Ganrich

He was an acting icon. There are few people with a catalog as extensive as his. He will forever be Dracula to me. Truly a loss to the world.

Made me think of this.

Yes, and? They still work at Obsidian. A founder of the company just left. I think that justifies discussing that particular person. Nothing has changed with the other devs, and that means there isn't much to discuss.

Fallout 4 is long enough in the oven that MCA would have little to no impact. That said, he could bring a much needed facelift to Bethesda's future stories.

Good luck MCA! It is sad, but if he moves to CD Project Red, Bethesda, or InXile I think great things could come of it. Not to say good things couldn't come from Obsidian. I think the gaming industry needs more writers like Chris, and whoever snags him has got my attention.

Was Kotaku the spearhead for the Farcry 4 "Whitewash" campaign? Just trying to figure out the reason for their not being invited to the Ubisoft booth. I am sure there are other reasons, but that incident is the one sticking out in my mind.

Interesting article/blog on the witcher situation. https://medium.com/@adrianchm/on-the-witcher-3-and-racial-quotas-in-art-e6a9f594439

It kind of reminds me of John Carpenter's The Thing where Kurt Russell's character refers to the Norwegian scientists as "Swedes." Except he isn't using that incorrect label to make a political statement.

Been on a Monster Magnet kick, and thought I would share.

Wanted to expand on this. I think a lot of people don't realize the strain of building out the engine. They used unity, but had to add a great deal. I point to another kickstarter game that suffered this very issue. Shadowrun Returns. Then they came out with Dragonfall. Which was much better. I expect PoE's expansions and possible sequel to be much better than this game.

Obsidian would have to make a compelling pitch to EA as they have sole Star Wars video game exclusivity. In all honesty, if we are to see a SW RPG it will be made by Bioware, more likely than not. That could be good news or bad new depending on how you feel about Bioware these days.

The dragon will also Attack if you move toward its treasure horde, or it did in 1.03.

No, I didn't misunderstand you Gromnir. I am not arguing for D&D here either. I don't want save vs Death. It's odd you use that particular save vs effect since I used examples of CCs. I haven't once mentioned save vs death. Could we not use examples of extremes that don't exist in this game to argue our points about PoE? Unless of course you see someone arguing for that extreme. I am talking save vs CC. I am not arguing for a Finger of Death. I would like Obsidian to use its Accuracy system to have some variability in the outcome of CC. More variability than duration, that is. It isn't one way or the other IMHO. There can be a happy medium. If a wizard grazes on Gaze of the Adragan it doesn't have to necessarily still land a Paralyze effect. It could just hobble or daze, or perhaps cause a knockdown. I do not want the spells/abilities to be hit or miss, but the spells to work more like: Crit = Extended Paralyze (or Petrify), Hit = Normal Paralyze, graze= knockdown (hobble or daze), and miss does nothing. Of course another thing they could do is cut down on so many spells and abilities being AoE. I may actually prefer that route as at the moment a large number spells effect far too many enemies at once because we need to make sure Intellect is valuable as an Attribute. Either way, I actually like the game, as I said in the post you quoted. Heck, I have played through the game 2 times and working on 3 now. I would probably have a few more plays under my belt, but life has been busy lately. Anyway, I just think certain things are janky, and the fact that any combat can be resolved using the same tactics as any other is one culprit. I do agree the game being different from the other IE games is a bit of a breath of fresh air, but the game still has issues in my eyes.

The IE games also had a solution to the stalemate problem for NON-magic battles. They use the D20 system, where 1 is always a miss and And a 20 is always a hit. Personally, though, I've come to terms with the Miss--Graze---Hit--Crit system that PoE uses. I like it. My only issue with it is how....universal it is. It applies to everything. Which means we'll never see those dramatic high level magic battle moments from BG2 and IWD2 where a heated, intense battle could end suddenly in a nail-biting moment due to, say, a Finger of Death, or a Wail of the Banshee. After all, what's the point of scoring a critical hit with your death spell? or a Graze with your Destruction spell? One thing I'd love to see is for more than just the duration of spell effects to vary with attack resolution. Particularly, CC spells need to apply different status effects based on the attack resolution - so on a hit you might charm, and on a crit you might dominate, but a graze only dazes. (just as an example) This would allow for a bit more counter-play on both the part of the player and the AI against status effects. As it is, you can confuse or paralyze even extremely powerful enemies for a decent amount of time since you can generally get a graze even when their defenses are very high. Extremely powerful status effects like confuse, charm/dominate, paralyze, etc should be difficult to apply and (IMO) should only ever apply on a hit or a crit, with the possible exception of some very powerful and very specialized (possibly single-target) spells. Maybe slicken doesn't inflict prone unless you hit, and just hobbles on a graze? Etc... There's been some serious missed opportunity to do interesting things with spell effects and the attack resolution system. Maybe they'll implement some more interesting stuff in the expansion? I definitely agree. I think the debuffs/soft CCs (hobbled, blind, etc) should cause their effects regardless of whether your graze, hit, or crit. Their duration should be effected based on whether it is a graze, hit, crit. Some single target hard CCs should also remain this way (Fighter Knockdown). However, big CCs like Charmed, Paralyze, and/or big AoEs that cause knockdown should only work when hitting or critting, and should hobble, daze, etc when they graze. Obviously, these abilities/spells should do nothing when they miss. If not, the AoE CCs need to go. They really trivialize the combat too much. Especially the way the AI doggy piles the Tank. @Gromnir - I won't argue for pre-buffing. I never cared for it, and I think it adds a lot of tedium by forcing the habit and then forcing the players to strip those effects from enemies. I understand why some like it, and admittedly have played games like NWN (1 and 2) as a Strength Bard that prebuffs. However, I think that gameplay style not being in PoE is fine. I know others think it needs to be here, but I definitely do not. However, I will stand by "hard counters" and "Save or else" being a good thing. You can call it archaic, obtuse, or what have you. However, it is in those moments where you failed with your spell, or the enemies are resisting your normal strategy, that you have to think up something else. Because of differing party compositions this forces you to do different things from one fight to another and from one play through to another. I see that as a good thing. Otherwise, it is far too easy to open almost every hard fight with Gaze of the Adragan (or some equivalent CC), and pretty much stomp the opponent. I always liken it to a popular quote from Return of the Jedi. "It's a trap!!!" The rebels were hard countered, and then they had to do what they could to come out on top. Or maybe the Empire was Pre-buffed. The effects of these CCs aren't really the problem, nor the consistency of them working, but the fact that a large portion of them are AoE is definitely an issue. Charming/Dominating 1 Ogre among the 7 in combat isn't a huge swing, but Charming/Paralyzing/Proning/etc 2 to 4 of them is a gigantic one. The fact that 1 or 2 buffs to accuracy can make those effects a near certainty (with a hefty duration, I might add) compounds the issue. The annoyance of being under the effects of these CCs would be diminished if we had ways to remove those effects. Reducing the time is ok, but sometimes you have to use a CC to counter the CC. It just isn't great gameplay IMHO, but YMMV. I would rather be able to devote resources to fixing the issue and not using a duct tape solution. EG - I would rather be able to remove the effect vs reduce the duration or casting hold on my Charmed Rogue party member. To each their own. I will say... that as annoying as these CCs can be that their not being removable has forced me to do some odd things to stop my Monk, with full wounds, under the effects of charm from tearing my squishies apart. However, if that kind of variability is ok then why are hard counters a problem? Because the outcomes are the same. The outcomes are " **** happened and now you gotta deal with it". I guess you could argue that the way the system works that it isn't a variability, but all that does is make me (and I would assume many others) metagame it on harder encounters. These Dank Spores are gonna Charm/dominate the party? Open combat with Priest's Prayer Against Treachery. Those Drakes going to drop some AoE frighten/terrify? Open with Prayer Against Fear. So on, and so forth. Anyway, to go on record... I really like the game, and I am really enjoying it, but I won't pretend that all is right in Eora. To use a metaphor, I think that this is a really good base for some amazing soup, but I still want to voice my opinion on what spices would be the best. I expect the Expacs and the Sequels to bring the spice.

I'm going to piggyback on Stun's comment about hard counters, save vs effect, etc. One issue I have is that a large contingent of spells are AoE in order to make good use of intellect. This compounds the issue of spells not being save vs effect. If I have a scrolls of paralasys why would I use it on any encounters other than the tough boss battles? In the current game these tough encounters are trivialized because the effects occur unless you miss. So, you boost accuracy and guarantee victory with solid AoE CC. These CCs should be single target, some enemies should be immune (or have such high saves to really make them pointless), and so on. Enemies need limited resources as well. We also need dispels. The Priest's protection spells vs charm do nothing once a party member is charmed because buffs, heals, etc don't work on them once they are charmed. These dispels shouldn't be AoE either. I feel we have too much AoE in order to justify intellect. It needs dialing back, and would go as far as to say many issues in the game are repercussions of trying to make all 6 attributes useful to all classes. Which IMHO means we also need to look at attributes again. To sum up: I think hard counters are good. I think We need less AoE. We need CCs and how they work to be reevaluated. Attributes need work still. Engagement needs to be scrapped or toned down. AI needs work. Enemies need limitations on ability/spell uses. I personally think tankiness vs squishiness should be less pronounced. There are probably a few other things I would do, but my lunch break is at an end.

On the note of "why copy BG1?"... Obsidian built this thing from Unity up, and I believe expecting $4 million in 2012-2014 money to reach BG2 quality is asking for a bit too much. They had to create the monsters (their statistics, animations, etc), write the story, implement the gameplay, etc, etc, etc. With the system in place a sequel can expect to do more, have more monsters, have more areas, have more quests, have more everything. To expect a small budget RPG to be built, more or less, from the ground up and exceed one of the greatest RPGs of all time is asking for the sky. BG2 had a good bit they could carry over to allow them to add an obscene amount of content. I hope for the same thing with PoE2, and maybe even their expansions for PoE. I am trying to look at the current game as NWN2 OC, and hoping for Obsidian to be able to focus more on creating a better, shorter, more interesting story or missions with their expac like they did with MotB and/or SoZ. They have said they are doing something more akin to Tales of the Sword Coast so I don't expect MotB level story, but I think it may be wise to try for something on that level. Also, after Obsidian showing off the opening dungeon (Months ago) with a floor puzzle... I was disappointed in the lack of floor puzzles. That said, I could probably chat for a while about all the things I don't like about PoE, but all in all I think it is a great game, and I am having a lot of fun. Could it be better? Yup. Is it Obsidian's worst game? Um... no... My least favorite is DS3, but that is "like... my opinion, man." I don't totally disagree with the review, but I definitely think the reviewer already had an ax to grind. He definitely seems to have not paid much attention to some of the details on abilities and the like.

@gkathellar - your right. That's what I get for posting with 45 minutes sleep. I still prefer slightly more DR than robes bring to the table, but to each their own.

Ciphers are powerful enough that the companion's stats don't inhibit her from being very useful in a party. She can still lay on the hurt. Just finished my Monk play through last night. I loved it. I went kinda offtank with it. 16, 8, 17, 17, 10, 10 IIRC. I let the fighter companion get the bulk of enemies, used the Monk to clean the sidelines, then moved into the crowd around the fighter tank to spam damage with Torment's Reach. Monk requires micro and good positioning. They become really tough to kill late game. I also wore light armor. You can wear robes, but you will be crit more often which can leave you in a bad way. IMHO the Monk has more micro than cipher, but ymmv. You sometimes cannot spend wounds fast enough.

If IB is a percentage then it won't be worth a Talent point IMHO. If IB is a flat number then it could be a bit OP. This is once it is fixed of course. @Ruminate - I think a better example of whether Interrupt is worth it is giving both examples a set time (10 seconds or so) to see how many times the Bear gets an attack in that period of time. Sure, number of attacks between each bear attack is relevant, but I only see 2 bear attacks in the first encounter, and I see 4 in the second. 1v1 interrupt isn't going to matter much anyway, but a party of interrupters that mix weak interrupts (.35 and .5 second) with strong interrupts (1 second) will have a more drastic outcome. If you had a party member with a mourning star get an interrupt on that bear how many attacks would that barbarian land before the Bear attacked again? If in 10 seconds the bear gets 3 attacks because interrupts slowed him, but in the second example got 4 then that is 1 less chance the bear had to do damage. Number of attacks in between isn't everything. IF an interrupt party can cut the incoming damage by 1/3 to 1/2 via auto attack (EG using no per encounter abilities)... then that is silly good IMHO.

In a future game I am planning on making a party built around interrupt. I agree that faster attacks are better, but I am going to combine a monk (TR spam), wizard for blast interrupts, Druid for insects, and a 2 handed Barb for Big interrupts (1 second interrupt). The idea is the monk, Druid, and Wizard can keep enemies semi-interrupted long enough for the Barbarian to land those big interrupts. Dunno if it is optimal, but seems fun in premise. I might go Paladin and Priest for the other 2. Paladin for +accuracy aura to ensure hits. Priest may be swapped out... I believe some cipher spells have good interrupt properties. The idea is still in the works. I was just finishing the mega-dungeon, and my monk had a 1v1 with one of the Animats. It only got its first swing in before it died. I interrupted it 3-4 times straight. Interrupts are incredibly easy to make OP if they buff them up too much IMHO. EDIT: Actually, I will probably make the Paladin my PC (Kind Wayfarer), and couple it with a Chanter Tank instead of a Priest or Cipher.

Monks are great. They are incredibly fun to play. I have been dragging my feet finishing my Monk play through because I can't figure out what to play next. I am worried that nothing will be as enjoyable lol. Definitely going to finish the next couple days. Since everyone hates on Paladins and Rangers (Just like the Monk) I am leaning toward one or the other.

Chanter - Preservation of Knowledge - Once per Encounter the Chanter can cast from a scroll without consuming the scroll.

IDK, while that is valid from a mechanic viewpoint, it seems entirely counter-intuitive, not to mention it completely kills realism. Whoever ever heard, in a fantasy setting, "Quick, let's pelt our friend to near death so he can be useful !" ? That sounds... broken by design. Perhaps there should be an additional way for Monks to generate wounds, and I'm not talking about the lousy per rest ability. Of course this ability is quite acceptable if you rest after every fight, but then again, was that really the intended use case, with camping supplies being limited ? That's a fair criticism. I won't argue that it isn't counter intuitive. I will say that the class is counter intuitive in many respects, but I don't view that as bad. Most fantasy settings (particularly video games) don't have a mechanic that makes you want your character to be damaged. I personally find the idea fun since it isn't something that has really been done before. There are also a handful of broken mechanics in the game. Some of the Barbarian Carnage silliness comes to mind. I see this concept as a pretty legit myself, but it is what it is. Also, it gives synergy that any class can take advantage of. Also, to argue a point based on the setting, the Monks in Pillars seem to be a kind of mix of Asian Monks (like those in D&D) and European Monks that would practice flagellantion. The Monks that practiced flagellantion believed that the pain somewhat absolved them of sin. In PoE it is because it "strengthened the soul and helped prevent fragmentation." Similar, but different. IF the Monks of Eora believe they are strengthened by pain... do they care who causes that pain? If those were my beliefs I may not care one way or the other. The per rest Wound generating ability is indeed garbage, though. IMHO it should be gained for free at a low level (level 3ish), and not cost an ability point. Either that or it should be 1 per rest. Perhaps both. Just to give the numbers for the idea I am talking about to quantify it better... I was out of the house earlier, but here it is. I am using Aloth in my Monk playthrough on hard. I haven't jumped into PotD, yet. I won't comment for or against the Monk's abilities as a whole in PotD. I understand the issues people have with them there though. I still think the issue of removing Accuracy from Perception, and probably removing Damage Threshold from the game as well, are the root cause of these issues on that difficulty. Because these classes were designed with that Accuracy and DT in mind. Aloth's current Thrust of Tattered Veils does 18-30 damage (with his current Might at present). My Monk's Rooting Pain does 12-18 with 16 Might (I haven't gotten a +Might item yet). My Monk's attack damage is 18-24 for each hand. I also have Lesser Wounds. The party is level 9+ atm. If Aloth hits my Monk for 24 damage with 1 ToTV then I generate 3 wounds. That should give me 3 procs of Rooting Pain (It may only go off once, but IMHO it is still a better use) + 3 Torment's Reach. Torment's Reach also debuffing anyone with the AoE for -2 Might, and if Crits occur then I have Enervating Blows to Weaken them as well. So, IMHO it is a better use of ToTV than hitting 1 enemy with the spell.

Shooting your monk is an edge case. Sometimes you don't get engagement when you would like. Sometimes you kill all the targets but the ones on the tank for one reason or another. When those moments arise there is nothing wrong with using an excess resource to proc Rooting Pain, and use wounds to spam a couple TRs. Turning mediocre single target into AoE. You could also just target the Monk with a wizard and get blast damage to boot.

Who cares about DPS on class 1 if it is a more tactically sound idea to convert his meager single target thrust of tattered vwild damage into solid AOE? I do what is better for the moment for 3he party. It does enough to cause a wound or 3 though. If my I don't want to use a per rest ability then I will convert a weak spell from the wizard into an AoE from the Monk.