Varana

I think that the main issue here is the Dozens quest, which is by no means explicit. Regarding your earlier post: The alternative view, though, is that the Dozens do provide you with access to the President even if they know perfectly well that you just went to their enemies and tried to betray them. "You talked to the Dozens, now we don't trust you any more" is nice, if it weren't in complete contrast to how the Dozens continued to trust you with representing their side in front of the Duc in spite of you trying to talk to the Knights. In my game, I went with the Dozens out of necessity and completely betrayed their interests in the animancy hearing. If anyone had paid attention, that would've come as no surprise to anyone. But since the game shoehorned me into their side and didn't let go, that was what followed. Maybe the fallback access from Lady Webb should be made more accessible, or, well, Wenan could state his intentions a little bit more explicit.

And confusing the target AI exploits its shortcomings because it was not the focus of development. Seriously, I can read BG2 attack scripts, and I'm by no means an expert in AI programming (or programming at all). I can write (or could, a few years back) BG2 attack scripts at a similar level than the original ones. There is nothing special about BG2 AI. Its basic modus operandi is "if I see my attacker, attack him; if I haven't used my one special ability yet, use it; throw in a random chance to do nothing; re-evaluate attack target".

The main conflict in the end is precisely that: Do you trust people enough that they will continue to hold up your ideals (e.g. what Eothas represented) because they (ideals as well as people) are inherently good and will do so out of general decency? Or don't you and think that the Engwithan god-machines are necessary to force Eothas' ideals on people? That the gods did not create the world is quite a common trope both in Fantasy and real life (in many stories, Zeus did not create the world). Being the creator is not necessary to be divine. What PoE does is this: We have a people (the Engwithans) who devoted their culture to finding "scientific" proof of god(s). They didn't. (You could argue that it mirrors our own world in that respect. I am Christian, but I believe that it is fundamentally impossible to prove God scientifically.) Iovara's words don't say anything whether a god actually exists. They just state that the Engwithans didn't find one and concluded that either there was none, or that they had departed. And considering the basic problems in proving the non-existence of something, that does not really inspire trust in their methods. But as they thought gods (or better, personifications of principles with the task of a moral police) to be necessary for the well-being of kith, they built some. So we don't know whether there are gods in Eora. We can be fairly sure that they can't be proven to exist. And we are sure that whoever created this world, it was not the gods of Engwithan religion.

Edit: Delete.

First of all: The Hireling prices are broken. You don't pay them per day, you pay them even less. (Week, I think.) Second: Oh sure, they thought about that. But they didn't think how to build a realistic economy. They thought about how much loot you get, at which price you will be able to sell that, and in light of this, how much money they want to drain from your resources in exchange for which buff. Resting at an inn is a valuable thing for you because it refills your health and spells and can give you bonuses. Therefore, it is expensive. You will probably get hundreds of Xaurip spears: they have to be quite cheap. You cannot raise attributes in this game, but they are important - everything that raises an attribute is therefore valuable and expensive. Your stronghold hirelings aren't really useful which means that they're rather cheap. That is the reasoning behind the economy. It has nothing to do with a "real" economy and everything with resource management. Now, it's entirely up to you whether you find that appropriate. But it is not lack of thought, it is a completely different way of looking at things.

Ah - yes, that was very murky to me, as well, and I also had to put the pieces together after the fact.

You kill the companion for real, for a permanent stat gain.

I don't know how long Kana was in your party, but apparently, you've missed out on some of the flavour dialogue explaining his quest. Basically, he travelled all around the world following the tracks of that Engwithan mage and thought of him as a wise and benevolent scholar because he had found that Gabrannos apparently had written some lines that happened to be in his culture's Holy Book. So he was convinced that the Engwithans (and Gabrannos in particular) were all great guys all around - and that view got a bit shattered when he met "real" Gabrannos and his remains.

Yes, I did as well. Go level some more. Level 9 is quite low to take on the ogre bounty or Undead Raedric, specifically. I tried Raedric at 10 and went under and returned just before the end at level 12, at which point it was doable. Well, I'm sure it's possible quite earlier, but if you're getting stomped, come back later. Proceed to Twin Elms and do some of the quests there which don't include fighting Dragons and whole ogre tribes.

Because there is no reason why this should be a consequence of our action, and why there should not be a way to change course until after a certain point. The consequence does not follow logically (or even plausibly) from the action. The game offers a lot of freedom and opportunities to do unintended stuff. Like how they thought about what to do if we slaughter everyone in the caravan in the prologue. Until now, I've found out three different ways for Calisca to die (plus getting her killed in combat or doing that myself), and there's probably more. The contrast to this quest line is so jarring. It's not a choice and then a consequence, it's the game preventing us from completely logical actions. Like making amends with the Crucible Knights by demonstrating that we're most definitely not in league with the Dozens. Shouldn't that be possible? Staying with that example: Wenan (not only a member of the Dozens but also the one who runs an expedition kickstarter) recruits us for an expedition. The Knights might not like that - but my character screen tells me that my standing with the Knights is "Good" or "Hero" or whatever (can check later). At that point, I was simply "Moderate" with the Dozens, i.e. I had better relations with the Knights. It stays the same after accepting and even finishing the quest! Why should I prefer one information over the other? And how should I know which one the game expects me to believe? We get to the other party and they tell us that Knights guard the entrance to Lle a Rhemen. We proceed to kill them (the party, not the Knights). If we return at that point, we are chums with the Knights, killed some Dozens, prevented their expedition, in fact: everything went just great for the Knights. Why exactly is that a reason for the Knights to believe that we're not on their side? That doesn't compute. It's not that consequences should always be spelt out. It's that this particular consequence does not in any way follow from our actions - and if that happens, it would be nice to give a hint. "Dear player, we know it doesn't make any sense, but please be informed that if you do X, Y will happen."

What exactly do you mean by "Perception and Resolve are rock-bottom"? I think, however, that you're approaching the issue from a somewhat unrealistic (if that can be said) angle. Your Korgan is not a hardened veteran of many battles. Your Korgan starts as a level-1-character. He will become a veteran. Setting some attributes to what you would find appropriate for a character who lived through BG2 (which started, in fact, at a relatively high level), is a strange way to create a character. You can do this, but you will sacrifice other aspects along the way, which essentially (should!) bring down your character back to what he is: a level 1 freshman. Attributes of 10 are obviously considered somewhat average. I'm not going to calculate how much you had to lower the "dump stats" for your attributes, but I get the strong impression that you didn't create a "character". You created an assortment of attribute values that seemed to fit your preconceived notion of what these numbers should express, without much regard whether they actually do that in this rule set. Part of what makes fantasy worlds fascinating is how they recombine our imagination and twist it - sometimes less so, sometimes more. Ghouls in this game are not simply ghouls, they're PoE ghouls. They are ghoulish enough to be called so but how strong they are or what they#re doing to your character, is entirely up to the game. Whether Korgan should plough through small mushrooms depends entirely on how PoE chooses to depict those mushrooms, nothing else. If they're dangerous in this world to someone like him, he won't be able to one-hit them. That said, I don't deny that there are aspects to the combat system that could be better or don't make much sense. It seems to me, though, as if the specific issue here are not the details of combat mechanics but the way of looking at the game, in general.

Is it coincidence that the personal quest of both of Avellone's characters basically consist of loads of talking? Answer: No.

You list "overpowered at higher levels" as a con but your suggestions don't try to remedy that except for weakening Petrify somewhat; instead they'd lead to even better wizards at high levels. I would certainly agree with most of what you've written - wizards are quite useful, they just deviate a bit from the standard "walking rocket launcher" variety. They even inherited the somewhat uneven progression e.g. of DnD wizards - very weak in the beginning but getting exponentially stronger. I wouldn't exactly say that they're "overpowered" even at high levels, esp. compared to some other classes, but they can hold their own. The wizard's buffs - I found them highly useless, as well. My wizard was not made for melee, but if someone attacked him in melee, I usually didn't bother to buff him but opted for taking out the attacker, instead. If cast on party members, some buffs would be quite overpowered, though. They're quite strong but balanced by being restricted to characters that don't really gain much from them. Cast on other classes, the synergy effects would be quite strong. My main beef with Fan of Flames is its friendly fire area of effect. Either my wizard stands in the front to cast it - which I don't want to happen. Or he hits my front line - which is equally stupid. Or I have to maneuvre him around quite a bit - which is tedious and prevents him from doing other useful stuff. I'm not saying that that should be changed, I just think that FoF does have its drawbacks. (Which doesn't explain why it's better than most other cone spells, sure.)

Nein - einige sind auch auf Deutsch*, Finnisch, Latein, Koreanisch und vermutlich noch ein paar anderen Sprachen. Die haben einfach reingesetzt, was die Backer ihnen geschickt haben, egal ob das einer kapiert oder nicht. Das sollte man wirklich so lassen. * Danke an den Backer, der "Esst mehr Käsetoast!" geschrieben hat. :D

Almost always the three rows to two formation: Main Paladin + Edér (front line) Aloth + Durance (keep Aloth alive, let him go to the front and back to position fast, and put Durance in the centre for the buff auras) Grieving Mother + Kana (with Kana as off tank should someone come from behind) All other formations either didn't offer enough advantages or were of little use in narrow walkways.

It's also not only a secret spy organisation. Its outside face is a kind of detective agency or criminal investigation bureau, and that part of Dunryd Row works in the open.

Dear zered, Congratulations. You qualify for our Cartoonish Villains in Movies and Videogames program. You will receive your standard black armour with useless spikes and excessive skulls momentarily. Your new job involves the responsible position of laughing maniacally while waiting to be killed by the hero. We're looking forward to hearing of your inevitable demise. - Evil Overlords for Hire Inc.

Every companion has exactly one personal quest, though they're not really extensive. Otherwise, you mostly miss out on some comments and party banter.

If you come from the left, proceed further east until you get to fight a second pack of Spotted Stelgaers. After you've taken them down, combat ends. If you come from the right you've already killed them.

Also, Chromatic Orb. Damage was kind of negligible (although there was no save against it), but the side effects became rather astonishing later on, up to enemies being petrified or insta-killed.

I think you also need to activate them to open the door to the lower level. Given people's propensity to just press red buttons to see what'll happen, it's still unfortunate level design.

To bring across urgency and an inevitable descent into madness in a computer game without time limits is quite a daunting task. BG2 tried it, and I think that was a quite decent attempt - some actual nightmare sequences, a nasty twist to your superpower, and a few conversations. That's not the real thing, of course, but you have to be very careful with actual gameplay consequences. Fatigue carries a very heavy penalty, resting is severely limited esp. in the higher difficulties, and travel times are outrageous (and doesn't rest you, which is kind of stupid). Managing the side effects of your affliction, however, currently is not what the game is about, so it shouldn't influence gameplay too much. So anything that actually really hampers you in random places, is kind of off-limits. But we all have imagination, we can fill in the gaps for ourselves once we get something to work on.

I didn't even play bloodthirsty and cruel in any way, I was simply mostly Passionate, Clever and even Honest, and I got the option to side with Woedica. Maybe they though it wasn't rational? :D So I think that it's definitely your dispositions that prevented you from seeing that end. And yes, I think what you're seeing is the actual creation of the god-machines and the Engwithans sacrificed to do so.

I found any spell or ability that mind-controlled or confused enemies highly irritating. - They run around my whole party, not neatly in front of my tanks any more. - I can't use half of my spells on them while they're friendly. - If I cast any buffs, I buff my enemies. Stupid. - I have to manually order attacks and keep a close eye on everyone's timer for it not to run out while standing next to my wizard. If only a few of the enemies are affected, it's useful. If the majority is, I found it quite annoying.

I chose the Grieving Mother. She stood out as being too weird in a way... too Torment-y. The Birthing Bell came across very strange, initially. It became more mundane later on, but in the first conversations, it left a distinct feeling of "Huh, what?" Also, she suffers from overdone mysteriousness and "I want to play an NPC!"-syndrome. (Really, being able to turn myself into a walking Somebody-Else's-Problem-Field should come in handy now and then, shouldn't it?) Durance... his back story was just too interesting. Really, you blew up a god?! Even if I didn't mind at all getting his "bad" ending. :D