *** Sorry the of topic

I hope no, keep PoE as PoE and if you want D&D game then make D&D game that set in one of the D&D multiverses

Idea behind godlikes was to be similar to planetouched from D&D, and they decided to use humans, dwarves and elves as their base races because it would make setting more familiar and more easy to approached for people. Dyrwood area is made feel like your typical European based fantasy setting for same reason. And they purposefully tried to make Dyrwood feel similar to Forgotten Realms' Sword Coast area, because in their opinion that was the main thematic feeling that people would except from the game. Something to be cliché it would need to be constantly repeated thing in the genre, which their presentation of cycle of souls and how souls generally work and even how reincarnation of souls works in setting isn't anyway commonly used thematic tool. Of course souls as concept is thousands years old, as is the idea of reincarnation and even the fact that souls can be called back or be trapped, etc. things that they decided to do with them, but overall their approach towards the subject was somewhat new and fresh with some new ideas. They try their best to make Dyrwood area to feel very familiar those that like your medieval European fantasy settings. But I would point out that there is one aspect missing that is typical to high (or epic like you say) fantasy setting, which is good versus evil concept, which Obsidian has tried to tier away in this setting, by making everything to be more nuanced and trying to make all the factions have things that are generally seen as positive and things that are generally seen as negative and over all they have tried to avoid universal moral judgements in their lore. I agree with you that their reactivity towards certain things could be much better and their implementation of godlikes have much to improve. But hopefully they mature these things in expansions and in possible sequels/new games in the world of Eora.

Totally fitting in my book. No offense, but your alternative for Aloth is what I would find ridiculous. Yselmir didn't put it politely, so why should my character? And what's more, you don't have to say it. You just have to give it a rest with one of the other options. How is it fitting? And how is the alternative ridiculous? Because in that option your character points out that Aloth clearly insulted that man and not try anyway beat around the bush with that fact like your alternative does. There is such alternative option in that conversation as you can instead to choose to say "You did make a rather lewd suggestion regarding one of the aggressors and his own sister." , which makes your alternative needles and even poorer option than one that is offered. The point I'm trying to make is that it doesn't have to be there in the first place. It is there to create contrast between Aloth's and Iselmyr's personalities and it also makes sure that player understand why those people become so angry towards Aloth that they were willing to attack him on full daylight. And to why player has choice to say profanities, that is just to give player option to make their character to work better on their vision about the character, not giving such option would much lessen role-play aspect of the game. I would point out that player characters come from all sort of backgrounds like pirates, high way robbers, swords to hire, slaves, craftsman, nobles, royalty, teachers, etc.. So there needs to be large selection of flavor options in conversations that player can choose to make it so that their character feels right. So not offering profanity options would drop lots of nuance and spirit from the game and make it worse than it is. So there is need for such in first place, even if Aloth didn't have such contrasting dual personality.