CottonWolf

If this is easy to be implemented, it seems like a really good idea, but at this point, if it takes significant time away from from bug fixing/balancing, I don't think it's worth it.

Josh said on SA that their going to add a "board" option at combat start, so you can get straight into boarding in exchange for an indeterminate amount of ship damage if you find the ship combat boring.

Yep. This should be fixed. It's always been weird that there's not a unarmed proficiency.

I think they're generally okay, because the icons are informative. Jibing being the exception. That needs a better icon to make it clear exactly what it means.

Yeah, targetting different parts of the ship or switching ammo to chain balls for different effects or something would definitely make it more engaging. As it is, I didn't really feel in control of what was happening. It was just a lot of turning to get in a broadsides then dicerolls as I fired. I'm not sure if I should even have been attempting something else.

In theory it should be today, the redemption website says updates on the first Thursday of every month until release.

Apparently you can't take it if one of your classes is Monk.

The answer is a lot.

Yep. Mine too. They must have pushed a silent update.

It's obviously okay. That's the deliberate downside of the subclass. You're trading flexibility for power, and if there was never a cost to that power, it's no longer a trade-off. It's not like there's nothing that can be done. It's a party based game, you can pull your fighter back and let the other four toons take out the immune thing, or you can switch to a weapon your fighter has a malus with, and fight it with the handicap.

Unless it's genuinely enciphered text, and we should be decrypting it rather than attempting to type it in somewhere.

If I attempt to start the game through Steam it immediately to desktop before managing to get to the title screen. However, if I find the local file and use the "Open" command on it directly, the game loads fine and can be played. It's an odd one.

I'm with you on class, but background absolutely should give you skill points. What you did before you became an adventurer is the main determinant of what your starting skills would be.

Don't nerf the strong passives. They're the only actually interesting ones. Besides, getting rid of the strong passives doesn't make multiclassing any less desirable, it just makes it moreso, because you have to look for real synergies to counter the decrease in power, which is something single classes can't do. The only way to solve that problem is to make passives less good for multiclass characters, but that means taking out any that cause step change effects, or putting them so late in the progression trees that multiclass characters functionally can't take them.

I agree passives are an issue, so I like Boeroer's suggestion of having passives be A + b(powerlevel) instead of a flat number like 50% sneak attack or 15% like weapon specialization. That way single class gains a quick and consistent lead over multiclass both in powers of individual abilities and in terms of their passive. That doesn't work because most of the really good passives have step change effects, like +1 engagement or downgrading all afflications of a certain type one level.

This is what I'm hoping for.

Plus, there's DLC, so they'll want post-release support to keep people playing so they'll buy it when it comes out. And if they have plans for a PoE3 (divine campaign, please), they'll want to keep goodwill.

Not really. Spells are cast because soul power in PoE. What you are affects how you manifest this power. Gods and religion itself has no power over it. Yeah, just to add to this. While text of the game is rather equivocal about this in Durance's case, the pre-release information implied that priests abilities don't come from direct divine power tapped from a specific god, but rather the power of the soul of the priest, fueled by their own belief. So in theory, a priest in PoE could believe in anything. A really fervent athetist could be a "priest" if they wanted.

I don't have a philosophical objection to them. I have a practical one. (But yes, I'd generally prefer a classless system too.) My issue is generally that I can't see how you can balance the power of passives across multi/single classes. Passives are (arguably) the most powerful abilities on the tree, and multis get full progression in both classes passives. And as many of them represent step changes, you can't even scale them with power level - partial downgrading of afflications doesn't make sense. Even if the level 8/9 spells are amazing, for most of the game they won't have them, single classes surely won't be able to make up the difference that multis get through their passives (and that's putting aside that ranger pets and summoned weapons, and possibly other things I don't know about, don't depend on power level, making multis built around those concepts even more broken). If they want to keep single classes in as an option, fine. But seriously, give new players recommended multiclass combinations to choose from. Don't make them play a single class character, that's the worst possible outcome. Auto-level up is already a thing if they want to avoid the complexity of skill choice.

I can't see how confusion would cause that anyway... You're right it just looks like a straight up bug, not an interaction with the afflication system. Bleak Walkers are notorious for not sharing.

I still think the solution is to get rid of single class characters entirely. They're vestigial at this point. Just have full advancement in two classes. There are enough pure martial classes that you could build a roughly "non-magical" fighter (Fighter/Rogue) if you wanted to, and everything else is covered.

Yep. It's nowhere near the whole progression. Up to level 20 in the full game. So, yeah, we can't be sure what the balance look like in the endgame, but it's also true that the majority of the game isn't the endgame.

I'm on the put healing on Constitution train, autoattack and weapon skill damage being on Strength, and deflection and "magic" damage being on Resolve, feels right, and it gives Constition a reason to exist.

That was exactly the situation that led me to find this out. I was creating a Devoted/Wizard using summoned weapons, and I wanted to find out exactly how they scaled with Power Level to see whether Conjurer was the best class for the build (also how useful Nature Godlike would be). A bit of testing later and I reported what I thought was a bug and was told it was intended behaviour. Seems very odd to me. It is odd. It possibly explains why so many spells are conjuration though, that had puzzled me. But it was probably necessary if you were going to have a subclass focusing on conjuration spells but have the archetypal spells of that school not actually get an increase in power. Speaking of which, what does empowering a summoned weapon do at the moment? More damage? Longer duration?

That seems like a poor solution. The number of specific items that would then be required would be huge, and many of them would be unusable for most players due to the lack of a pure class X (especially with the smaller party size).