ImNotCreative

I had similar problems in POE1 and POE2 beta, the cause was telemetry and my bad internet connection (the problem occurred when there was heavy network activity). You should try disabling telemetry, that helped me.

Thanks for the reply

For example if i equip Shod-in-Faith and Nature's Embrace is one of the spell holding effects going to be supressed? If the answer is yes which one will be supressed? If the answer is no, how would they activate? Are both spells going to fire on the first crit?

I assume that complaints come from the fact that unique items should come from "unique" places, ie Sword of Awesome shouldn't be sold by a common blacksmith (because that way it is available to everybody with enough money) but be a weapon of legends that you found in the belly of a dragon. If that is the case I think that The Witcher 2 had a good solution for this, most unique weapons were crafted from the ingredients that you found by killing strong monsters (mainly bosses) but in order to craft them you had to pay a blacksmith to do it for you. I think that it takes best of both worlds, unique weapons became product of your adventures (they wouldn't be available to everybody who has money but only to heroes as yourself who can slay a dragon) and at the same time you have to save money for them and couldn't get them for free. Considering that crafting is going to be character skill in PE maybe the solution is that you buy expensive, but not legendary rare, crafting ingredients from merchants, for example a rare metal. So a good number of unique items will only be available through crafting by using unique ingredients that you find on your adventures mixed with expensive ingredients that you buy.

We've also got another 16,110 from four different websites donating. That would put us at 3,200,127 Which four websites?

I worded that poorly, he was interesting for video game antagonist (there are a lot better ones than him of course but, but video game antagonists tend to be pretty shallow) because he had a little more complex motives than "I want to destroy world because I'm that evil". Also everything that he did throughout game was within his character, why do you think that he didn't made sense?

You know, I always saw the blight in Dragon Age more as a force of nature than an antagonist. The real story wasn't the blight, it was about how people responded to the blight. And for that purpose it worked fine. I agree main antagonist in DA:O isn't archdemon, it's Loghain (and he is a very interesting antagonist if I may add). His agents are actively trying to stop you throughout the majority of the game, while on the other hand archdemon is, as you said, more like force of nature that puts events in to motion and don't intervene much after that.

This kind of reasoning (crit plot crit path and movieplot only omg!!) brought us the abomination of level scaling in the first place. The whole game is a set of plots and little stories. The critical path is only one of them. The player should reasonably expect that the critical path has some of the toughest combat encounters in the game. Why should designers accommodate a minority that is only interested in railroading themselves through the critical path (movie-style) ignoring the rest of the game, and ruin the experience for everyone else by introducing this nonsense? These critical path encounters won't be boring if, logically, they're some of the toughest fights in the game. You want to beat them? Stop crying, explore the world, train with your weapons and spells, find some powerful artifacts and then come back and deal with the big bads. Level scaling is not needed at all for them to not be boring.. what is needed is just some player/designer common sense. You should check you reading comprehension, I was talking about over leveling. From what you are saying I guess that only way you can deal with tough encounters is grind side quests and find +x equipment MMO stile. Don't worry you will be able to do that because level scaling is probably going to be limited. I've comprehended your BS just fine. Not that I'd miss anything intelligent if I hadn't. You, on the other hand, keep missing the point. Of course it's about leveling, you little pumpkin. Yes, the only way you can deal with tough encounters is... *drum roll* ... by getting stronger; leveling up. Who would have thought, right? And you level up and get stronger by.. *drum roll* .. completing quests and defeating enemies. If exploration in a non-linear quality RPG is "grinding" and a "MMO style" feature in your parallel universe... you'll probably enjoy DA2 a lot. And your last sentence shows how you fail at logic yet again. You'd be able to "grind" regardless of level scaling. And you keep misusing the word "grind": there won't be grinding in PE unless they don't have the common sense to not make enemies respawn over and over again. No, you didn't comprehended "my BS". I would try to explain it further but it is pointless since you resorted to insults. Why even bother with that reply? You wanted to show how hardcore and cool you are? Do you want to turn this forum in echo chamber that only repeats your ideas? Grow up, you accomplishes nothing with your snarky replies.

This kind of reasoning (crit plot crit path and movieplot only omg!!) brought us the abomination of level scaling in the first place. The whole game is a set of plots and little stories. The critical path is only one of them. The player should reasonably expect that the critical path has some of the toughest combat encounters in the game. Why should designers accommodate a minority that is only interested in railroading themselves through the critical path (movie-style) ignoring the rest of the game, and ruin the experience for everyone else by introducing this nonsense? These critical path encounters won't be boring if, logically, they're some of the toughest fights in the game. You want to beat them? Stop crying, explore the world, train with your weapons and spells, find some powerful artifacts and then come back and deal with the big bads. Level scaling is not needed at all for them to not be boring.. what is needed is just some player/designer common sense. You should check you reading comprehension, I was talking about over leveling. From what you are saying I guess that only way you can deal with tough encounters is grind side quests and find +x equipment MMO stile. Don't worry you will be able to do that because level scaling is probably going to be limited.

It's very simple, almost all players aren't going to do all side quests no matter how much of them are in the game, because they got bored, because of role playing or they don't find them all. Problem arises when there are a lot of side quests because different players will begin main quest at different level, and encounters without level scaling are interesting only if you approach them at certain level range otherwise they are either boring or impossible. Main quest is usually the best part of the game and it is really disappointing when part of it is boring to you because you are stomping everything on your way. I find this problem in a lot of games without any level scaling because I like doing side quests but I always have to be careful and from time to time complete main quests although I don't fell like it because I don't want to overlevel. Limited level scaling (within certain limits it doesn't have to scale exactly to your level nor below certain point) ensures that parts of the game on which developers spent most time remain challenging and interesting to all players and it enables you to complete as much side quests as you want (again within certain limits) without thinking if you have done too little or too much. Look at Fallout:NV for an example of good level scaling, I don't know why everybody thinks that the only way to implement level scaling is like in Oblivion.

Maybe they will give you the option of group sex. Would that satisfy you?

I think that it was more "Here comes the cooldown question again..."

Couldn't and elf be a human? Couldn't a human be a dwarf? Yes, yes and yes. Have you never role played an elf who is actually a human (race reassignment surgery) but thinks that he is dwarf?

The problem is how is the game going to recognize that you have fallen if it doesn't log some kind of "morality points"?

I disagree. Vehemently. Thanks for you extensive contribution to the conversation. And what was your special contribution to the conversation other than stating your personal opinion that class selection should only be mechanical? At least I explained my reasoning, maybe I wasn't clear enough. If you tie specific moral codex to a class you are limiting the number of roles that are possible to play. Edit: And btw they implied that they are going to separate those two from the beginning by dropping alignment. I didn't hear nobody complain then.

You're misrepresenting my posts, likely lumping me in together with other posters. I'm not dead set on the existence of a mechanical class in order to provide for a roleplaying niche. As far as roleplaying is concerned, I'd be perfectly happy to play a fighter in a knightly order for the same roleplaying (though not a temple soldier, because those are substantially different from each other). But mechanically, you could make as strong an argument for paladins as you could for barbarians, to cherry pick one of the specialist classes. The barbarian is traditionally identical to the fighter except for two key differences. They wear lighter armor, and they use rage mechanics. These two things by themselves can, and have, been folded into the standard warrior class in other rpgs. To justify a barbarian as a separate class, certain things get thumb-sucked that have novelty but aren't terribly meaningful; fast movement, uncanny dodge, and other small gimmicky things. Paladins traditionally differ from warriors and priests in at least as many mechanical respects as barbarians do from warriors. They aren't the pure melee specialists that fighters are, nor are they the defensive support spell-casters that priests generally are. Paladins traditionally sacrifice these things in exchange for the unique mechanics of passive auras, passive immunities, weapon blessings, and the like. If light armor and rage mechanics are enough to contrive an entire class for barbarian that is distinct from the fighter, an argument can definitely be made that passive immunities, auras, and weapon blessings are just as much cause to contrive a distinct class for the paladin. The roleplaying justification and the mechanical justification are separate though. If you are asking for specific mechanic that's another story and I apologize. But how can you speak about differentiates between classes when we know so little? This isn't DND based game and I hope that they are going to make Barbarian significantly different from Fighter. I want to roleplay a lot role playing options and because of that I think that it is a bad decision to tie such a specific moral code to a class choice.

I disagree. Vehemently. Thanks for you extensive contribution to the conversation.

Which is the new D&D interpretation of the paladin, certainly, but this sort of Divine Champion mold caters to a different roleplaying niche than the traditional paladin. The archetypical barbarian is as close to the warrior or the rogue as the archetypical paladin is to the priest. In terms of roleplaying archetypes, it is easy enough to fold the barbarian into the fighter, the ranger into the rogue, the psion into the mage, and the monk into the priest because the concepts only differ in a few key ways that can be internalized as specializations. Tradition has built them into classes of their own, alongside the paladin, and identified them with specific roleplaying niches. It is just weird to see some of those archetypes resurrected, like the monk and the even more obscure psion, while the paladin is engulfed by the priest. Personally I'd be content with being able to join a knightly order, but I'm a bit baffled by which classes were kept and which were thrown out. You are missing the point, those "specialized" classes are chosen because they have different mechanics (at least I hope so). Nothing is forcing you to a specific role when you chose a class and because of that there shouldn't be a paladin class. They got rid of the alignment precisely because of that, your role (personality and motivations of your character) should be determined by the way you interact with the world not by a choice of class. You are constantly arguing for paladin because of role playing while only good argument for a class should be mechanical.

This is really ridiculous, do you guys remember why this games was such a big deal when it was announced? It was because it is being made by Chris Avellone, Tim Cain, and Josh Sawyer. You know the guys that made all those great games that are still being played more than a decade after they were released. Do you really think that this is the first time they are dealing with player feedback? Do you honestly believe that they don't know that this game is going to be terrible (this is an understatement) if they just put everything in it that is demanded on this (or any other) forum. Are you going to make "Data structures and algorithms" topic for their engineers now?

Don't forget to vote (up and down) for good/bad questions so that the best ones climb to the top. There are a lot of varied questions out there and it would be a shame if some of the boring ones made it to the top 5.

OK my mistake I looked at it purely from mechanical standpoint. May I suggest a fancy animation or just a loading screen instead of fast forward (map traveling would remain the same) because it could be implemented easier and adds more to immersion IMO but this is a matter of preference.

What's the difference between this and being able to rest anywhere with the limitation of min 8h between rests and with the possibility to be interrupted? There is absolutely none, both systems achieve the same thing yours just adds a little more in game time which is irrelevant.

...'cept that restin' after e'ery fight didna always work; got interrupted a fair bit...am not sayin' mechanics was perfect, but interruptin' rest works fine ta stop those that abuses it...an' really, only thing peoples is doin' abusin' the rest function be takin' the fun away from theysselves, an' if'n peoples is gonna powergame, theys gonna find a way ta do it...sad, but true... ...WHO LUVS YA, BABY!!... You could always run to a safe place losing only time.

But maybe time could be a resource. Otherwise I agree, excellent pointers. However, I also think that a game which even gives you the option to create self imposing challenges are great design. Yes I worded it poorly, what I wanted to say is that it is bad that you basically had to ignore a mechanic to fully enjoy the game. Self imposed challenges are great, but if most people have to make them in order to enjoy than why aren't they part of the design in the first place.

Abusing the rest feature isn't strategic mastery. it's just ruining the fun for yourself. The most enjoyable way to play those games was to try to survive as long as possible before resting. What is fun and what isn't is highly subjective and not part of the rules so you can't take it in to consideration when determining optimal strategy. The fact that optimal solution isn't the most enjoyable (or even enjoyable at all) is the point of my post.