Quillon

I like jobs defining initial skill bonuses but yeah attribute bonuses are somewhat pointless, maybe only culture should give attribute bonuses since races have traits.

Since there won't be a Nassau-like island base I'd rather want HQ will be just the ship, if someone should come to us to make a deal or something they should come on board, a mere "key to breezehome" would be redundant in a game like this and should it be more than a home it would take from what would make the ship special/important.

How about speed slider then? Maybe on top of the toggle.

Yeah I went a bit too far but ship graveyard type map, a map where many ship carcasses are used as platforms(not actual ship to ship combat) could be done I think maybe without the sinking etc. depends on if the devs see it worthy

I hope for a naval battlefield(if its a thing) at some point; a map in which 10+ ships abreast, half of them half sunk, we board from one side to a long fight with plenty of deck hopping with ships joining the fray and/or sinking at couple [check]points with an eventual sea monster encounter. Expensive, maybe imposubru dreams. And when we defeat the sea monster, a much bigger ship will arrive and steal the trophy/loot/whatever, which will be our medium term ship/captain nemesis. Come to think of it, there is a great potential with enemy ships/captains who can be our allies/enemies and mystery ships, plague ships(which is confirmed), trading ships conveniently needing our help or facing our wrath etc. something rpgs with mobile bases lacks most of the time f.i. there was no other normandy type ship roaming around the galaxy in ME, a bit too one of a kind

It'd feel really weird if guns and crossbows didn't have it. They're not modern semi-automatics. Just merge recovery with reload like they did already, why would it be weird?

Yeah, I agree about DAO's two handeds, rest was okayish tho. Yeah this may be the ideal solution. Where ever possible time should be taken from recovery to animation without making the animation slow-mo like they did with merging xbows' recovery with reloading. Recovery is just so unnatural, it just bugs me too much; now in Deadfire some evading moves etc helps with that inaction period but more could be done; f.i. instead of waiting out 3 secs recovery then shooting an arrow in an instant, animation time could be longer on drawing and shooting...and most other anims could be a bit slower I guess. And I already expressed this in other threads before but recovery period could also use some flavor animations: pseudo defensive stances/taunts/wiping away sweat/holding onto wounds if hp is low etc.

Sure, a minimum fixed downtime should be required as long as dex, armor type etc effects animation speed only. Haven't they said they added recovery time of crossbows' to their reloading animation a few months ago? Isn't that so in the game?

Not sure you understood what I said or I understand what you're saying Recovery is the period where characters do nothing in between actions, I'm saying that time could be added to animations(making animations slower) and recovery could be removed altogether.

I've always felt recovery time in PoE is an artificial way to balance combat in a real time(with pause) computer game, its just a period of inaction tied to other variables which doesn't seem appealing for starters. It also helps reduce simultaneous actions at any given time which actually supposed to help coping with combat. But does it really achieve that purpose? Why has most people been using slow mode in PoE? Is it to see what the characters are doing more easily or for less simultaneous actions happening with increased recovery time in slow mode? Maybe both but for me the former is the purpose of activating slow mode. I didn't think of this much before, I just wasn't liking "artificial inaction for gameplay purposes" but when I saw Josh's twitter post recently it hit me that recovery time's existence may be the problem all along that people have been calling combat in PoE a clusterf*** etc. https://twitter.com/jesawyer/status/931612193036017664 I think the problem is fast movement & animation speeds so removing recovery times and adding that time to animation speeds/slowing them down should solve it. As an example, Dragon Age Origins doesn't have recovery times and has slower animations, running speed etc. and combat never felt confusing in that game. Anyway, I may be wrong or this could be too fundamental part of PoE that couldn't be changed anyway. Thoughts?

Maybe holding tab should reveal hyperlinks? Otherwise they should stay hidden, only showing up when player needs an explanation for some word :/

"Some people" not getting it, of course. It's always because of a vocal minority that we can't have nice things or get to keep them, like in this case. Vocal minority are the people who are here atm. Its the un-vocal wider audience; the other 999k or so who bought the game they are changing some mechanics for.

I destroyed Thaos' soul purely for going against the cliche that "good guy fights the bad guy, defeats him, spares him then bad guy recovers somehow and comes after the good guy again", no friggin way he won't Tho there is no way he'd be at the same strength/importance if there were to be a reactivity for it in Deadfire or in another game later on. It would potentially be a cool boss fight tho.

Its just an example which can surely be refined. I haven't played much of TToN but I guess its that choice between the red robed gal & the older dude, I guess I could be ok with that kind a choice if it has repercussions like I said, if the one we didn't choose wouldn't wait around and goes on to become an NPC that matter which we'd cross paths later on. There are also existing examples like in KoTOR2, where we could recruit one of the 2 companions dependent on the path we took prior or in DAO where we could recruit Loghain but Alistair leaves(becomes a king or whatever). My standing on this is that replayability should come from our choices in narrative and how different all the available companions react to our different choices not whether they are there or not to be able to react.

Yeah, gave the example with that in mind.

The big mistake you're making is assuming that by giving combat as an example that's all I care about. Character development and companion interactions are both important to me, but I don't buy the more is better argument. So you actually want a twelve person party right? I mean there are going to be twelve companions/sidekicks in Deadfire so, by definition, having a party of only six means having half as much fun as having a party of twelve. As Fardragon says it's a false comparison. Character development looks to be significantly deeper in Deadfire as compared to Pillars such that I'll probably spend more time making choices in it than I did in Pillars. This is also a constant issue for me, I'm half agreeing with kanisatha. I like to see all the companions' development/good or bad reactions to all the situations etc. Its not a realistic choice that choosing which companions to bring with us at any given point, its just gameplay limitation which I understand. But I don't mind the party being 5 or 6, if party limit isn't big enough for all the available companions I don't care how fewer it is. And I don't necessarily want a 12 men party, I want fewer available companions in the limits of available party limit with a lot more reactivity packed in them. And with what's explained to us we can cheat with metagame knowledge, f.i. if I gotta kick a dog for some reason that will hurt my relationship with Eder, I could simply load an earlier save and not bring him or if I'm to save a cat on a tree and Eder's not with me at that point... you get the idea, this is a degenerate strategy that game allows. I really don't understand that people wanting more and more and MOAAAR companions, there can be characters who sticks with us(they could have been stationary in Caed Nua or could be in our ship) who should not necessarily be companions. Character variety isn't tied to companions. Just make few companions with more class choices if you wanna cover all the classes with companions, 3 for each f.e. which they already did with 2 classes for about half of them. And if someone really hates some of the available companions for some reason, there is custom companion system after all. Ofc at this point this is all in vain talk, hope to see future RPGs that'll tackle this issue. Since I'm talking in vain, companions shouldn't necessarily be strictly companions, they should potentially be powerful NPCs; allies or enemies. If I took Eder in gilded vale, Aloth could have refused to join me and could have been a powerful enemy later in the game, vice versa. Or Durance and GM could have been arch enemies that we could take either's side and help them defeat the other etc. This could have allowed a party choice which isn't purely gameplay based and companions more than the party limit but not necessarily all of them available in our roster.

Have you guys seen the journal in DOS2? Compared to it, this is god's gift to RPG community.

There is a difference between praising something and declaring it instant classic and such; giving it 94 metacritic etc with all its flaws. Bugs alone should have taken at least 10 points from that score. And I was thinking critics were far too generous to Pillars 1, seems I hadn't seen nothing then. DOS2's standing on its combat and production quality for its sheer scope, I don't see people praising its story, reactivity, characters etc. all time classic alright. I guess I have to add IMO or such at the end of every sentence otherwise I'm speaking for everyone.

The opposite for me, the more I played the more I started to dislike it. Too much design flaws, the game is in between single player and co-op and not catering fully to any side. Its never explained why you can control companions in dialogue. Straightforward quests, pointless features(why is there a big ass ship?) very few on board. Too many useless items and gear. Mostly boring companions who are too isolated from each other just to make playing as any of them could work. Too much power gap between levels it becomes a chore just to keep party's equipment on par during the last 3rd of the game.(managing inventory is pure chore right from the start) Act 3 was also pure chore to just to get to the end which was buggy as hell. It certainly doesn't deserve all the praise it got. Just the first 10-15 hours of it is really fun then its downhill from there which I imagine the only part of it the joke that is "media" got to play before declaring it instant all time classic.

https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3807509&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=278#post477232833

Well, this was certainly enlightening at the least. Btw. shouldn't Galawain's choice effect our party to have stronger souls also? Or is the machine's racist and effected only dyrwoodans, then at least Eder, Durance, GM & Hiravias & DoC should have got stronger souls, no?

I thought that was a beer, or does he offer both? Its a beer. Yeah. I'm countering "Eder is selfish" argument He's considerate enough not to offer them smoke.

Not true, he offered to buy one for Iselmyr, even had to extend his offer to Aloth.

And Palle was "balls", right? ...weird naming obsession

Alright, ima gonna change my opinion once again on this topic I got used to the narrating guy, and all the voiced dialogue & not reading. Damn, DOS2 is making me lazier than I was.