Kveldulf

I'm looking at my rights and I don't see your signature at the bottom. You determining my rights should obviously sound wrong to the rational person. Laws/rights are not made, they are found. Ever hear of the idea of self evident? Its really interesting as it makes the notion of majority/minority less of a consideration in law; it alludes to solid ground for a universal rule of law than a barbaric form of 'might makes right' (That u are attempting) Checkout Blackstone. It may help you understand what rights humans actually have vs ones made up.

I was hoping for more of a sandbox Arcanum feel than BG. Yea, it's much more like BG, unfortunately. Also, I agree with what someone said earlier about the writing, the concept was neat, but the delivery was poor. Nevermind the issues with the eccentric dark history past life throughout the game, the main quest was riddled with theological/atheist contradictions as the story went on. It made me feel like whoever wrote it, was shoe horning meaninglessness as the real agenda to finally fix things... um... that's so daft it's hard to think certain supposed, superior minds would miss how illogical that is... Unless they are trying to prove something with incoherency. lol. I guess you could say, 'that's the whole point' but if thats really meant to be a twist, it's contrived and... dumb. Simple greed would have been a better twist. It's like, they were trying to recreate the Arcanum plot- with the whole Living One reincarnation thing. That part was sort of weak in Arcanum anyway, but it worked because of the choices you felt like you had during the game. This game has too much of a railroad to forgive issues with dialogue motivation.

Well, there's always going to be that fringe minority that has a knee jerk reaction. I myself don't agree with Obsidian on it but wouldn't swear off the company - unless they make some sort of persecution simulator, then I might. I think the biggest underlying concern is that if this will be a trend with development... in which case, we won't know the better. With what little ethics revealed from the company, we are left facing a notion that doesn't look truly consistent, plural and tasteful for future fictions (Or at least, as well as it could be). I myself found the PoE storyline at times a bit redundant and shoe horned. I fear the reason for this shortcoming may have something in relation to the mindset/people as to the limerick thing.

Well, I don't see them either as being intentionally hurtful. Rather, what I'm saying, is a matter which would be more ideal for a company: content, particularly fiction, shouldn't be perceived as politically real, or a matter that needs to address whose feelings will be hurt; it is fake after all. Really though, those within the company concerned about the feelings of a certain group, are more concerned about siding with a perceived safest bet. In this case, I think it has some diminishing returns regarding the quality of the product.

If there is one thing I see out of the limerick fiasco that's troubling, it's that I see a company siding with the SJWs. I see that as an indicator as to issues with any future content, as there will be a filter to content that's more political than about taste. Obsidian may now have a very promising future due to PoE's success, but if they keep filtering content/development with this 'politically safe' business mentality, they'll suffer in indirect ways; what could be a 9.5 game, will be a 9.0 game - for example. I heard the writer of the poem came to obsidian after the debacle, but I also heard that obsidian mentioned the poem 'missed the vetting process' or something to that effect. So, one way or another, they were going to remove a cleverly written nuance in their game.

Thank you OP. I never heard of this title until now. After visiting the Bare Mettle website, I'm somehow missing $60

So during the course of my work week, I've had quite some time to sit back and pontificate about things regarding PoE's system in relation to other PnP systems: FIrst off I think the roll system is charming in essence but cumbersome. Seriously, I understand that pc RPGs 'need' new granularity and cookies to keep a certain pace/incentive, but what PoE has done has made things less intuitive compared to a D20 system and definitely less decisive than a D100 system. Some major issues related to this are (IMO) : 1.) Each stat is trying to do too much and too little. The whole 3 bonuses per stat paradigm seems more about a developer trying to make a system symmetrically pretty than functional. During character creation, its like there's a party going on, and everyone I don't care about is invited. I recall that during beta, the devs were trying to show how different combinations could be used with their paradigm - escaping the dump stack more so. Well, its turned out to be nothing but 'streamlined freedom'. We have all of these fun bonuses flying around but different 'dump' stats. It feels like a salesman pulled a fast one on this stat system, something to the tune of: 'Each of our cars can go fast or slow; the model doesn't matter, its all about what you want....". Now, I understand there are still distinctions between the classes in PoE, but in relation to how the attribute choices particularly relate to the class choices, there is less to distinguish between real strengths and weaknesses (or ones more obvious and consistent with reality). 2.) After hit resolution there are not the usual 3 hit conditions but now 4 (graze). I understand the desire to add some distinction between the types of hits landed ( like a diametric opposite of a crit - thus 'graze'), but even for a pc game, this makes damage less predictable in not a good way. Its as though its trying to maintain a feeling of rock, paper, scissors, than truly a good abstract sense of diametric opposition. Minimum damage on a character sheet gives an impression of a ball park figure and thats already thrown off by damage absorbs from armour. I like damage absorb systems, I really do but from my evaluation between the two types (poe absorb vs wfrp for example), having an adjustable attribute that contributed to DR helped stabilize damage across the board AND made it obvious to the player. The graze mechanic seems to be attempting to emulate a soft global DR to a degree but it feels too volatile & nigh convoluted. 3.) The 'Accuracy' stat utterly neuters the glory of the remaining attributes. Usually the idea is that in a pen and paper rpg, you sculpt your character with various strengths and weaknesses in mind, accuracy is very often one of those direct considerations. There is almost no choice in this system to change its base and that's very sad. I personally like choice, I think most pnp'ers do. Perhaps the board game crew or pc gamers don't ? 4.) Regarding Might, as well as bonuses that seem out of place. Most RPGs have stuck to a classic definition of physical & mental stats (like SPECIAL or SDCIWC) for good reason: Its a good compromise to maintain necessary intuitive details for an immersive tactical AND roleplay experience. I don't mind trying new things, but that doesn't mean I want to play something confusing because it's different.

I don't think an accent change for the Dwarven hunter would have fixed that problem; female Dwarven as a character pretty much flushes immersion for me. Often I try to forgo any female characters in my group unless they actually have a non token vibe, which is rare.

Maybe if they added a "Go to war" mechanic where you could do battle vs other non compliant kingdoms or something. Or, enlisting peons to your cause (than just the six followers). Heck you would figure that as a lord, you would field more dudes to travel along with you, or at least have the option to. I would bring an entire package train if that were the case, along with a holy hand grenade (for them dragons and soulless wabbits)

I think the stronghold idea is sort of meh too. Maybe if there were some more interesting visuals, or generally, more stuff going on (decisions) with it, then okay. The amount of time and energy it took for them develop strongholds, they could have extended other areas of the game - which I would rather have.

He's mentally ill because Gender Dysphoria is in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. you strike me as the kind of person who would quote mine Leviticus. you have NO idea what you're talking about. none. it's like if you said that a runny nose is a sign of infection by Ebola. For one Levititcus is entirely null thanks to the word of Christ and replaced by the laws he lays out. Two: How? I said someone is mentally il because they have a mental illness defined by the main guide on mental illness published by the leading Psychiatric group. Just to add-in - Leviticus is quite contextual with the revelation of the law - and its purpose. Old testament law was really big on maintaining some semblance of real order during a time of murder, great superstition, licentiousness leading to child sacrifice, general crude acts of indecency etc in the area. There's also an interesting correlation as to the cause/effects of acts (sins) recognized in old testament that other world religions never really defined with great satisfaction. The law was extreme, but it was extreme times. I digress though. Mental illness is an affliction of the mind, and just as dangerous as a physical virus. Its recognition and definition can create hysteria in a populace, and given license, its exponentially more cruel. Back on topic - It's a company's decision to recognize types of mental disorder. Homosexuality was considered one at a time. If a company were to maintain that in their mission statement, it may or may not be beneficial, as it depends on their clientele. In a christian or muslim society, a company like that might actually do better than not defining it. my .02

What's really amusing is the sense of justice invoked by SJW - as to where they get their 'law' from; its pretty baseless. The truth of the matter at hand is that every company has a mission statement, and in that, they can't be all inclusive or entirely 'secular'. This company was attempting to make an immersive game, in a fictitious world, but ended up with politics bleeding through. No surprise but..... Since they did this to firedorn, just imagine the other official content sifted/vetted through that the majority of us probably would have liked better?

Her, bigot. And she posted it. On twitter. Someday I'm going to meet a slightly intelligent bigot. It has to happen eventually, right? Maybe if you try putting the tiara of social grace +2 on. Just because someone rolls out a conspiracy thoery doesn't mean you should merely honk with disgust.... can't u just have an open mind? or at least dismiss things politely? I mean, did I hurt your feelings? it sounds like it.

[Kveldulf puts down the piano string] I sense another Firedorn coming to this thread. HOLD ON!

/shrug If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.

Im not saying all effeminate men are gay. But it tells me something might be up. I'm not ashamed to notice effeminate qualities or mannerisms. I try not to judge too much by it, until certain things become too pronounced.

We don't actually know what "vetting" entails. Please..... the story that this one backer somehow escaped vetting is a lie to cover this ruse. They clearly were pressured by the LGTB lobby to change this text. Im telling you..... all the developers laughed when they first read this text.... NONE found it offensive.... its why it was in the game I recall one of the devs in a PoE sit-down/demonstration sounding quite effeminate. If I were to suspect anything it would be that they have LGBT sympathizers from within also pushing this censorship. - just a conspiracy theory.

Heh, I could see it now - Wizard spells called: Entitlement, Repressive Freedom, Firedorning.....

You know how PR works... it generally make things worse when the truth isn't as bad as it seems. Sometimes not bothering about "What will people think if I say this? ... and what if I say that instead?" can make everything go smoother. Obsidian isn't perfect, but that doesn't make them terrible people either. The thing is, if they are willing to bend over for this, it also reflects on their integrity in other areas... like development. There are already big threads pointing out some fundamental flaws in the rule set, as well as some funky decisions with their art style. So this is just another highlight with something internally wrong imo. Game is still impressive though

The fact is, obsidian's vetting process found a cleverly written Limerick to be unfitting for a setting in which people are lynched, babies killed, mental disorders are made fun of, and PCs have the choice to ravage entire cities via theft and murder. Right, it was ill fitting and tasteless /sarcasm *cough* Obsidian = SJW *cough*

New Internet Word - Firedorn - A person, act or thing inadvertently attracting bigotry by being perceived as a bigoted response or too insensitive. [Firedorning, Firedorned]

I do not believe that. Firedorn already said that they left him the choice of a change. If they said keep it in I am sure they would have left it in. They said that it 'failed their vetting process'. It's hard to interpret that as anything but that it was going to be either changed or removed. Yep. One way or the other, they were going to change it. At least Firedorn cemented it with something clever. His name will be an internet reference now.... 'He got Firedorned'

Agreed. People made their case on both sides of the issue. Obsidian listened and made up its own mind about how best to respond. Respect their decision and move on. The prolonged and irrational anti-"SJW" tantrum is effing infantile. No it is just freedom of speech. And a reaction to their behavior since its getting more and more stupid every day. And now the line is almost completely crossed for many people. Whose behavior? From where I'm sitting, it seems both "sides" get way out of control and lose all sense of objectivity and rational thought almost every single time. As for freedom of speech, indeed. People on both sides exercised their freedom of speech to make their case. Obsidian was 100% free to react in whatever way it felt best. That's how freedom of speech and public debate are SUPPOSED to work. Freedom of speech is great.... but it doesn't escape blow back. Obsidian may have thought of its best interests, but the ultimate message after all of this is, it buckled under pressure by a fringe group and backed down. This looks bad to the rest of the community; worse than keeping it. If someone thought it tasteless in Obsidian, that's a reflection of their development, which also means confidence diminished by those who actually thought the joke amusing.... which it sounds like the majority of its fanbase. HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Rule 2: Forums are not a representative sampling methodology. The "majority of its fanbase" is quietly enjoying the game and ignoring this nonsense entirely. Thats just a deflection - as the ratio is probably still the same. Plus, I was making a point that there are consequences to freedom of speech, and in this case, is going against its own internal humor methodology as well as the demograph the joke was intended to entertain. No, studies have shown that forum dwellers are, in fact, not representative and tend to exhibits some distinctly similar trends and traits, which also shows they're a subset unrepresentative of the whole. It's not a deflection, it's the reality...and I say that as someone who likes forum dwelling from time to time. Just because something is getting said or talked about the loudest, doesn't mean it's what most people are saying or talking about. Studies have shown that heterosexual males to be the super majority when it comes to video games. As such we can deduce that most would appreciate the sense of humor portrayed in Firedorns Limerick. Citation: Me, myself and I. [Empirical POV, educated guess]

Well, I respect Firedorn for changing it. Just too bad it came to that.

Agreed. People made their case on both sides of the issue. Obsidian listened and made up its own mind about how best to respond. Respect their decision and move on. The prolonged and irrational anti-"SJW" tantrum is effing infantile. No it is just freedom of speech. And a reaction to their behavior since its getting more and more stupid every day. And now the line is almost completely crossed for many people. Whose behavior? From where I'm sitting, it seems both "sides" get way out of control and lose all sense of objectivity and rational thought almost every single time. As for freedom of speech, indeed. People on both sides exercised their freedom of speech to make their case. Obsidian was 100% free to react in whatever way it felt best. That's how freedom of speech and public debate are SUPPOSED to work. Freedom of speech is great.... but it doesn't escape blow back. Obsidian may have thought of its best interests, but the ultimate message after all of this is, it buckled under pressure by a fringe group and backed down. This looks bad to the rest of the community; worse than keeping it. If someone thought it tasteless in Obsidian, that's a reflection of their development, which also means confidence diminished by those who actually thought the joke amusing.... which it sounds like the majority of its fanbase. HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Rule 2: Forums are not a representative sampling methodology. The "majority of its fanbase" is quietly enjoying the game and ignoring this nonsense entirely. Thats just a deflection - as the ratio is probably still the same. Plus, I was making a point that there are consequences to freedom of speech, and in this case, is going against its own internal humor methodology as well as the demograph the joke was intended to entertain.