GrinningReaper659

The fight's particularly nasty because everything's on their terms. They're all positioned perfectly to open up on your group. One thing you could try is running back into the previous room immediately, making sure the whole party is out of sight of those in the other room, and put Eder right around the corner inside the door. This way, they'll have to come to you and you can control the encounter accordingly. Make use of Durance's knock-down seal, and use Grieving Mother to charm someone or spam her spells that damage multiple enemies.

Dude I've read every post he's made about the game on the codex. You are misinterpreting him I believe you, and maybe he's changed his opinion since writing the review, but I'm not misinterpreting that which I keep directly quoting from the review. He declared something as a design goal that never was, and then he complained that the design goal wasn't met. I don't need to know what he's said since then to know that that bit of the review is either intentionally dishonest or, more likely, based on him misunderstanding the design goals. I suppose we should just drop the point, though.

You said this in your first paragraph of your last post Your key mistake here is that you think the reviewer thinks that what Obsidian created is 'to be as different as possible from D&D' when he is actually saying it's trying to be 'not-D&D', which is basically D&D stuff with slight variations. He criticizes them for being unoriginal/boring. Part of Obsidian's goal was to make the game feel a bit like Forgotten Realms / D&D and this is what they did to an extent, but the reviewer wanted them to take more risks, to be a bit more inventive. The exact opposite of what you said. Seriously, I think you need to reread what I'm talking about here. It's not a mistake on my part, but maybe on yours, because he clearly states it and I'll quote it one more time as I try to explain. Roxor said "The game abandons established settings and rulesets in favour of ones developed at home by Obsidian, whose one big purpose was to differentiate it from Dungeons and Dragons." Here, he is saying that Obsidian's main goal when designing the setting and ruleset was to make it as differentiated as possible from D&D. Read through his quote, that's what he is saying, I'm not misunderstanding him. He's saying that they wanted to make a setting that was as distinct ("differentiated") from D&D as possible, and then he goes on to complain because they failed to do so by making so many things only superficially different. My point is that that wasn't their goal in the first place. The reviewer compares the writing against Obsidian's other games and not the other Kickstarters, but I'll humor you. There are many aspects of writing and I think Obsidian's writing is nicely written but in Pillars of Eternity specifically the plot is weak, has structural and pacing issues as well as issues with establishing player motivation, and then goes full retard in the last part of the game (which he mentions, where they throw everything including the kitchen sink at you in the last bit of the game). Nothing in the game me even remotely care about the Dyrwood or the antagonist to the point where I stopped playing the game because I simply did not care to pursue the story any further after the Act 2 finale. I have completed Shadowrun Returns (and none of the other KS games) and while Obsidian can write nicer sentences, I thought Shadowrun Returns had a better plot - started out investigating a murder and then evolved into a save the world story, simple, perhaps a bit cliche, but it worked without issue. Obsidian reached for the sky and fell short with theirs. There were several things I didn't like in SRR such as the murderer showing up at the crime scene (derp) and I didn't even like the second part of the story but there was nothing wrong with the plot and I liked the characters, particularly Coyote. Apparently Dragonfall is way, way better. I recently bought that but I've only played the first 10 minutes. I'll take a simpler plot/story that succeeds than one that is underdeveloped/a mess. IMO the most interesting story tidbit was the Hollowborn stuff, I would have rathered if the game was just about that. Roxor says the writing ranges from average at best to abysmal at worst. I disagree, and you defend him but then all you can talk about is the fact that you don't like or care about the plot. You say that SRR has better plot while Obsidian "can write nicer sentences." In other words, the writing in PoE is better and you're continuing to use the fact that PoE's plot didn't draw you in to deflect. --Dragonfall is considerably better than Dead Man's Switch in my opinion, I think you're going to enjoy it.-- Getting drawn into the story or even liking it is a lot more subjective than the quality of the writing, which is what I'm talking about. Say what you want about the plot and story that didn't grab you, but you even admit that the writing itself isn't bad. Also, I wish I had left out the bit about the other Kickstarters (I don't think there's any debate that PoE has better writing than any of them) because you didn't answer about the BG games. I'm really curious about that, how do you rank the writing of PoE vs. BG and BG2 writing (not plot), also against IWD and PS:T? So did many others, I'm sure. It's not difficult to separate combat from story either. Combat in The Witcher 2 sucks, but the story is quite good and I've enjoyed replaying that a few times and the Rise of the Sword mod makes the combat less insufferable. Fair enough. From what I see you saying about it, it seems to me that you're a bit biased, but I could just as easily be wrong. I've only completed one Obsidian game - Knights of the Old Republic 2. I played Neverwinter Nights 2 but never finished it (and likely never will). I refuse to play Alpha Protocol, South Park and Fallout New Vegas because AP is a console shooter, I don't care about South Park and I don't like any Bethesda games (including Morrowind) and I only mildly enjoyed the first Dungeon Siege but do not care to play the second or third. None of those games cater to my gameplay preferences. Out of the games I have played (Kotor 2), NWN2 and Pillars of Eternity I'd say it's worse than KotOR2, but maybe better than NWN2 at least in some ways, but worse in others. Most Obsidian games aren't my cup of tea either, PoE is their first game made in a style and genre that I can enjoy. I've played most of their games, but there's not one before PoE that I could actually enjoy enough to finish. That's partially due to my tastes in games (which I think are similar to yours), I don't play first person RPGs and over-the-shoulder stuff is nearly as annoying to me. That being said, I think most who are being honest can look back on Obsidian's rather small catalog and agree that PoE is not the worst among them. Again, it is a matter of opinion, but there's no doubt in my mind that Roxor didn't give PoE a chance, and it's plain to see that it's a list of flaws more than an objective review, and that's not because the game only has flaws. PoE has both strengths and weaknesses and a worthwhile review will reflect that more clearly.

I don't think it would be too hard, but they may see it as a waste of time that could better be used fixing the actual issue. The console command you're looking to use just tricks the game into thinking that a quest has been resolved. Once they've fixed the bug, it won't be necessary anymore. So, they don't expect you to go get the mod to work around the bug, they're essentially expecting you to wait until they fix the bug instead. If they spend time making temporary workarounds available, they have less time for fixing the underlying bugs themselves.

I'm sorry but I have absolutely no idea how you got this from the review because it doesn't say anything of the sort. He used the word not-D&D. You've heard of "I can't believe it's not butter" right ? That pretty much invalidates everything in your first paragraph. No. What are you even talking about. You don't know where I got the idea from, I was directly quoting his review. He says, and I quote (again): "The game abandons established settings and rulesets in favour of ones developed at home by Obsidian, whose one big purpose was to differentiate it from Dungeons and Dragons." He then goes on to make snarky, sarcastic comments about how everything is "not-D&D" such as the amaua which are "not-orcs," the orlans which are "not-halflings," etc. In other words, he falsely presupposes that the point was to differentiate from D&D, and then criticizes the game for not doing so. So, I don't know what you're on about, but it's not my first paragraph that's been invalidated here. I doubt it, because I was determined to enjoy the game, and I came roughly to the same conclusions. I had the same opinion as Darth Roxor did that even if the combat wasn't very good that at least the writing/story would be good, because it's Obsidian right? This is their forte. It turned out to be exactly as he said - average at best. I wouldn't go as far to say abysmal at worst but there are areas where it clearly struggles. The plot and player motivation is a mess and the game clearly suffers from trying to cover too much ground while not really doing any of it's themes justice at all. This thread basically covers everything and includes several posts from the author: http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/index.php?threads/the-writing-in-this-game-is-average.98103/ So, which games that I mentioned have better writing than PoE? D;OS, Wasteland 2, SRR? Do you think that the writing in BG1 and BG2 is better than the writing in PoE? We'll leave the story and plot aside, because the comment was about the quality of the writing. I think that the writing ranges from as good as to better than all of the games I listed, but you're free to disagree of course. Also, you can say that you were determined to enjoy the game, and Roxor can say the same, but both of you hated aspects of it before it was even released. I don't think you're lying, and I think that you did try to give it a shot, but ultimately there are irreconcilable issues with combat that are bound to warp your view of the game overall. I think that his comments about the writing are indefensible. You single the comment out but then you even agree that you don't think the writing is abysmal even at its worst, so what's your point here exactly? It seems that in some cases you're defending the review simply because you relate to being disappointed with the game, regardless of whether or not his points are true. I'm not sure how you got "clear preference for action games" from this. I think it's pretty clear that the game burnt the reviewer. He was expecting an Infinity Engine successor that at least had a decent Obsidian story. What he got was a game that he didn't find fun to play and didn't have a good story. Whereas Dungeon Siege 3 probably at least met or surpassed his expectations. That was my scathing summation, a nod to his if you will. Obviously enjoying action games doesn't preclude you from enjoying story-driven RPGs, but he made the initial comparison between the two and my response was meant as a half-joke. Anyway, I just don't think that the review offered anything worthwhile. Furthermore, I think it's ridiculous to call it the worst Obsidian game to date, do you disagree? Do think that Roxor really believes that this is the worst game Obsidian ever made? Do you believe that it's their worst game?

Unforunately, Nexus do not allow account creation for those who use Tor (and presumably other online privacy tools). Now that is their perogative, but it does confirm the post title as correct - mods on Nexus not being freely available. And their method of pushing premium accounts is really just as sleazy (though not illegal) as the behaviour of some "free" download sites. Not Obsidian's fault, but a plea for any modmakers out there - please provide mirrors using sites that don't require accounts. Also some of the BG2 modding forums should be willing to provide hosting. Yeah you do have a great point and on top of that, wtf? is it really so hard for Obsidian to just create the IE mod themselves and then just give it to the consumer and say you can use this tool or not its up to you wether you want to use it or not, why do I have to go through Nexus and go through all the hassle of registration to obtain this is my quesion?? and weirdly enough, im now getting denied acess to the file because, the account I just registered with Nexus isnt working?? Ummm, again, the IE Mod is a mod. Do you expect Obsidian to recreate every single mod that anyone dreams up just because someone wants them to? A mod is an optional modification to the game created by fans. Now, I don't know about the bug you're experiencing, sorry about that, but I'm sure that if it's actually an unfixed bug then Obsidian is working to fix it as soon as possible. As soon as they've fixed it, it will be in an official patch, which will have nothing to do with the IE Mod. I get that you're upset about a bug, that's reasonable, and I'm not sure how exactly the IE Mod fixes the bug, but regardless of that Obsidian is undoubtedly working on officially fixing it as quickly as possible. Attempting to take the workaround or fix from the IE Mod and implement it would almost certainly take just as long as (if not longer than) whatever way of fixing it they're currently working on. Listen mate, I have no idea about how mods work or how to create them,I'm just a casual gamer, I was refered to use console comands as a workaround to the problem as stated as above. As far as I'm aware you first have to activate the comands by using the "IRoll20's" then your enabled to use certain comands but the other comands like the main one I want to use which apparently forces the quest to complete is locked unless you have the IE Mod. If you have possibly a solution or anything positive to say, let me know dude, id love to hear it. It wasn't my intent to be overly critical, I was just trying to explain why there was no way that Obsidian would make an official version of the IE Mod. Anyway, it seems like the console command workaround you're looking for does indeed require the IE Mod, and that the only other option would be waiting for an official fix in a patch. If you can't get access through Nexus, then hopefully someone will upload the file for you. I did a search for the file itself online, but the only results were hosted by Nexus, so no luck there. Hope you get your issue resolved.

This is the worst Obsidian game to date, is that right? Anywho, oh RPGCodex. Sometimes I can't tell what you love more, being generally contrarian, or shi*ting all over everything. I entertained the fantasy, for a moment, of how Roxor's review would have read if the mainstream gaming sites had said some of the absurd sh*t that he did about the game before he wrote the review. If PCGamer had called PoE Obsidian's worst game ever and Metacritic had placed it at a 50 instead of a 90, would Roxy have perhaps been rushing to tell all the critics that their opinions are sh*t and that PoE is at the very least one of the better Obisidan games? The answer of course is no, not Roxy, he was too invested all along. He decided a long time ago that the game would be sh*t and even the greatest game Obsidian has ever made (not that PoE is necessarily that) couldn't change his mind. He would have had to admit that he was wrong, can you even imagine such a thing? You don't have to read far to understand how this review is going to go: "The game abandons established settings and rulesets in favour of ones developed at home by Obsidian, whose one big purpose was to differentiate it from Dungeons and Dragons." This is where he declares that the one main goal of the setting (and ruleset) is to be as different as possible from D&D. This is, of course, blatantly untrue. The setting was meant all along to be reminiscent of D&D settings, and the rules as well, if to a lesser extent. One of the main promises of the game was to evoke the "feels" of the IE games, which was accomplished through the familiarities of the setting and rules. If they had been completely unfamiliar, then the game would have failed to deliver on a huge promise. But none of that will stop Roxy from going on and on and making snarky comments about how undifferentiated this or that is from D&D, as if that somehow is objectively bad because he declared that the goal was differentiation. He goes on to say that the writing is "at best average and at worst abysmal." I mean, it's so clear with every passing paragraph of this review that he's determined to hate this game. So, the quality range for writing in this game is average to abysmal apparently. Compared to what, Roxy? Compared to Divinity: Original Sin (ha) or Wasteland 2 or Shadowrun Returns? Is the writing average or abysmal compared to those. Is it average or absymal compared to BG and BG2, the games that inspired it? Give me a break. The only compliments he allows are occasional concessions such as "Generally speaking, it’s your generic medieval fantasyland that you’ve already seen many times before under different names, but it has at least a few cool twists." So, an extremely rare half-sentence, backhanded concession followed by five or more paragraphs of bile is about the only positivity you'll find. The reason some of you are thinking "Hmmm, I do agree with most of his points, but totally disagree with his overall opinion of the game," is simple: buried beneath all the try-hard edginess and negativity are a few actual good points. This "review" isn't much of a review though, it's just a list of every perceived flaw blown completely out of proportion. Give me a seething hatred of games and a few days of free time and I could do the same with BG2, Planescape: Torment, Ultima IV, Fallout 1, or any other game. When instead of reviewing you just find every possible fault and write a few paragraphs about how terrible it is, it'll paint anything in a negative light. This can be done with any sort of creative work, from the worst of them to the best, which is why this review is essentially worthless. For reference, lines such as these I find to be useful and worthy of a review, even if he is being overly critical in my opinion: "The bad encounter design and general lack of difficulty have one more very unfortunate result - they make exploring and dungeon-delving insanely boring. But make no mistake, this is also due to the dungeon design being very lacklustre to begin with." In other words, the sentiment here is fine if true, but it's a problem if you're just making any and every argument you can dream up in order to bash the game, as often seems to be the case. Then there are lines such as these in the summation which reveal that you're not really reading much of a review at all: "This is literally the worst Obsidian game I’ve played to date. That’s right, I even had more fun with Dungeon Siege 3." Well, by all means, refrain from reviewing story-driven RPGs in the future then, because your preference is clearly action games.

Unforunately, Nexus do not allow account creation for those who use Tor (and presumably other online privacy tools). Now that is their perogative, but it does confirm the post title as correct - mods on Nexus not being freely available. And their method of pushing premium accounts is really just as sleazy (though not illegal) as the behaviour of some "free" download sites. Not Obsidian's fault, but a plea for any modmakers out there - please provide mirrors using sites that don't require accounts. Also some of the BG2 modding forums should be willing to provide hosting. Yeah you do have a great point and on top of that, wtf? is it really so hard for Obsidian to just create the IE mod themselves and then just give it to the consumer and say you can use this tool or not its up to you wether you want to use it or not, why do I have to go through Nexus and go through all the hassle of registration to obtain this is my quesion?? and weirdly enough, im now getting denied acess to the file because, the account I just registered with Nexus isnt working?? Ummm, again, the IE Mod is a mod. Do you expect Obsidian to recreate every single mod that anyone dreams up just because someone wants them to? A mod is an optional modification to the game created by fans. Now, I don't know about the bug you're experiencing, sorry about that, but I'm sure that if it's actually an unfixed bug then Obsidian is working to fix it as soon as possible. As soon as they've fixed it, it will be in an official patch, which will have nothing to do with the IE Mod. I get that you're upset about a bug, that's reasonable, and I'm not sure how exactly the IE Mod fixes the bug, but regardless of that Obsidian is undoubtedly working on officially fixing it as quickly as possible. Attempting to take the workaround or fix from the IE Mod and implement it would almost certainly take just as long as (if not longer than) whatever way of fixing it they're currently working on.

Not sure if this was directed at me or at everyone... I was just mentioning that the Dyrford areas were somewhat challenging for me when I did them in Act I around level 3-4. By which I mean they were more challenging than most of the other stuff in Act 1. Also the temple in Gilded Vale was a bit tough I guess. Playing on hard with only Obsidian companions. Act II has been extremely easy so far, except for the lighthouse which was somewhat challenging. Anyway, I agree that the game is too easy from what I've seen so far, mostly seems to be due to handing out way too much XP, among other things.

I'm also playing on hard. I did all the Dyrford stuff in Act 1. I was at level 3 or 4 when I got there. It was pretty challenging at that level. I can definitely see it being mind-numbingly easy after finishing a bunch of Act 2 stuff.

Is that what you think I'm doing? Did you read what I wrote? The comments I was replying to were making the comparison, I was simply pointing out the flaws of the "this combat system is reducible to a little rhyme and is therefore simple" argument. However, I don't think that comparing the combat in PoE to the combat in BG2 in any way would be absurd, but to each their own I suppose. Comparing things helps us to understand their similarities and differences. I'm sorry if it offends your sensibilities to compare BG2's combat to PoE's combat, but that's pretty much what everyone on this forum has been doing for the last couple of years. Are you kidding? BG2 has no silver bullet tactic that works on everything. As opposed to PoE. Breach and teach won't work on everything. Trolls for example. It's not enough to breach and teach to beat them. Golems either. Please name one encounter in PoE the Tank & Spank strategy won't work on. Yes, I am aware that there is no universal tactic that will win every BG2 battle. That was in fact my entire point, that the ability to reduce it to a rhyme does not make it simple. My rhyme was flawed for BG2, let's just change it to 'Locate and Obliterate!" See how that works on everything? You find the enemy and then you destroy the enemy. The ridiculousness of saying that "tank and spank" works on everything is that 'tank' will be a different setup in different players' parties and 'spank,' if you're playing ideally, will be different depending on the enemy. Do you not choose offensive spells and switch weapon sets based on the specific damage resistances of your enemies? Hmm, those sound like tactical responses to me. I fully agree that PoE combat focuses considerably more on strategy than on tactical responses and I think that the combat can be improved a great deal by increasing the amount of tactical response that is required to deal with different scenarios, among other things. However, I don't think that reducing the ideal strategy to the little rhyme 'tank and spank" is any sort of valid argument which proves the simplicity or faults of the system.

I think it's funny that you criticize it, yet you mention no less than three distinct ways to deal with them. Three ways out of a small mountain. In PoE? What do you do? You.. tank them, and spank them. Preferably in a doorway. You know, I agree with most of your thoughts on the weaknesses of PoE's combat, but reducing the ideal strategy to a little rhyme like that doesn't actually make an argument for how simple it is. In PoE, you tank them and spank them. In BG1, you sight them and kite them. In BG2, you breach them and teach them (a lesson in pain). Rhyming is fun, but each of these rhyming words is representative of a larger concept.

But 1 million in sales is not a wide audience, in the case of PoE it's a reasonable expectation. I know people are getting tired of having D:OS getting thrown in their face in this discussion but it *must*. D:OS is PoE's true Peer. It's a kickstarted game, it's a PC exclusive, it's an RPG, and its development costs was ~$4 million. It sold ~ 1 million copies. Therefore, PoE SHOULD do the same. If it doesn't, then there will be legitimate questions to ask. The main one being: WHY NOT? Where did you get that ~$4 million for the D:OS budget (just curious, I had heard it was considerably higher)? I haven't played D:OS yet by the way, but have heard a lot about it. I generally agree with what you're saying, but the main, obvious difference is the multiplayer co-op in D:OS, which allows the game to appeal to a larger audience because it incorporates people uninterested in playing a single-player game. Also there are some other big differences such as the serious writing and story of PoE vs. the lighthearted nature of D:OS's writing. It seems that a lot of people play D:OS primarily for the combat and dungeon diving, and others specifically for the co-op, while a lot of people that wouldn't play D:OS play PoE for the story, writing, etc. There is definitely a lot of overlap though. I can't think of a closer competitor so they should be compared, but the large differences need to be taken into consideration.

Ive seen it argued, and Im not making this up, that the mere existence of the option causes some people to lose all gross motor skills and forces them to click buttons they don't want to, even at the detriment of their own gaming enjoyment. They literally cannot stop themselves from using it so the only possible solution is for the option to not exist. Theres nothing you can say to that. That's a really great point. This same reasoning is why I demand that the devs include a button on the GUI which insta-kills all enemies on the screen. What's to complain about, it's a single player game. If you don't want to use it then just don't push the instakill button!! Logic people, use it. This is pretty much the only compelling argument I've seen here. If enough people are needing to walk back to town all the time to rest while playing on Easy, then that would certainly suggest a problem. I'd say that if enough people playing on Easy were having this issue, then perhaps the number of supplies a person can carry and the number available should be increased on Easy, or perhaps the resting restriction could be removed completely from Easy mode only (or on a new, easier setting). I'm not sure how many people are having this problem, though, as most people posting in this thread complaining say that they're playing on Normal or Hard.

You seem to be thoroughly confused about how games are funded/made. Traditionally, a publisher would have given them the money to produce the game. That ~4 million from Kickstarter took the place of the funding that would have been provided by a publisher. Games aren't made for free out of thin air and then paid for afterwards... Many AAA RPGs cost many tens of millions of dollars to produce, and expecting this game (made on a budget of around 4 million) to be considerably longer or more complex than other modern RPGs doesn't make much sense.

Hmm, that's a bit unfortunate, I maxed resolve and was expecting more of a classic charisma type trait. I'm on expert mode so I guess I'm probably never selecting the dialogue checks that I'm best at because threatening to break someone's leg if they don't give you what you want is the farthest thing in my mind from what I thought the attribute represented, and as such doesn't fit my idea of my character at all.

Yeah, I got the "secret found" and then while moving my cursor around found a sort of hovering secret door below the opening in the wall. I seem to recall clicking on it which may have made it go away, but I'm not sure. I'm also pretty sure that the door itself became visible (well, as a purple rectangle) when I hovered over it.

Just thought I'd share that I'm in Act I and all six of my party members are at level six now. I've done everything I can except Endless Paths, which I haven't started at all. I imagine that with bestiary, lock, and trap XP (and possibly quest XP?) throughout however much of Endless Paths I could finish right now, as well as other possible XP gains related to the stronghold, I'd end up at least a couple of levels higher before even starting Act II. I'm playing on hard by the way.

To further clarify, it's the same logic that keeps you from wearing more than one ring per hand or more than one belt per waist.

Well, just in case you guys really don't understand the logic of why cloak and amulet take up the same spot (as opposed to just disagreeing with the decision)... I assume it's because they would take up generally the same area on the character. The cloak is held in place with a clasp/brooch which will be in the same area where an amulet would rest (upper chest/neck). Assuming that all of these magical items are rather large and as such having too many on the same body part wouldn't make too much sense (and would be overly complicated gameplay-wise) is usually the reason for limiting the number of these items that can be equipped to a particular area at one time. EDIT: not sure how to brooch the subject, but I wrote broach instead of brooch

Well, regardless of my personal thoughts on the mechanic, I think I understand what the intention was. A lot of people in this thread are saying that they have to go back to town all the time to rest even though the fights aren't too hard on their current difficulty setting (normal/hard/potd). However, I think the idea is that if you are having to go back to town all the time to rest, then the fights are too hard for you on that difficulty setting and you should lower the difficulty. "The fights aren't too hard for me, I just use all of my per rest spells/abilities in every encounter" isn't a valid argument because if you're overusing your per rest spells and abilities, then the fights are too hard for you. Lower the difficulty a notch and you'll be able to use up those abilities less quickly and you'll be able to carry more camping supplies.

Yeah...I think most of the time it goes by whoever is closer to the found thingie at the time. So if you're using the whole party, stalking around, whoever is the one close enough to trigger the hidden object first gets the line. For disarming traps, whoever has the highest mechanics (or is closest, if more than one has it high enough) moves forward to disarm. Assuming you don't have auto pause on trap found turned on in which case no one moves forward... Someone does move forward when you click to disarm the trap (and unpause). If your whole party/multiple characters are selected, then that someone will be whoever has the highest skill or whoever of those with high enough skill is closest, which is what LadyCrimson was saying I think.

Will they all see reason if I just keep on posting this meaningless stuff that they're probably not even reading or considering? It'll work eventually, right? You weren't being sarcastic, were you? Fine, fine, I guess I'll give it a rest. Nobody's getting through to anybody in this discussion anymore.

Let me counter your question with: Does my right become more right if I am in a minority, and am I allowed to be more of a **** if I am? Does my right become more right if I also rile up people around me, who have no idea what my emotions are or who I am but they simply feel emotional because I am emotional? Take Denmark's embassy in the Middle-East (Yes, I am comparing with that, if you know what I am talking about), where islamists got riled up because a Danish artists had made a painting of "He-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named" (lol). Whilst marching towards the embassy, the crowd became larger and larger, and no one in the crowd had any idea what it was all about, but someone had made a painting, probably, and they were yelling and got angry and tossed **** around them and eventually they burned down the embassy... except they burned down the Norwegian embassy too (They probably didn't know which one was which so they burned down both). Does that right make them more right, because they were offended by a cartoon of Mohammed, and that made it right of them to rile up thousands of people around them? What if Obsidian hadn't listened to Erika, would she be allowed to burn down Obsidian's offices and spread hate about them because of a poem? I know my example is a bit extreme, but do you understand what I am saying? Read: I think (2) fits into it. A bit extreme? Of course she wouldn't be allowed to destroy property or hurt people because she got freaking offended, what kind of a question is that? I'm a huge supporter of free speech and I reserve the right to walk around in public with a t-shirt with a graphic of the danish cartoon with Muhammad wearing a bomb as a turban. But I also have the right to not wear that shirt if I don't feel like it. If Obsidian had removed the poem in order to appease a group threatening violence against them, I'd be pissed, but that's not what went down at all. First of all, it's likely that they overlooked it and legitimately don't like it or want it in the game in the first place. That would be their right to include whatever the **** they want in their work. Furthermore, they didn't remove it or apologize and they weren't responding to threats of violence. They chose to ask the backer if he wanted to change it in light of the situation, and he decided to do so. Period. That's the entire story. Nobody caved to threats of violence and no censorship was forced on anybody. Obsidian decided that they wanted to give the backer an opportunity to change something that was causing a lot of people to **** on twitter and the forums, the backer decided to do so, Obsidian published his rewrite which directly insulted those who got offended in the first place. It's amazing how much imaginary bs all of you are attaching to this situation.

That's a great point. After all, the Nazis greatest crimes were, of course, making people cry. Thoughtless people will always reach for the baseless cheap shot of labeling those with opposing views as Nazis at the first opportunity.