JFSOCC

thanks, this does paint a picture for me that the only difference in classes can be found in combat. I hope that's not the case.

My German is very dodgy and I haven't used it in six years but it is just good enough to understand your post There will be a beta but it won't be a conventional "early access" build (they intend to have little or no story content in it). As for your actual question the devs haven't said anything about when it'll be available but the game is set for a release sometime in December this year so... sometime between now and then. Unfortunately my english is pretty bad! Aber danke für die Antwort After all, one who understands me :D würde mich freuen wenn jemand auf deutsch Antworten würde! Ich glaube das Josh Sawyer eine bisschen Deutch spricht, vielleicht kann er sie beantworten. Ok that's the best I can do, my German is very rusty.

unfortunately no cross/multiclassing.

I hope so. I hope so because I hope to see many ways in which classes have different experiences in play, outside of combat.

Depends. If the first 3 damage of every hit is absorbed by armour, for instance, it's definitely better to have the heavy axe. This is also assuming that you win the damage race via direct damage only. There will be, buffs and debuffs, conditions, abilties and spells.

So far, every class update we've had focuses on the combat abilities of the classes. This is understandable, it's a design decision to build the game around the combat systems, P:E is going to be a combat heavy game (or at least that's suggested by the statement that 100% pacifist runs will not be possible) I've seen some upset more than once when classes were announced (and again some today with both the rogue and the ranger) because the classes don't seem to completely fit known CRPG standards. I've seen complaints that the classes are very similar to MMO versions or DnD 4e. Again, understandable when class balance is designed around combat. But there remains, at least with me, the desire to know more about how classes differentiate themselves outside of combat, we know what attributes do combat wise, but know little to nothing about how or even IF they affect skills. Whether every class will be able to invest in every skill (sounds like it) or if there are going to be features and abilities which are interesting for classes, outside of combat. So this is an open question asking if there is any information available about class distinction outside of combat. Any information would be appreciated, really.

I'm surprised that there aren't more conditions, like bleeding, diseased, poisoned, deep wound, cursed, or dazed. Or maybe there are but they don't qualify for sneak attacks.

Midichlorians. It was as if a million moviegoers cried out in agony, and were suddenly silenced.

"you can hear the ribs breaking" There are no ribs in that carcass...

Chanters sound like guild wars paragons, from what I've taken from the limited information we have,

I think a lot of the fears people have could be taken away if we could discuss class strengths outside of combat.

curious when this poll closes and we get to hear something.

Looking good. Love the dirty fighting... Ranger is looking good as well. Few Questions about coordinated positioning: If my rogue is engaged by a few enemies, and switches positions with a friendly fighter, will that fighter be engaged with the enemies attacking the rogue? Will any active stances/abilites carry over or will they have to be recast? If the ally the rogue switches with was already engaged with another enemy, will that engagement break or carry over? Are sneak attacks crits, or can they crit for even more damage? Will the rogue be able to benefit from conditions caused by other party members? Will different animal companions feature different strengths and weaknesses? how different would we be talking about? I'd like to know more about the leaders of the band.

might be an interesting way to introduce us to the sequel baddies/organisations as well.

You could abandon them.

That's a tired old argument. Let's name it "The Willpower" argument. And call it for what it is: a fallacy. The Willpower fallacy states that a design shouldn't be better, options shouldn't be available, because the issue at hand can be solved by having a superior mindset. All you need a strong backbone, and you won't succumb to degenerate behaviour of any kind. Let's ignore the large body of evidence suggesting that people aren't as in control of their behaviour as they like to think. The large body of evidence showing people will pick less enjoyable strategies if they know these lead to better or easier results. We don't need a feature where players can opt-out the subconscious incentives, because really what they need is more willpower. What bull****. The less meta-gaming information I have, the better I can roleplay. That has nothing to do with willpower or a strong backbone. Better yet, including the feature makes the argument moot; If you believe that willpower is all you need, you don't have to turn off anything. If you don't mind the meta-gaming information, you don't have to turn off anything. But if you, like me, want to play out a story as you imagine you would without knowing you just passed an intimidation check, you can.

If I don't know that I'm 20xp away from getting a level which allows me to do something I intend to do more easily, I might choose to solve my problems differently, rather than use game knowledge and wait for a small bit till I get the level. In this way, knowledge of experience affects my in-game behaviour. I think it would be interesting (though I'd have to try it first) because I will have to do more roleplaying and less rollplaying.

Your argument is invalid.

I watched Dirty Wars, which I recommend. It's terrible that this doesn't surprise me in the slightest. What a cynical world. It's a stark reminder how much of our lives are filled with propaganda and spindoctoring.

because north and south is an arbitrary designation. it literally makes no difference (except whether or not the sun sets in the west or the east)

today I caught up with two weeks lagging behind on the Project Eternity forums. That's a lot of posts to catch up with. I admit, there is one thread I skimmed. Usually I read everything, but some arguments are boring and stale.

Welcome Iraya to the OOoE

What I'm going to say will sound snobbish, but hear me out. No, I do not want novels. Not by fans and not by authorized authors. I've gotten my start in literature via fantasy fiction, and I have read my share of crap. I got started with Magic the gathering novels, but I've come in contact with Star Wars expanded universe, dragonlance, forgotten realms, and other licensed works. These books are mostly utter crap. As entertaining as you might find them, they read like fan fiction. They are plot driven, the characters have no arc and are one-dimensional. Each character reads like a cliché or worse a Mary-sue cliché. I couldn't read Game of Thrones past chapter 2 when it was given to me in 2006 by a friend. It was such drivel. I was groaning all the way through chapter one and chapter two. I enjoy the tv series as a guilty pleasure, but it does keep confirming how plot driven and obvious it is. I'm not saying that there is no good literary quality fantasy fiction. There most certainly is. But these are all original works and worlds created by the author itself, not licenses. Novels based on the Project Eternity universe are going to provide exposition and lore we haven't asked for, deal with issues aren't the point of PoE, tell stories within the strict knowledge of the game, or alternatively ignore world rules and retcon. Man I hate retcons. They are going to be written by Fanboys and literary amateurs. They're going to be constrained by the authors understanding of the game and world lore, which is always going to be less than those who created the world and game. More importantly, these books, of questionable quality will be canon. Fanboys will come and use the books as arguments of why something needs to be in the next game a certain way. That thought alone should give you shivers. Please, no novels in the PoE universe. Edit:

I wouldn't mind if teleportation was possible... At a very small amount of places in the world. (places of power, activated circle stones, etc) Places of power might have one, like to the start of the old paths, the end of the old paths (still needs to be activated) at the stronghold, and near some glanfanthan ruins. So that there are a few teleportation hubs in the world. Not many, but enough to speed you up if you're in a hurry.

This old thread again? Quest staggering can have some very useful implementations. It can be used to repopulate areas with new level adjusted quests after you've gone through any of the story bottlenecks. It rewards exploring and going back to places you've cleared of quests before, and prevents you from feeling like a place is now "completed and empty" after you've run through all the quests there. Quest staggering based on pre-requisites like, story progression, level advancement, faction advancement, gear, areas uncovered, or specific triggers, can help make the world feel more alive and reactive. Suddenly that party you didn't get an invite to when you were still a mercenary scrub is much more welcoming now that you are the lord of a stronghold with prestige level x. Anything that gives you a reason to come back to a place you've already visited, imo, enriches the world. You can still have a great quest density with quest staggering