Marceror

So what happens when you use a forth level spell slot to learn a first level spell natively? Does that spell become once per rest. Once per encounter? Twice per encounter...? I always go for the fourth level spell.

Not sure. I will confess that in some 25 hours of playing the beta I haven't even gone to that area yet. All of the quests seem to be either in town or at the Crossing, so that's where I always head first (so I can get a level or 2). And invariably, something always seems to go horribly wrong with my game before I can complete those quests, so travel to the other area never happens. Hoping the next BB version will allow me to save and load without issues, so I can complete all of the BB content with a single party.

He seems to post here like it's his second home. Lots of little tidbits that you're likely not going to see here: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3593502&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=260

The first rule of PoE club is, you don't talk about... err, you don't reload.

Drats. Foiled again.

Yeah, but we already took care of that. Pillars of Eternity: Throne of Woe, I thought it was. We're now on to planning other parts of OE's future.

I think it was one of the Kickstarter updates, and I believe it that it was just an idea, not confirmed. For some reason I thought it was Tim who said it, but could be wrong. Could have been both of them.

Pillars Gate - Tales of the Vailian Coast That's your PoE 2 right there!

Clearly, it was a really profound paper cut.

I hurt myself today to see if I still feel. I focus on the pain, the only thing that's real. Damn papercut!

It might be separate credentials for the backer site? It's been a while since I set this up, but I seem to recall something like that.

Agreed that it's a minor annoyance, but I'm still hopeful that the appropriate OE team member might stop in for 30 seconds and tell me to piss off, and that he'll/she'll do this when hell freezes over. Then I'll stop wondering about it.

i no. It jsut bawthars me wen sumwun cawls a sneekee RPG careactor woemans maycup.

That's fine, and I generally thought that was where you were coming from. That said, as the OP and someone who would like to see this option added (and who has utterly gotten his ass handed to him in that regard), I felt the need to call your metaphor into check insofar as it relates to the primary topic of this thread. If I'm going to go down, I at least want to go down with a shred of dignity.

Any response on this? Is this something that is remotely possible to make happen at some point? Or does the webmaster feel strongly that any edits made, even those made 10 seconds after posting to change "teh" to "the" should always be displayed for the world to see?

Its because it ends up having to do with how the game is built/designed. Theoretically, the game could just give everyone an omni-weapon at the start that kills everyone and people who want an enjoyable game could just not use it. Except that's dumb. Game design is about making choices for the player. Game design is about constraining what the player can do, and then letting the player have fun within those constraints. Just because something doesn't affect another player (the "it's SP" reasonibg) does not make it a good basis for doing it anyway, because "not negatively affecting another player" does not form the basis for making a good game system. I don't recall the ability to roll attributes in the BG series or ToEE being anything remotely akin to an "omni-weapon... that kills everyone." Just saying. It's called metaphor. I get the metaphor. My issue is that it's not a valid metaphor. A character with above average ability scores in Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale or Temple of Elemental Evil wasn't a "kill anything" overpowered character, like your "metaphor" suggests. They had some advantages that other more average characters didn't, sure, but they could still get their asses handed to them if the player wasn't playing smartly.

Fixed. Sorry, that particular misspelling is a bit of a pet-peeve of mine.

Its because it ends up having to do with how the game is built/designed. Theoretically, the game could just give everyone an omni-weapon at the start that kills everyone and people who want an enjoyable game could just not use it. Except that's dumb. Game design is about making choices for the player. Game design is about constraining what the player can do, and then letting the player have fun within those constraints. Just because something doesn't affect another player (the "it's SP" reasonibg) does not make it a good basis for doing it anyway, because "not negatively affecting another player" does not form the basis for making a good game system. I don't recall the ability to roll attributes in the BG series or ToEE being anything remotely akin to an "omni-weapon... that kills everyone." Just saying.

After playing the backer beta quite a bit, my ideal party has changed quite a bit. I no longer feel the need to include a wizard or a rogue, since I feel other classes are overall more useful. At this point my ideal party would look like: Front Line Fighter - Tank who goes "sword and board" Paladin - Secondary tank with a big, two handed weapon Barbarian - Melee damage dealer who fights with 2 weapons Back Line Priest - The ultimate healer and buffer. Will primary use firearms. Chanter - Great buffs and some spells. Will use a bow as her primary weapon. Will invest in the mechanics skills, thus easily replacing the role the rogue would have otherwise filled outside of combat. Cipher - Will use a wand/rod as his primary weapon. Basically this will replace the role that would otherwise have been filled by a wizard, with less damage and more crowd control, and a lot more spells being cast overall. At the moment, this seems to be the ideal PoE party.

Paladin and Cipher are neck and neck! My beloved Chanter trails quite some distance behind. Oh, the poor, sad ranger....

I'm ambiscrollorous. I can use WASD and edge scrolling with equal skill. Also left handed.

Indeed. It still needs some tweaking, but is such an improvement over the D&D bard.

It's a fairly notable change from the IE games, so yeah, only expect that the buzz about this will increase as the release date gets closer, and more people become aware of it.

Good point. I'd say my love for rolling attributes really started back in my pre-IE P&P days. I don't think I ever played in a single campaign where we didn't roll, as that was just how me and my friends... well, rolled. We developed a fairly generous way to do so... roll 4d6 and drop the lowest of each roll, and assign stats to whichever attribute you wish. Do that 3 times and take the best roll out of the 3. But still sometimes you'd end up with a marginal character, and we'd just deal with that. It was actually funner that way in many respects.

Good thought. Let me see if I can still do that. EDIT: DONE! For the record, we can say that the Paladin now has one vote too many, since I voted prior to making the change. Chanter is my top vote. EDIT2: Strike that. I realized I was able to delete my earlier vote, and vote again properly. But I've already noticed that someone else did not follow that method. Oh well.