1varangian

This pretty much sums it up. In DnD, when you look at the stat spread of a character you can imagine what they are like. In Pillars, when you look at the stat spread you can see micro modifiers to other stats.

I like stats and planning builds but I don't like excessive math or spreadsheets when I'm playing a game. So I would take action speed out of Dexterity. It's an unnecessarily complicated modifier on top of other modifiers. The whole concept of recover time in combat i.e. standing still and waiting for the recovery bar to finish is a dead moment. A much better way is to have the action itself take longer and then let the player do the next action immediately. Removing magical might from Might is something I support fully. I would, however make Might / Strength a more important stat by having heavier weapons and especially armor have strength requirements to use effectively. Stats in general need to matter more in Pillars. That is the system's greatest weakness. You think you are making a character that is really good at stat X but you end up just like everyone else with only a micro modifier to whatever your stat affects. Having a really good stat or a lack thereof doesn't influence your playstyle enough.

Pillars 2 won't be that game but eventually someone needs to make a multiplayer game like NWN. Not everyone likes MMO's and it's been too long since NWN2. Pillars wouldn't function in multiplayer because the constant pausing that is needed to track the long list of status effects would drive everyone insane. Or maybe you could let the game flow on normal difficulty without pause. I would prefer a whole new game in Eora with a toolset and DM client when multiplayer happens though.

You'll just have to agree to disagree then.

Pillars is more complicated and does a lot of micromanagement with the stats, yes. Yet the DnD stats feel more solid and meaningful and flesh out your character better. E.g. in Pillars you can pump your Might to 18 but you don't really notice a difference between 10 Might and 18 Might so it doesn't give the player a feeling of a particularily strong character. It's the same character who simply does 24% more damage. Once you get better equipment and some talents that 24% is diluted into oblivion. In DnD the difference between 10 Strength and 18 Strength is very noticeable. The 10 Strength feels very average Joe while the 18 Strength feels like a juggernaut. It's important in an RPG that buffing some attribute to high levels or extremes gives the player a feeling of being exceptional at something. I believe the original debate was about Might and combining physical and mental strength into one attribute.

The min/maxed one that dumped Intelligence to 3 would be more likely to win.

There you said it. Min-maxing is needed for the stats to change the way a character plays. Dumping stats to 3 isn't cool from a roleplaying perspective.

Something between PoE and DnD would be optimal probably. In PoE I don't think I've ever even looked at the companions attribute scores. That's how irrelevant they feel. I don't need to know them. So why do they even exist in the game if they don't have a big enough impact? Much more important is to have the right type of weapon/damage available to get through DR.

14 strength means you can cast Shield and fight goblins or other minions effectively in melee as opposed to being completely useless without spells. And a Bull's Strength stacks on top of that 14 so it does not "cease to matter". In Pillars your character plays exactly the same and you hardly notice any difference from stats unless you heavily min-max your character. I like the point buy system in NWN. Take the Wizard for example. You can pump Int to 18 and maximise your spellcasting power but be weak elsewhere. Or you can have 15-16 Int and 14 Str/Dex/Con which does give you a completely different melee presence. Point is that you can actually influence how your character plays which gives you choice. In Pillars that choice is so subtle it hardly matters.

Having to pump two stats instead of one for spellcasting actually limits your choices with the remaining stats. It's the opposite of "expanding". A good wizard needs both stats in Pillars. Good that you brought up D&D. The DnD stats not only do an excellent job in describing or creating an image for your character but also impact combat in a more meaningful way. In NWN you can choose to not pump your Wizard's Int from 17 to 18, and buff your Str from 10 to 14 instead. You make a meaningful choice losing some potential of your primary talents but gaining a significant increase in melee. The strength increase in Pillar's terms is +10 accuracy and +3 dmg with a staff so it actually matters - it even enables the melee option while in Pillars everyone does everything anyway. Now that's what "expanding" your build options is about. The Pillars system lacks meaningful choices. Assigning stats in Pillars feels more like micro managing a generic character of a class who performs more or less the same regardless of how you choose your stats.

Guys, debating the lore is pointless. Whether or not the lore on Might is solid isn't the problem here. With Might it all comes down to a very simple thing. You can't create a mentally powerful character without also making them physically strong. That's the issue. They eliminated the physically fragile but powerful spellcaster archetype completely. And the mentally lacking brute. It's a design decision. And a bad one because it creates such controversy and is debated endlessly. They might as well combine Dexterity and Intelligence and call it Prowess. Mental and physical skill conveniently as one. But that would be just as bad. The whole purpose of the ability scores is to reflect the character the player has envisioned. Therefore, the stats can only represent one thing at a time to give the player complete control over their character.

I would reserve Inquisitor for Priest/Paladin instead of Priest/Cipher.

I always felt like the "graze to hit" and "hit to crit" and similar modifiers were unnecessary additions to the miss/graze/hit/crit system. Modifiers to accuracy and defenses already accomplish similar results. With these extra layers of modifiers on top it is quite difficult to get a feeling just how much of an impact they really have. DnD games work just fine being as simple as hit or miss. The feedback this gives to the player about the relative power level between their characters and their opponents is a lot clearer. I would only add damage reduction on top of that because of the tactical depth it adds to combat.

Cipher / Fighter = Soulblade Wizard / Priest = Theurgist Wizard / Cipher = Mystic Wizard / Monk = Savant

This quote contains both the question and answer to that question :-P Debates with easy right answers aren't particularly interesting, eh? And as I pointed out, you can absolutely create a mage with low Might value - he's just not going to be very good at throwing fireballs everywhere. Which is fine as making sacrifices is one of the cornerstones of RPGs, isn't it? You don't think being physically strong is an odd requirement for a Wizard to be able to throw potent fireballs?

Why is this even such a hot debate? There is no right or wrong here. I can't create my character the way I envision them and I'll just leave it at that. It's valid criticism towards their design choice.

And roasting them will be very satisfying but still cost you resources.

I'm sure you can have a perfect reasoning behind combining all kinds of stats into one but that's not the point. I want to be able to create a Wizard who is physically frail but mentally a giant, and I can't do that in PoE without gimping his spellcasting power. I can't create my character in a way I envision them. And that's why this completely unnecessary combining of two attributes is not good design.

An easy solution would be to impose a cumulative Deflection penalty for each opponent beyond the first who have engaged you in melee. In addition to flanking. That would also make hordes of low level minions a relevant threat for high level characters. Especially those in light armor. Most RPGs face the problem of low level foes becoming completely irrelevant later in the game and high level PCs have to be challenged with lore-stretching amounts of powerful monsters where giants become as common as goblins. A system where low level monsters in large numbers can be threatening for high level PCs would be better.

Also true. I find all the flaming hair stuff a distraction in the gritty and melancholic atmosphere they've created. "Look that evil lord hung 18 people on a tree! -Nevermind that, that dudes hair is on fire wonder what supersayian powers he has?!" Im trying to avoid seeing godlikes when I play.

The vancian slot system could easily be replaced by a mana or spell point based system. If mana is only replenished by resting the end result is that the power level of wizads remains the same, just with more flexibilty. Which is a good thing. It makes no sense you can cast a 5th level spell but not a 1st level spell just because you ran out of first level slots. PoE already limits your selection of active spells to a pre-selected 4 per level so no need to limit castable levels arbitrarily on top of that.

The description does say it is both. A character with 18 might is always very strong both physically and spiritually (also within the lore if you're spiritually strong you can make yourself physically strong). It is kind of on the people who expected otherwise. What they should have done is given a reason for the two to be connected. In theory in Pillars' world you can have people who are strong spiritually but weak physically but it's impossible to create a character that way. They probably should have made it impossible to have a character be weak physically but be a powerful spellcaster in the lore. That's an awful decision and I hope they do change it for PoE2. All spellcasters are as strong as your warriors? Come on.

When Might represents two different things, it becomes unclear how the ability score reflects your character. Is he physically or mentally strong or both? Scripted events where you push down walls clearly paint a picture of a muscly character when you imagined your Wizard or Rogue to be thin and fragile. And you feel a disconnect to the character you envisioned. This is bad in an RPG. Secondly, there are ways to make physical strength useful for everyone without doing what PoE did with Might. A strong character could always wear heavier armor without penalty. DR is always useful. In fact its strange heavy armor and weapons don't have any kind of strength requirements. I also hope the ability scores you select for your character will have more impact on your stats in PoE2. Maybe using a diminishing returns point buy system so that nothing gets out of whack, like NWN had.

I generally don't like races that are too high-fantasy. Unfortunately godlikes are the very extreme of this with flaming hair and whatnot. They just stand out too much and I wish they were living on some forgotten island somewhere as NPCs. With Orlans. ,-) It's personal preference of course but for me the races that are too far out / furry / fiery / wingy make the whole setting less believable and more like a fairy tale for children.

Agreed, there are too many defensive spells. I would start removing some of the boring ones that only passively add +X to defense. It's much more satisfying to knock opponents down or create a devious illusion to fool them. Arcane Veil is an oddball too. They made that into a panic button with a high Deflection bonus and a short duration. But it's a really boring panic button and 10 second durations are annoying to keep track of. While an AoE knockdown push around caster would be simply awesome. I would also like a system where you could pay for dailies or encounter abilities with Endurace or spell slots. The arbitrary limits of "2 shields per rest" are weird. If a Wizard has an ability to create a telekinetic shield, they should be able to do it as often as they need to, with some kind of cost attached.