Hiro Protagonist II

Bobbin, what you're talking about are different versions of D&D. Fighters in PoE are Fighters from 4th ed. They're quite inflexible. Also, rogues should be in melee as is the case with 4th ed. That's the best way to play them.

Yeah I know. Talents may change some things but from experience with 4th ed, it's very hard to play a character that's not doing their role. You can do it, it's just not as effective as doing what their intended role is and makes encounters harder because a mob ruler is trying to be a heavy hitter, defender trying to do something else, and it just makes encounters harder than they should be. That's how I see it with PoE. Some classes are suited doing only one role and while they can do other roles, they don't do it as effectively. The Fighter in PoE is a defender. That's their role and while you can do other roles and equip them with ranged weapons, choose skills and talents to support that build, it may well turn out that it's underpowered than you would expect it'd be. Viable but not as good as what their intended role is. With 4th ed, you play to their roles and I see a similar thing with PoE.

Stealth shouldn't be an encounter/daily power. You already have stealth for individual members of your party through your skills. They're individual skills and you should be able to select your character with high stealth like your rogue and stay hidden while your party is out of stealth mode. If my rogue has a high stealth and my fighter doesn't, I expect to be able to send my rogue as an individual ahead with stealth. The party stealth confuses me more if I have a Fighter with 0 stealth and clanking down a dungeon in plate armour but my rogue has high stealth and this helps with the overall party stealth? I don't know. I'm also for party stealth, I just don't know how it's worked out.

Can you link that quote? I know it's from memory but I don't ever recall a quote like that. In fact, in the Backer update # 81, the Fighter seemed to be the tank on the front line all along. They're the classic 4th ed Defender role and that's what they do. There's not much scope in 4th ed as even the Heavy Hitter Fighters like the Slayer are also on the front line. The PoE Fighter seems more defender than anything else. Even as far back as Backer update # 71, they were always envisioned as being on the front line. "We will be doing three more class pair updates in the future: The Leaders of the Band (chanters and priests), The Front Line (fighters and barbarians), and The Mob Rulers (wizards and druids)."

When the game has penalties on armour, I'm not going to wear it - especially for my ranged characters. I'll wear it for my tank but that's it. I did make a post about it in another thread. It's a perfectly viable tactic and Josh seems to be okay with it. Josh did say they're tweaking the A.I. to target ranged characters and having enemies with ESP to find out which characters will have lower stamina, but there are work arounds with that.

I'm also a WL2 beta player and finding the combat fun. I'm someone that doesn't play a lot of TB games, but I'm really enjoying the combat just the same. Whereas the combat in PoE is something I want to avoid. I don't find the combat enjoyable and mostly tedious. The recent patch helped with combat but I still wanted to avoid as much combat as possible. I have no doubt further balancing will improve combat up to the game being released, but can see myself trying to avoid a lot of it.

If there's one good thing that's come out of the beta for me, it's getting better at these fights. When PoE is released, I'll know what I'll be doing and be better prepared. If I wasn't following the forums and hadn't tested it myself, I wouldn't have known about the completely acceptable nude strategy. I imagine there may be a steep learning curve for those who haven't played the beta.

I try and avoid all the trash mobs. Beetles, Wolves, Spiders, Wurms, Feral Druids, Lions, etc. Beetles have now become easy. Trash mobs that are easy are the wolves and wurms in Dyrford Crossing which you can totally avoid altogether. So I just ignore them. The Lions in the gorge map are a pushover and I try to avoid those as well. The couple of times I went up to the top part of the gorge map and encountered the feral druids were easy to pick off one by one. Now I just avoid the top part. It's also easy when you know there's going to be a fight. The Medreth fight is a breeze when you can position everyone before hand and have the BB Fighter pull all the enemies on him. In this fight I only lost about 15% health while all my nudists were able to kill them quickly. I had my nude BB Rogue in position to flank and sneak attack every round. And the adventuring party at the dragon egg wasn't a problem either. I didn't realise one of the enemy had a knock down ability which knocked down my BB Fighter and he turned on my nude BB Rogue which she sustained some damage. But it was quick killing them as well. Getting used to all the different spells.

I know there's loot down there in that corner, in a wall of some ruins iirc. Can't remember what the loot was though. A pointless encounter in the corner of the map was enough for me to never go back down there again.

It's not part of a quest. Maybe in the final game it will be part of a quest. Check Josh's comment above. - quests that were specifically “defeat this dude” or “clear this area” - Josh. eg. Villager wants you to defeat Spider Queen. Kill spider queen or clear the spider nest in the Ogre cave including the Spider Queen. Hand in quest. Get rewarded.

eh DCParry. People are coming up with their solutions and debate is currently in progress why some solutions shouldn't be in. If the quest-xp only people who have been arguing for the last 2 years against the combat-xp players now want combat xp, they should say so. Trying to wrap it up in the form of cyclopaedia entries isn't going to fly. And I'll be here to point it out to them.

I find the lack of rounds to be confusing if I think in terms of the IE games. That's why I see PoE more of an arpg with pause. If I think in those terms, it makes more sense in what's happening in combat. There's no rounds where characters and enemies start over again, it's just constant real time.

Rewarding kill spree players? That's been kind of the point for the last 2 years for the quest-xp people arguing for not rewarding kills and going to an objective / quest based system. The cyclopaedia is not part of a quest as we currently know, therefore killing for xp not related to a quest is just another form of combat xp. And the argument saying the game isn't a stealth/pacificism simulator is false. Nobody in this thread has said this is a stealth/pacifist simulator. There are quest options in the Beta to solve quests like the Ogre Cave without having to kill everything. You can kill everything in the Ogre cave or avoid a lot of the fights through other means. I would've thought that's what you would have wanted? What your suggesting is rewarding the combat xp player more with their kill sprees with their cyclopaedia entries. Adding another system like lore books and rangers may help. But which will players tend more to? Which will be easier? If there's an easier option, then players will gravitate to that type of play. I would gravitate to lore books and rangers because it sounds like the easy option to me if it avoids combat. No danger at all. So it then becomes free xp for me.

Isn't PoE more of a true real time with pause game? Bear with me. In the IE games, you had 6 second rounds. Your party and enemies did everything in that round and then it started again. In PoE, there are no rounds so it's every man, woman and enemy hitting everything. There is recovery time but that can depend on many factors. I find it more like an arpg with pause.

http://jesawyer.tumblr.com/post/97094696076/would-you-consider-giving-xp-for-selected-unique And this is my point. Sawyer is tying combat to quests. If it's part of a quest, you'll get the xp. If it's not part of a quest, no xp. But it won't really be combat xp in the sense of the IE games. It will be quest xp when you hand in the quest. example: Kill x number of goblins in one area. No xp. Hand in quest. Get xp rewards for the quest. You're rewarded for completing the quest including clearing an area or defeat this dude. So the spider queen could be part of a quest for killing it. You just won't get xp for killing it without the quest giver.

It does. I'm talking about things like spiders in the ogre cave. Enemies that are in the cyclopedia. Clearing the ogre cave of all the different types of spiders would give the kill spree player more xp if they received those completed pages than the one who avoids most of it. That's encouraging kill sprees. And if it's not part of any quest, it's just combat xp wrapped up in a different way.

I highlighted this before in another thread. Quest gives you two options: 1. The kill spree player goes through a dungeon killing everything in their wake and finish the quest. They received the quest xp and may have received not only 1 page in their cyclopaedia but 2 or 3 pages from killing various enemies. 2. The non-combat player who avoids combat through things like stealth only receives quest xp. This encourages players to go on a kill spree to get more xp rewards for that quest. And this is what the quest-xp people have argued against. Your number 2 point with the Spider Queen also encourages kill sprees which is something the quest-xp people have argued against. Unless it's tied to a quest, the combat player shouldn't get xp for killing. It's no different than just putting combat xp in the game.

4 can also encourage kill sprees when completing quests and the player who takes the non-combat route is disadvantaged. Kill sprees are something the quest-xp people have argued against.

Going by the Beta, there is objective xp but is dependant on when you want to receive it. Do you want to receive it during a quest or at the end of a quest? The Ogre quest example is one that shows you can get it during a quest or at the end of the quest, and this is dependant on when you speak to the quest giver. As I said in the previous thread. I'll be using a walkthrough to find out who all the quest givers are, and I'll be clicking on all the quest givers first to get all those xp check points on my route instead of getting them at the end of the quests. You could very well level up collecting all those check points on your route. And with a party of 6 in the Beta, one of my characters did level up when entering the ogre cave. That's a clear advantage when you now have a higher level party to take on enemies than if you ventured through an area missing out on those objective xp rewards / not knowing where the xp check points are.

I assumed you did get all the xp for the Ogre quest. For me, I'll be clicking on all the quest givers first to get all those xp check points on my route instead of getting them at the end of the quests. You could very well level up collecting all those check points on your route.

Yep, clicking on all the quest givers, choosing the most optimal route to get all those xp check points in one go if they intersect and then finishing all those quests.

I'm also thinking of large maps like city maps. What if multiple quests intersect and while doing one quest, you're going past another xp check point from another quest and miss out on it. Whereas I talk to two quest givers and get both 'xp check points' from the two quests along my route. I can see my walkthrough opened while playing.

Just checked and without the Quest Giver, you get a whopping 0 xp. I went straight to Dyrford Crossing, battled my way through and entered the cave. 0 xp Then I went to the Ogre and killed him as there was no dialogue options concerning the Quest. 0 xp I did however take the Ogre's head and blood. But nothing to indicate what this was all about. So all in all. You get nothing from doing this unless you find the Quest Giver. However, I decided to hand in the quest (knowing it was the farmer) and there was a dialogue to finish the quest. I did receive xp but no xp amounts showed up in the combat log to confirm how much I received. Now if anything is like this in the final game, you may be going past 'xp check points' like the Ogre Cave and not knowing there is an 'xp check point' there because you didn't click on the quest giver. Without the quest givers, this has some problems. Two come to mind: 1. You will have Quest items not knowing what these quest items are stacking up in your Quest stash. You then have to click on villagers to find out who this quest item belongs to. You may be in the wrong town or map if there are city maps involved. 2. You are missing out on xp along your route and this may have problems with levelling up. You may be just off levelling up and going past an xp check point and not knowing about it, while another player will know about the xp check points and level up accordingly.

LOL. So you want to accuse posters of confirmation bias INSTEAD of talking about the actual thread topic. LMAO. And no. I'm not going to 'put up or shut up'. tsk tsk. I won't be alone in questioning Josh's design decisions which also include his preoccupation with degenerate gameplay.

I've played it but haven't really contributed anything to the WL2 forums. But I've found the game is fun. It's a shame that too much emphasis on balance and trying to remove degenerate gameplay was a focus (maybe not the main focus) with PoE imo. But I feel it could have been much better. Also, WL2 was put back a year to continue development which shows InXile really have gone above and beyond imo.