Mr. Magniloquent

I'm actually quite fond of the spell effects. They are a vibrant breath of life into a realistic, but static world. I find them attractive without being obstructive. Some of them certainly require debugging, but it's clear how they are intended to look. Character creation is much improved. The amount of information provided in each talent, spell, and ability is deeply welcomed. Combat is more lethal than before, but I haven't spent enough time to fully understand why. I've just begun dipping my toes into this update, but at a glance most everything appears to be improved in general.

I haven't had any of those issues. Slightly increased loads times I suppose, but the game has been stable for me every patch thus far.

I have a feeling that they don't scale because the higher level spells are just the scaled spells of lower level. Need to check though. I believe they are, but why not scale them instead of making a new spell / name? I was wondering if anyone knew why the devs took that route. All very good questions. Nobody really knows. I thought is that since they intended spells to graduate to per encounter/at will frequency, that spells did not need scaling. That's just me reaching for an answer though. Not scaling spells sure increases their work-load and dilutes the identity of spells. Lots of redundancy pushing out resources that could have made a more robust and unique selection. Games like the 13th Age and D&D 5th edition have only one spell, but that it scales in power according to the level of the spell slot used to memorize it. Example: Lvl 1 Charm behaves as an ordinary level 1 Charm. Charm memorized in a level 9 slot functions as Mass Dominate Monster, but is referred to as a lvl 9 Charm. That approach, along with a spell point system could really save PoE spell casting. I was working on a proposal for these very things. I've created a meticulous excel file chalk full of pivot tables for on-the-fly balancing, I just haven't had the time to draft up the actual proposal piece yet. Adulthood and all of that. I digress. Spell points and spell scaling. PoE needs them. The good news is, a functioning spell point system already exists--they just need to get more work out of it!

Ubiquitous DT is a major accounting nightmare. I've been trying to find some systemic way to deal with it, but haven't found a good solution other than operating on an assumed average of DT being omnipresent. At least as pertains to spell quantity and damage, I've sent some pivot tables over to Matt with regards to rebalancing the wizard. I can send them to you as well if you'd like.

No, they shall not. The most complex spells you will likely see for the wizard class are those questionably conceived spells where the wizard changes places with an enemy. Not likely. Mr. Sawyer resents what makes D&D wizards unique and interesting. Thus, he is resolved to make PoE wizards mechanically MMO-esque in spell variety. Count on it. It will likely be one of the first major mods created after release.

Thank you for the update. I also want to extend my compliments and Obsidian's decision to extend development. I am in agreement that it was the right choice. I'm happy to see that Obsidian understands the gravity of this product and have committed even further. I'd also like to say that while I may be among those that disproportionately extend critical skepticism, that I do enjoy the game even in its current incarnation. Every update has been a significant improvement, and I have no reason to expect anything else from your company (that's why I backed). You guys are forging the keel of a gaming renaissance! Hats off to you!

I played consoles at friend's homes, but never owned one of my own. Mostly SNES games, that sort of thing. Things didn't really pick up for me until I was nine and fixed up my dad's old x386....complete with turbo button. First it was the old "gold box games", like Dark Queen of Krynn. A few years later I acquired a broken AST which I then fixed up and moved into the big leagues with games like Betrayal at Krondor and Mechwarrior 2. Having already been bitten, my fate was sealed with the releases of Starcraft, Diablo, Age of Empires, and Baldur's Gate. There was no turning back. Oh yeah. Recently 27.

E.C.L. Effective Character Level. This was solved over a decade ago. Read.

I play in the maximum resolution possible, and I find the game to look its best when zoomed in to the greatest degree PoE permits. I do not feel greater zooming is necessary. This is a feature that I am very happy with. I acknowledge that this is an opinion. If you're having problems, it's probably because you're playing on a 60" television with a game developed exclusively for PC hardware.

Give experience for every marginal action, but temper it with ECL. This problem has already been solved for us people.

I beg to differ. The fact that they only allow checks against your PC's stats/skills in dialogues suggests that, at the very least, it's intended for you to have to play through the game as several different characters just to experience all the various dialogue options/quest brances, etc. I agree with SymbolicFrank on this point. It's a distinction where you can define the "Golden Age" RPGs of the mid-late 1990s from their successors in the 2000s. A game responding realistically to choice through in game ramifications is different than explicitly deciding on whether an NPC companion lives or dies by how well you have befriended them. Designing "replayability" is very different from designing a game world which reacts in a rational manner to player actions. I don't believe PoE has the intention of inventing false/arbitrary choices for the player to rehash the game with.

I am sympathetic to the points of the OP. I do not generally like grouped specializations, and I do find myself recoiling a bit when forced to choose amongst them in the PoE beta. The way I try and overcome my intuitive and emotional barrier, is that I get to specialize in whatever specific weapon I please, whilst getting many alternatives bundled as a purely additive bonus.

Towards pacing, the only thing Baldur's Gate 2 needed was an ECL system. The deluge of quests in Act II were there as a means of acquiring gold to resume the principle plot (in addition to their own enjoyment). You do not need all of these quests to gather the requisite gold--not by far. Due to the inner completionist within us all though, most everyone does all of the quests not merely for the enjoyment, but to avoid missing out on experience/power. If Baldur's Gate 2 had an ECL system, players would have been passively shuffled towards the main plot after completing so many quests regardless of which quests they had pursued. From a narrative standpoint, it moderates extremes in player choice with respect to urgency while not explicitly forcing the player to do anything. From a development standpoint, this has a balancing effect by reducing the expected range of character levels arriving at the next plot portion regardless of if the player rush towards it or drags their feet. ECL is where it's at. Learn it, use it, love it.

That's exactly what I wanted to know. Thank you!

Sigh. I held the understanding that spells could not miss on a roll--that the Graze was merely adjusted from 45% (base) to 50%. This has a significant impact on my calculations, as they are very fastidious. Ugh. I've noticed that base saves (Fortitude, Reflex, Will) are 30 for all classes in addition to attribute bonuses. I'm not sure why they've done that as it does not reflect how each class starts with an inherent preference/role. It certainly slants things against anyone using an ability that's for sure. I haven't quite figured out the bonuses provided by attributes, as they are not linear. Rolling new character and adjusting values to see resulting bonuses quickly becomes tedious. As for secondary effects, are you saying that those only pertain to duration? The wording made me think that for a spell which has multiple effects (-10 Will, 20sec. Daze), that those conditions were applied under separate criteria. If the "additional effect" prompt regards only duration (graze/hit/crit), then it makes more sense.

I've noticed that many spells are actually missing their target, rather than grazing at minimum. Is this behavior intentional? Can you elaborate on spells which have a primary and secondary effects? More specifically, how they are applied. I would be grateful. I was able to capture a screen shot of both in one single spell. Thank you! *Edit: Attached wrong SS

Yep! The last patch was an improvement (Sensuki won't agree, though ) for that map. Personally, I'd still remove one or two encounters more. Those shambling hulks feels very out of place, for instance. The shambling hulks do feel a bit oddly tucked into the map. When I was replying I immediately thought of them as they do feel out of place. I didn't mention them because they are tucked away, rather than thrown in your face like the beetles. What might be better would be to remove the shamblers and then move that corpse closer to the immature drakes to give them a bit more purpose.

Valley of Tombs in BG1 was a superbly created area. It was large with many things to explore and had several unique encounters which were engaging and challenging. Some of the trash mods on that map weren't really necessary, but combat in BG1 was much easier and less demanding so it wasn't too much of a bother. Right now I'm fairly satisfied with the map populations in PoE--especially with the beetle revisions. Those felt like a chore. Particularly like the guy who wants to sell you the "Gem of True Seeing" for around 2,000gp--but it's actually just an ordinary gem worth maybe 50gp! Stuff like that is awesome. Storm of Zehir had many encounters similar in nature to this, and it was a very wonderful aspect of that game. I really hope that they will do more of that in PoE.

Most certainly not! That would add an arbitrary ad hoc rule. The ideal is a system where all wheels rotate in harmony, not one that relies on exceptions to the rules to function. The root here is how combat begins--particularly as concerns LoS. Baring stealth, enemies should engage on sight. If the player can see enemies without the use of stealth or spell/abilities yet the enemy does attack....then you have a LoS problem. Simple as that. So long as LoS is functioning correctly and classes are balanced, pre-buffing is not an encounter design conundrum, it's a player preference. I'm confident that once both of those are solved for PoE, arbitrary restrictions on what spells can be cast when and where shall be removed.

I don't vote in most polls like this because even when a poll isn't inherently skewed, people use the results to represent whatever they want, regardless of my intentions. *Edited for gross typos.

Thank you for the correction. *Edit I don't see any accuracy bonus for spells which do not inflict damage though, like Arduous Delay of Motion, etc. Also, it looks like they chanced the wiki page and are no longer listing the spells. I can't help but feel responsible. lol

That these spells target different defensive stats isn't important. All defenses increase uniformly and linearly for all character classes each level. Some will start with higher Reflexes, whilst others will start with higher Deflection. Yes, in v301 Crackling Bolt actually does 30-50 base damage, and Jolting Touch does 55-75 base damage to the initial target and 41-56 to two secondary targets. Jolting touch does an average of 65 damage to one, then 48.5 damage to two foes with at +15% chance to hit and critical with no harm of friendly damage. Contrast Crackling Bolt which is 2 levels higher, but does an average of 40 damage to 5 targets, with 5% less accuracy bonus, while incurring friendly fire damage. It's a very dubious claim to assert Crackling bolt is the better spell--especially for one two entire tiers higher. What is important, is that Jolting Touch vs. Crackling Bolt is more broadly representative of how many spells lack intuitive or logical progression. Consider the average damages of Fan of Flames, Rolling Flame, and Fireball. Each are respectively level 1, 2, and 3 spells. Each does a respective average damage of 52.5 (FoF), 25 (RF), and 42.5 (FB). The 1st level spell, Fan of Flames not only does more damage, but has twice the AoE as Fireball (Base 5m vs Base 2.5m)! Examples of this abound for just about every spell parameter. It's the major inconsistency that's the problem. There is no predictable behavior nor established power level with increases in spell level. This is important, because the Wizard, Druid, and Priest classes are more or less the sum of their spells.

You raise many good points that I have kept in mind. I've balanced damage ranges to be more in line with 3rd Edition D&D. This is reasonable, considering that PoE endurance values are even higher than 3 Ed. D&D, which had basically doubled from 2nd Edition. Balancing accuracy and durations are a more delicate matter with the potential for critical hits, but not horrendous. I believe the biggest problem is convincing Mr. Sawyer that the wizard should have the most potent offensive output, as their resource is both the most scarce with the greatest potential for failure. As for Wizards being an omniclass...that's not really a concern considering every class has roughly the same potential with the skill/attribute/proficiency system in PoE.

Certainly true. Why this accuracy bonus is only applied to damaging spells is unknown, as debuffs are also reliant on accuracy. What accuracy bonuses do exist are seemingly random and have no logical consistency. The same applies to damage and durations. Contrast: Jolting Touch Level 1 Foe only +15 Accuracy Bonus 30-40 Damage Crackling Bolt Level 3 Friend and Foe +10 Accuracy Bonus 39-65 Damage A very similar spell that is 2 spell levels greater only does about 33% (average) more damage, is 5% more likely to graze, 5% less likely to critically hit, and has the risk and bother of friendly fire. The notion is that spells improve with level. The improvement of this spell is very debatable. Put into the context that Endurance/Hit Point values have doubled by the time a wizard has access to Crackling Bolt, that poor spell comes up even worse. Comparisons truly become painful when comparing these two spells to the level 2 spell Ray of Fire and the level 3 spell Fireball. The interesting thing about all of these horrible spells, is that Jolting Touch is the most appropriately powered/balanced to its level. The greater spell system and spells are a total mess. If it were a balancing issue only, I'd be ecstatic; however, it's the near total absence of logical consistency and general ad hoc nature of each spell that unnerves me.