Mr. Magniloquent

I haven't had too much trouble with this. It's certainly one value of having Pallegina on your time. Between her and Durance, any bad effects get suppressed for either longer than the actual debuff or until combat concludes.

At first I thought 5th edition D&D would be easy to translate to a CRPG, but when I think about it, it might actually be fairly difficult. While 5th editions mechanics are overall much more elegant and fluid than other editions, many of the "simplifications" it introduces would be difficult to translate. Reactions, many wizard class features, bard & rogue dice roll modifications, and more. It would by necessity have to be turn-based, but even then, imperfectly translated at best I think.

I use this on my PC Cipher and Grieving Mother. Each picks a VIP to Mental Bind, then uses Envenomed Strike with their unique blunderbusses to both KO that enemy and front-load an entire battle worth of focus.

In the beta I let them carry out their plans as I had no option to save the girl. Provided that option, I undid the curse, butchered the Skaenites, sent her to the temple, and killed Harrond.

I'm imaging that your greater connection to DA:O's character's was a combination of your 3D preference, massive budget, and 100% voice acting. As to setting, PoE is far richer than DA:O, which was just LOTR lite. My only complaint with PoE's setting and lore would be that much of it feels too reactionary. It's basically not-D&D. Arcanum did a significantly better job of creating a unique, yet in many ways, familiar fantasy world. They should have started with Arcanum's world as a template and incorporated all the soul bits. That would have been much better.

Tough call. While I enjoy Aloth's disorder, he is mostly silent and a wizard to boot--making him so much baggage. Pallegina has a place in my party because of her class, but her personality is as others have noted, mostly lore exposition. Kana Rua annoys me, but I can't tell why. He's supposed to be like a scholarly, jovial, bear, but I just don't appreciate anything he has to say. Despite configuring him to be as supportive as possible, he regularly gets KOed--more so than all of my other characters combined. I couldn't tell you why. I guess if this poll is only in context to personality, Kana Rua is the one I enjoy the least.

So we agree on con, might and int here I was thinking that since wizard has low deflect to start, but, has good deflect spells - then buffing deflection for the times you cant avoid melee is good. At least more useful than con since you wont have high health anyway. How would you distribute your stats for a melee combat wizard which uses minimal DD spells? I wouldn't. If you want your wizard to go into melee, my stat priority would not change. This is because I would let them only use reach weapons and hide behind Eder. They posses nothing making them capable of being front-line for more than one fight against trash/intermediate mobs. Wizard buffs are terrible and not adequate nor efficient to rely on. Int, Might, Dex, Con, Res, Per. That order, no matter the use.

I keep my Ciphers, Druids, and Wizards in padded armor. No DR is a bit too risky, but high quality padded does a nice job of taking the worst of any ranged attacks or melee that rarely slips by. When my clerics are using reach weapons, they stay in high quality padded armor as well. Recovery time is essential for these classes.

Perception is a better dump stat, as Wizards have next to no interrupt potential. I don't find Resolve useful, as your wizard should never be anywhere near the action. Teleporting monsters can sometimes be a problem, but shouldn't due to scouting and poor AI. Constitution is unimportant for the same reasons. I prefer Dexterity over those other three stats, because when I need or want my wizard to act, I need it to act right now. Dexterity will also be a long term investment for when your spells become per encounter. My wizard priorities: Intellect Might Dexterity Constitution Resolve Perception

Spells per day is an excellent mechanic when the spells are powerful and varied. By virtue of being highly conserved, it's permissible to let loose the magic and watch it go. We got neither variation nor power, just the rest mechanic. Ironically, the caster with the best spells (Cipher), can have them flow almost relentlessly. Hopefully the will eliminate the MMO class design and D&D reactionism for PoE 2. I wouldn't hope for much change until then.

I am in general agreement with the OP. However, I have surrendered the fight due to: or perhaps The wizard class is the sword I very vocally fell upon well before and all throughout the beta. You will not get the wizard you know and appreciate because of Mr. Sawyer. Wizards shall not surpass or match any other class in any manner.They shall not have utility spells. They shall not summon. They shall not dominate/charm. They shall not protect others. They shall not single target. They shall not have powerful self protections. So sayeth Mr. Sawyer. Wizards shall only perform AoE debuff and damage, as it was in the MMO. Amen. Just another aspect of the Wizard being reduced to ash, and its qualities scattered across other classes. See bullet 1 & 2 for more. See bullet 1. Ciphers are Mr. Sawyer's pet class to the detriment of the Wizard class. Here is to hoping they'll do some radical rethinking in PoE 2. With the class design, remedy will not come before then--expansion or otherwise.

The game is much better than what I expected given what I had experienced in the beta. I am not referring to bugs. The game still disappoints for the same reasons that the beta disappointed. I have quite far to go before finishing this game, but from what I have seen I do no expect my present opinion to change. Overall, I'm positive about PoE, but unenthusiastically.

Mental Binding is essential. Get it.

PoE will be a monster to tune correctly. The soft-counter approach coupled with "no bad builds" turns PoE in to a highly complex multi-variable calculus problem where only one thing can be determined at a time. That they also upped the complexity of some aspects since this game doesn't need to be coordinated by a DM makes it all the more difficult. It's too bad modding is so prohibitive for this game. That was about the only hope of it being solved.

This is one fight where I actually used per-rest spells, but didn't ultimately have much fuss. "Tank & Spank" still applies here, but you'll have a much easier time if you focus on keeping the Ogre out of the fight. Once he drops, there isn't much to fuss about. My party was level 5 at the time.

I completed the dungeon with Eder, Aloth, and my Cipher on normal my first attempt. Most of the shades can be engaged 1-2 at a time. The most important thing is to have heavier armor on your casters and stay close to Eder's back. For some rooms, you will need to utilize the doorway. Outside of your PC also being a wizard, this dungeon shouldn't be that difficult.

If you want a laugh, have a Cipher (or two!) cast Ectoplasmic Echo on the ranger's wolf pet, then run it back and forth around the safe periphery of the combat. Talk about melting faces.

My mistake.

If PoE used hard-counters, which it should, the entire game would have to be redesigned (for the better). I don't think every enemy needs a hard-counter, or that hard-counter means "only one solution". The total revocation of hard-counters was a much criticized mistake though, and combat suffers a tedious familiarity for it. I'm still in Act 1, but I don't feel too constrained. Another class? I do not understand this in the slightest. There are already too many classes within PoE. Each one is a fragmented shadow of what people regard and love of these classes. What exactly are you looking for? I have only passing experience with the stronghold thus far. Even with extremely high security proportionate to prestige, I still manage to get all but 15 coppers stolen every cycle. For the money invested, that certainly doesn't bode well.

That is fortunate for me, since it's exactly how I feel. No matter how tactical or deep D&D was supposed to be, combat in Baldur's Gate was a mixed bag, and an outright chore in BG2 as soon as a mage or something that was arbitrarily immune to +X weapons or less showed up. I much prefer PoE's combat, even if it has its flaws. A focus on positioning is right up my alley, and tough fights do force you to react or come up with strategies. Obsidian should probably have added more spell-using enemies and varied up some encounters, but compared to the mess that was BG2 I'd much rather play that. Ugh. Having a dragon be immune to +1 weapons and lower is no more arbitrary than a stone beetle with high slashing resistance. It's all justified by a combination of lore and creature design. There were dozens of very easy ways to kill mages in BG2--especially if you were playing vanilla BG. Frankly, I don't think you would have enjoyed PoE using more spell casting enemies. With its soft-counter design, there is no effective means of defending against spells. Mitigate, perhaps, but not defend. An enemy part with a heavy spell casting component would probably steam roll most players, even with the nearly absent AI. The combat in PoE isn't awful, but it's nothing compared to the IE games. The fluidity, back-and-forth counters, and dynamics are totally absent. Stealth, position, slaughter. For those of you who don't like to use stealth; position, attack, wait. Maybe toss in an occasional suppress affliction or consecrate. With the absence of hard counters, how engagement is handled, and the attack roll dynamics, most battles are very much the same. I am having a decent time thus far, but there is little variation, and it is quickly becoming clear to me how my first play through might be my only play through. I had four members get into frequent disagreements. Eventually one such argument came to an impasse, and they slaughtered each other (beyond my control). BG1 NPCs were far from devoid of character.

I can understand why you might perceive me that way. I am passionate about this, but I also make a point to speak in basic and unambiguous terms (invoking, oppression, theft, murder) to cut to the root. First, one cannot remove their participation from The State. If I and a group of others were to hypothetically homestead wilderness, we would be fine until we were discovered. Once discovered, we'd be taxed under threat of violence and likely fined for not abiding by that territory's authority (building permits, etc.). The situation would then be binary. Fight for freedom and potentially die, or submit and be yoked. This cannot be argued. Second, I do not believe The State keeps evil people restrained. For the most part, it gives them employment. That employment also gives them power to organize and propel society towards degrees of destruction and atrocity that would never be possible if people had to freely unite and pool scarce resources to commit. Governments give us tanks, hydrogen bombs, chemical weapons, etc. These things are wildly impractical, expensive, dangerous to produce, and provide absolutely no productive value. There is absolutely no incentive to develop these kinds of devices outside of State violence. No doubt there might be some turf wars or family blood feuds, but these are trivial in comparison to scale of wars and destruction that only a State can engender.

A NWN type game does not play to Obsidian's strengths. Such a thing with an editor needs to be ruthlessly bug-free, resource efficient, and multiplayer. These three things are actually Obsidian's weakest points. Obsidian is a better story teller, NPC creator, and putting a spin on otherwise worn-out tropes. Games like PoE is exactly where they need to keep their focus.

Absolutely. There was a small, but incredibly well done persistent world server for NWN1 called Montlethia. The interactive roleplaying experience there was almost indescribable. After a bad experience, I rolled a cleric of Talos and went full darkside. My villain became so notorious for extortion, chaos, and mayhem, that the DMs made one of the port towns hostile to me. That town's guard even had an official quest with journal entries and everything where they were to hunt me down and bounty my ears. One day I got caught by a group of Tyrians (my mortal adversaries) alone deep in a dangerous part of the woods. I even used my special unique ring given to me by the DMs that could change the weather, but there were too many of them and my reign of terror was brought to an end--not before taking several of them with me of course. The paladin that turned in my ears even refused the kingly bounty...how disgusting is that? Hahaha. Such good times.

I do not think that an anarchistic society would be a utopia. I recognize that evil exists, and shall persist indefinitely. It is my belief that there are better ways to deal with human nature and societal complexity. My main grievances are thus: Distilled to logical conclusion, compulsory government is immoral; and therefore can never ultimately do good. The State does more to foster and insure evil than such a structure can possible prevent or mitigate. The State actually fosters significantly worse harm on a catastrophically greater scope than would ever exist otherwise. The State prevents people, both directly and indirectly from pursuing more realistic, practical, and effective solutions. It's not that I think I am perfect, or that other humans are. I do believe that The State prevents humans from becoming better people though. Much like dogma and superstition are the underdeveloped person's substitution for philosophy, The State is the religious cognitive dissonance of those not yet brave enough to acknowledge history and human nature. Edited for clarity.

During the beta I preferred dual wielding stilettos, but I have joined the firearms camp. This is large in part because of the change with perception. Now instead of Orlan, I use a Wild Elf. I also have Grieving Mother, so I have one of them cast Mental Binding before both my ciphers fire a volley to reap a massive amount of power--not to mention instagib that poor soul. Hunting Bow takes over from there.