Elerond

Peasant human belonging in meadow folk stat lines is probably near 3 3 3 3 3 3

Game has bugs that I encountered, but any of them wasn't game breaking as I was able to finish the game. Worst bugs that I encountered were such that they give you ability exploit them for your benefit (that can sometimes trigger even without knowing effort from player), and lose of some abilities that characters should have. I also know that there are some bugs that cause some event/encounter scripts not working, which can mean that player needs to load game from earlier point of time and go event/encounter through again. I also know that there are bugs or more accurately unnecessary information that is saved in savefiles causing their size to bloat. There is also some problems with some specific hardwares and softwares. And there is bugs that case minor glitches in sounds and rendered graphics. (In some hardware-software combinations these glitches aren't just minor) But at end in my experience game is not bewitched by bugs that one could say that it is unplayable for majority of players or that it has some much bugs that it is release is incomprehensible thing. But of course it would have been better if game would had been released without any bugs in it, but sad reality is that such is not usually possible from monetary or time perspective for majority of games.

In end game you get superb small shield that gives +5 to all deferences, which means that difference between deflection bonus with it and large shield is only 3 points. Fighter have modal that gives +10 deflection bonus to all your party members which is sometimes nice. Also fighter can slash melee damage quite reliably. But anyways Fighters, Paladins and Chanters are best classes for tanking in the game. You can build them to have 120-140 deflection by their own and their other defenses you can build up to be about 100. Fighter has ability to engage more opponents than any other class and their disengagement attacks hit more reliably and usually with more damage than what Paladins and Chanters. They can offer little area support with one of their modal abilities. They also per encounter ability to knockdown enemies, which may come handy depending on your party composition. Paladins have reliable support auras, they have burst damage in form of Flames of Devotion, they have ability suppress negative effects that your party members suffer and they have healing ability that can be useful depending on your party composition. Chanters auras aren't as instantaneous as Paladins, but they have much more variety in them, and even though they don't have similar abilities as fighters and paladins their chant build up ability to cast invocations which have nice summon and foe only AoEs, which forgives quite well their lower melee capability. If you have all three in your party you have quite nasty front line fighting (stopping) force.

Wait, really? Was there a vote on that that I missed, because I would absolutely have been against per rest spells. They're terribad for balancing and gameplay. There was no vote, but when Josh explained his idea for wizards lots of people were quite angry that it was MMO like cooldown system that don't have anything to do with IE games, which lead that they changed their plans and created more Vancian style system for wizards.

They're fixing that also next patch. BTW, where did you get the ring other than Telendras (sold in copper town). I only found that one. You can find it on cave in cliff where Sagani's quest takes you first. Cave is accessible only by scripted interaction.

Wizards are great even with slicken and ice fog changed. As Wizards (at least Aloth) probably will still be best end game class regardless at least until they fix those rings of wizardry, because 43 per encounter spells is just ridiculous and those 25 level three spells and 17 level 4 spells isn't bad either. EDIT: Wizards have per rest spell because that was what backers wanted, even though Obsidian originally planed that wizards could get their spells back even during encounter. So if you don't like current system remember give your thanks those who it belongs

As game currently has bugs that let you make your party members immortal that don't necessary tell much

Purpose behind current resting system is to encourage people to find alternative strategies for resting constantly (which is also reason why there is achievement for completing game by resting under 10 times.) But if you want infinite resting you can always mod it yourself in the game, it is not that hard.

I liked all the companions, and I can't say which was my favorite as they all had nice segments in the game and it was sometimes hard to decide who I want to travel with.

Attack rolls are Accuracy-Enemy defense + d100. If the end result is less than 16 it's a miss. If less then 51, it's a graze for 50% damage. If less than 101 it's a hit for full damage. If it's more or equals 101 it's a crit for 150% damage. I just modified this with the racial passives and weighted them with the damage. Basically if you multiply your average damage with the end result you get your average damage per swing. You could also say that in a neutral environment (Accuracy=enemy defense) the possibility of scoring a hit is 50%. The midget passive upgrades 10% of this to a crit - which is 5% point. The elven racial gives 5% point bonus to ALL your swings - so it upgrades misses and grazes as well. Therefore the elf is better - worst case equal the midget. So if I'm understanding correct, you could basically word it as Hearth Orlans only needing to roll a 91, for a crit, whereas Elves need a 96, but only need a 21 for a graze and a 46 for a hit? No. Orlans bonuses convert 10% of hits to crits. which means that Hit roll is attackers accuracy - targets defense + d100 rolls 1-15 = miss rolls 16-50 = graze rolls 51=100 = hit rolls 101+ = crit Acc-Def = 0 scenario: meaning roll d100 + 0 Normal divination for misses-grazes-hits-crits is 15% misses, 35% grazes, and 50% hits heart orlans will instead do 15% misses, 35% grazes 45% hits and 5% crits. (as 10% of 50% is 5%) wood elves will do 10% misses, 35% grazes, 50% hits and 5% crits. (Acc +5 means 5% bonus in all categories) Acc-Def = -5 scenario: meaning roll d100 - 5 Normal divination for misses-grazes-hits-crits is 20% misses, 35% grazes, and 45% hits heart orlans will instead do 20% misses, 35% grazes 40.5% hits and 4.5% crits. (as 10% of 45% is 4.5%) wood elves will do 15% misses, 35% grazes, 50% hits (Acc +5 means 5% bonus in all categories) Acc-Def = +5 scenario: meaning roll d100 + 5 Normal divination for misses-grazes-hits-crits is 10% misses, 35% grazes, 50% hits, and 5% crits heart orlans will instead do 10% misses, 35% grazes 45% hits and 10% crits. (as 10% of 50% is 5%) wood elves will do 5% misses, 35% grazes, 50% hits and 10% crits. (Acc +5 means 5% bonus in all categories) So a +5 Accuracy bonus is essentially sinking the hit requirement of a d100 roll by 5? Am I right in understanding +15 accuracy (above deflection) would mean hits are negated then? And just curious, where and how are you guys confirming it's a 10% bonus in the sense it's 10% of the hit amount? AKA, in a normal scenario, how do we know it's not 15% crit, 35% grazes, 40% hits and 10% crits for Hearth Orlans? This is a typical scenario where even the descriptions do not make it clear if the bonus is additive or multiplicative (happens all the time in RPGs) so I'm curious if this is speculation or if someone peered into the code and confirmed it's the way you've outlined. Reason I ask is because now it seems to work in the opposite direction where Hearth Orlan seems universally inferior, whereas extra hit chance (and a smaller benefit to crit) in a situational scenario vs. less hit chance but more crit chance on hits (again situational, but extremely ridiculously common) seems more balanced and thus more likely to be implemented. I made mistake in writing those hit percentages for wood elf, as in reality 50% of their attack rolls result hit in every scenario. And I made same mistake in normal and heart orlans +5 scenario. I fixed right percentages to this post as I can't edit original anymore. You can test it if you want. But it is what we have told it should do. In my understanding how it works is that there is 10% change in heart orlans case that any attack roll which result is hit is converted to critical hit instead. So their race benefit and similar benefits from other sources don't actually have any impact in attack roll itself, but its result.

Attack rolls are Accuracy-Enemy defense + d100. If the end result is less than 16 it's a miss. If less then 51, it's a graze for 50% damage. If less than 101 it's a hit for full damage. If it's more or equals 101 it's a crit for 150% damage. I just modified this with the racial passives and weighted them with the damage. Basically if you multiply your average damage with the end result you get your average damage per swing. You could also say that in a neutral environment (Accuracy=enemy defense) the possibility of scoring a hit is 50%. The midget passive upgrades 10% of this to a crit - which is 5% point. The elven racial gives 5% point bonus to ALL your swings - so it upgrades misses and grazes as well. Therefore the elf is better - worst case equal the midget. So if I'm understanding correct, you could basically word it as Hearth Orlans only needing to roll a 91, for a crit, whereas Elves need a 96, but only need a 21 for a graze and a 46 for a hit? No. Orlans bonuses convert 10% of hits to crits. which means that Hit roll is attackers accuracy - targets defense + d100 rolls 1-15 = miss rolls 16-50 = graze rolls 51=100 = hit rolls 101+ = crit Acc-Def = 0 scenario: meaning roll d100 + 0 Normal divination for misses-grazes-hits-crits is 15% misses, 35% grazes, and 50% hits heart orlans will instead do 15% misses, 35% grazes 45% hits and 5% crits. (as 10% of 50% is 5%) wood elves will do 10% misses, 35% grazes, 45% hits and 5% crits. (Acc +5 means 5% bonus in all categories) Acc-Def = -5 scenario: meaning roll d100 - 5 Normal divination for misses-grazes-hits-crits is 20% misses, 35% grazes, and 45% hits heart orlans will instead do 20% misses, 35% grazes 40.5% hits and 4.5% crits. (as 10% of 45% is 4.5%) wood elves will do 15% misses, 35% grazes, 50% hits (Acc +5 means 5% bonus in all categories) Acc-Def = +5 scenario: meaning roll d100 + 5 Normal divination for misses-grazes-hits-crits is 10% misses, 35% grazes, 45% hits, and 5% crits heart orlans will instead do 10% misses, 35% grazes 40.5% hits and 9.5% crits. (as 10% of 45% is 4.5%) wood elves will do 5% misses, 35% grazes, 40% hits and 10% crits. (Acc +5 means 5% bonus in all categories)

Wizards are good class and they get better and better more game goes on as regards on other classes. Although they never get to be most powerful class in the game. But they are best probably best ranged AoE throwers in the game, because of their blast talent that gives them ability to do AoE damage with implements (wand, rod, and scepter). And they have access to largest range of spells in the game (wizards are able to have access to all wizards spells in end game because of their ability learn spells from other wizards grimoires). Their spell selection has good single target and AoE damage spells and they have decent debuffs and some nice self buffs.

Thats pretty confusing...theres an explanation somewhere of why they decide to implement such weird system? I don't know reason behind the system, but at least they explained system itself in the game It is probably to prevent people to use stronghold to generate infinite amount of money and items. And this also allow them to make stronghold quest to give bonuses on journal quests. So I think it is because of balance and strongholds role as money sink.

Chants' area is effected by int and area and duration of invocations, which is why int is marked as important stat for them.

Stronghold turns go forward when you do quests. Events and expansions have timers that use game clock to determine when they are done. Hirelings are paid basing on game time Taxes, items from expansions and quests are turn based.

When the quest activates? RIght after he is killed or at another time? You can activate quest in act III.

You can select from auto-pause options option to pause game every time your character's target dies, which gives you opportunity stop them moving around from their spot if you wish.

Yeah, that's what happens. "It isn't working! Oh... Wait... No, you really *are* healed?" I noticed that game has bug that cause party members shout it's not working etc. because their heals don't do enough damage, which probably tell too much about what these characters actually would want to do to each other. EDIT: It seems that there is no sound set for companions for healing others, but they use default in VOs for healing too, so there is no bug, but it seems to work as intended.

Have you been in contact with inXile as you should have gotten your copy already. I got my in December of last year, which was what they said after several delay notices.

They are just your reputation, they have some influence in conversation options and how npcs react on what you say

This really sounds like a recipe for a lot of meaningless arguments about semantics. It's totally fine to give a word a more specific definition in a certain context, and indeed academics do this all the time...but you NEED To define the word first before using it in a way that goes against the common (dictionary) definition. If you just say "that's not censorship because of XYZ" but you are going off your own undisclosed personal definition, while the person you are arguing with is going off of the common definition...then what are you even arguing over? A rose is a rose by any other name, but if I start calling a rose a tulip and insisting that tulips are red, then that would be confusing wouldn't it? If you read my post again you see that is what I said mostly. In academic context one needs to define every term that they think is important for the academic work at question, even if you use most common definitions that there are, because it is important in academic work that there is as less room as possible for different interpretation of meaning of those terms. Dictionaries are written by authors and those authors have their own world views that dictate them how they construct their work. There are studies done on dictionaries which so that they have bias towards major society culture and certain its sub cultures, causing it that they don't usually reflect well in how minority populations uses of words.

Frankly, judging by the fact that the dude couldn't even spell "light", I'd be astonished if it turned out backer submissions were even read at all, much less vetted for appropriateness. And you might be right. Regardless though, if they remove something solely on the grounds that it has offended or might offend someone, then it's censorship by definition. Even if they did it pre-release, if they looked at that limerick, and said "this might offend someone, we should take it out," then that's censorship. Once again, not good or bad, just fits the definition. I don't think it's a very useful definition then. (Also, typical GGer dogwhistle, which makes me even more hesitant to use the word.) It's not my definition though. I'm getting it from Wikipedia, but many other sources define it similarly. I know that people have given it a negative stigma, but I think a large part of that is people that reflexively argue that "that's not censorship!" whenever someone accuses something of being censored. When in reality, it's definitely censorship, but it's not necessarily wrong. Words don't have solid definitions, but instead their definition changes from speaker to speaker and from writer to writer. Dictionaries and other word definition instances are invented to catalog those meanings and let people have some ability to have understanding what they speak or write to each other. So when you say that you speak that act of censorship is bad then it would be recommendable to define what you include in that definition. If you borrow somebody else's definition you probably should mention if you have difference of opinion with it or parts of it. But this case don't fit in Wikipedia's definition of censorship because the group of people that ask/demands removing that memorial don't hold any power over Obsidian, meaning that Obsidian is absolute free to decide will they keep memorial, remove or edit it. You could say that it is self censorship, which maybe the case if they don't self feel that it is inappropriate text but edit/remove it in anyway to please people (this is by Wikipedia's definition) or that Obsidian censors backer who submitted it, but that is in my opinion bit far fetched as it is additional content to Obsidian's art work and Obsidian has editorial rights over it, it would be same as claim that moderator here censor us, when they make us to follow forum's rules.

N-space is inherently racist, and I demand that it be censored as it refers to slave housing in antebellum America. N-Space is game developer that currently is making Sword Coast Legends with Digital Extremes, so that memorial is actually their advertisement Sorry, I was kidding. It is funny that something as ridiculous as I said would be taken seriously in this climate though lol . I knew that you were kidding, but I thought to point out that memorial in question is actually bit questionable by itself, but it is to Obsidian to decide what they want to show in their game (people are of course free to disagree).

N-space is inherently racist, and I demand that it be censored as it refers to slave housing in antebellum America. N-Space is game developer that currently is making Sword Coast Legends with Digital Extremes, so that memorial is actually their advertisement

It is reaction of disgust and despair when identity that don't match persons exceptions is revealed that hits home, as it is reaction that most transgender people are familiar with and reaction that they have grown to fear and even sometimes expect. It is often root cause that drives transgender people to isolation and even suicide. It is not necessary simple thing to comprehend when one had not had to live with such fear but I see why one who has can find that memorial offensive. Offensive things in art work isn't necessary bad thing, but if they are things that artist didn't intent to their work to express then there is cause for editing, even if some of audience of their work liked that particular thing, because artist has always right to modify things in their work that they view as flaws or they just don't like, if they do feel to do so. People expressing their likes and dislikes about particular piece of art is also not bad, even when they demand changes in that piece, because it will give artist and other people alternative perspective of things. But also people that express their opinions against those likes and dislikes have right to do so, as that also gives alternative perspectives and people have also right to agree and disagree with these opinions. But at end it is artist whose views of their work is that matters and if they decide to change their work after they have gained new perspective then that change is OK, even if people disagree with it, but if change is forced by some entity like for example government then that change is not OK and should be objected by people that support freedom of expression.