Silent Winter

Leaving aside the specifics of whoever else said exactly what earlier - I'd just like to deal with this point. Yes - a general / evil overlord would keep bodyguards with him. The difference here might be between 'every soldier who can hold a gun' and 'a basic retinue because we're not expecting any real threat' They don't call the army in to surround the White House just because a guy with a .22 is heading that way - they'll let general bodyguard deal with it. OTOH, if a small army with tanks is heading that way, they'll relocate el presidente and send a larger force to deal with the threat. Lets take Sendai from TOB as an example: She sent lieutenants after you one by one (granted, in her case it was to 'bide time' to set up her uber-sendai spell). If she had seen you stomp all over her spider minions with time-stop and dragon's breath, she might have realised she's not going to beat you on her own and kept, say, her high-priestess and that beholder etc back to protect her further in the fight (in addition to her drow guards). On the other hand, if she only thinks you capable of fireball and magic-missile (as an extreme example - just roll with it), she might just think her priestess capable of handling you on her own. (She would, of course, still set up her spell - she's not a fool)(well, supposedly anyway). So I think it's less about the boss not having ALL their lieutenants and minions with them, and buffed up, at ALL times 'just in case', and more about whether and which minions/lieutenants they'll send where to deal with a given threat. If they know their enemy favours fire attacks, then they'll equip their ring of fire in advance. If they think they're facing an icy threat, they'll swap it out for their ring of ice (assuming ring-slots are limited and they can't wear all their protection equipment e.g. 2 sets of different full-plate would be out too). In-battle, they'd have to waste a 'turn' to swap rings if you're suddenly throwing the other effect. Spell buffs - in IE games, they'd either be pre-buffed with their full buffs or have a contingency with the most likely spells (stoneskin, invisibility, protection-ring of fire red/blue). In PoE they'd start by buffing themselves with what they expect you to come at them with first, if they have any intel, or a general buffing if not. (I realise aluminiumtrioxid wasn't talking about using this in PoE - above is just for example of different game system). I take the point that the system could be 'gamed' (though so can any system) - but try beating Draconis without showing your true power and you just might deserve an easier fight later So yeah, having a boss-fight (and other dungeon sub-boss fights) vary depending on intel gathered by said boss would fall under the heading of verisimilitude. Having a boss totally unprotected and unprepared for any threats of course would not. Having said all that - I think it would need its own game whose gameplay was centred around tactical scouting and where gaming that system would be the point. So not for PoE but another tactical rpg could have this as a very interesting game mechanic. Perhaps one where you control one set of forces and have to scout enemies yourself to protect your stronghold while also trying to breach others' strongholds without tipping your hand.

*Initiates tachyon web search for update 79* Nothing on sensors captain. *casts True Sight* Nothing - must have a cloak of non-detection. *lays a trap for Update 80* This one won't get by us

I hope it is - I got the impression that we were choosing between pause and slow (togglable in-game) - the auto-'pause' conditions should be easy enough to work with auto-'slow'.

That's why Fighters in PoE get other abilities - like being able to 'engage' more than one enemy at a time, fast stamina regen in battle, things like 'knockdown' or whatever they have. Because just clicking 'fight' is boring (though having a party member you don't need to micromanage is handy too). --- I'm mostly in the 'balance doesn't equal saminess' camp, but I can see the POV of not needing to perfectly balance all the classes all the time. Vanilla thief in BG wasn't equally powerful overall but still had handy things like backstab and HIS for scouting. Even if all the kits in BG2 were better than vanilla, the plain thief was still something you could play with. By end of TOB, HLAs made thieves ludicrously overpowered, true - methinks limiting 'spike trap' to one or two would've been more 'balanced' but then we couldn't instakill demogorgon for the lulz

Animancy is actually not prohibited in the Dyrwood region (it used to be and still is in other places - it is, however, frowned upon by many, including the churches). I think this is one of the conflicts in PoE factionism. (or have I misunderstood and it's "the animancy of immortality" that's still prohibited?) What do you mean by 'limiting undead by widespread cremation' - we're not talking about reviving corpses necromancy style (not sure if that also exists in PoE world) - the animancy process begins while they're still alive (AFAIK). Or did you mean going on a crusade against undead with fire? I agree that there shouldn't be loads of fampyrs in a small area, there could be more skeletons though as they might build up over a long time (assuming adventurers haven't been doing their job very thoroughly).

Maybe just a more limited number of companions from the Hall - i.e. 5 - so you can still recruit the type of character you want for your party but can't replace them once they're dead.

That crossed my mind, but, the world they live in isn't new, and surely, nobles keep company with other nobles, and discussions like "did you hear what happened to Reginald after he was supposed to live forever?" are sure to be expected among them, right? unless taking the 'live forever' treatment is taboo - they don't know that Reginald had it done - just that he got a bit strange and then reclusive, then disappeared. Besides, I think the degredation of the body happens slowly so they might not know about Reginald's condition until after they themselves die. ... er, I mean, they won't find out before they die. Other, older nobles might withdraw from society before it gets to the 'noticeable' stage.

That's what I was referring to - the pattern on the ground as part of the spell effect. I'm still on the fence about icons above the head, but I didn't mind it in BG2 for the limited times it was used then. So long as it's not 'overdone', I think I'm cool with whatever.

I think this is a good idea - each one would be distinct and easy to recognise at a glance. Having some lighting effect is ok - too much 'flash and glow' on the other hand gets out of hand. So a momentary lingering is ok but not perma-glow. And some 'flash' is ok, but not too bright. - I guess we'd have to see these in the midst of a big battle to tell whether or not these get crazy.

I agree that glowy lights all over the screen got OTT in NWN2 - every battle was a nuke-fest and it was often distracting. BG style got it right IMO.

ah, that's right - I was thinking just about the first 'sneak attack' but yes, they also get it if the enemy is under one of those conditions.

First up - another great update. Just when I think I can safely dismiss a class as uninteresting to me, you come up with those chanters. The way the character works sounds like it'd be great fun to play. Those chant and invocation names sound cool lore-wise too. I like how the priests' abilities might be affected by in-game decisions to follow or not the tenets of their order/deity. New portrait looks great (as do they all) Definitely for PCs, probably for NPCs The size is (last I heard) changed to 330x210 for the character sheet with a separate (not auto-downsized) but smaller portrait for the main game screen portraits. No confirmation yet on whether it's bmp,png,jpg or whatever format. But if no UI support for it, we'll be able to drop things into an override folder, right? (and also for non-companion NPCs?)

^maybe - but remember that it's not like pseudo-invisibility (as in IE games) - it's more about detection radius. So the enemies' detection radius might be really big in combat and nullify the ability to 'sneak' up to them. Rogues get their sneak attack bonus within the first 2 seconds of 'combat' according to Josh - might suggest it's only useable at the start.

How could I forget the Copper Coronet? Ship at docks in BG1 was the Low-Lantern (I remember them when my memory is nudged) so yeah - quite a lot of memorable inns - mostly when they're involved in quests but also when they've got something unique like interesting NPCs

I remember more inns than I do names for them but off the top of my head: BG1: Elfsong Tavern, Blade and Stars, Cloak and Helm, Blushing Mermaid, Shop of Silence (she'd let you kip on the floor), The Red Sheaf Inn, Candlekeep Inn, The Nashkel Inn, BG2: The Inn of the seven veils, The Sea's Bounty, (Edit: Five Flagons, Crooked Crane,) ... .... and er, that's it off the top of my head. Can't remember the name of the one in Trademeet, though I remember the Inn itself. Also that one in the Drow City and the one in Brynnlaw. I also fondly remember the enemy parties, though not usually by name, just by encounter.

All good ideas. This one is my favourite: I also wouldn't mind a weapons update. Not even 'special' weapons - just the basics, longswords v flails v axes etc Possibly with some in-game screenshots and some mechanical info (do polearms get a range bonus? Which are more powerful and which are faster and how are they handling the balance between the 2? etc). There's a bit of info lying around a few threads but it'd be nice to have an update about them.

Yes, and again I agree that boobies on armour aren't the only way to tell someone apart (though they don't bother me). In the example shown, the female plate-armour on left and right make room for breasts. Middle one is less obvious in terms of "I've got breasts" but distinguishes more around the waist. I'd be happy with any of those.

I was responding to your "why?" question. If you have a problem with the lack of outrage - PM the people who wanted no boob-plate and see if they'll come back to champion this cause - personally, I don't care either way, as I said (provided it's not ludicrously huge breasts on the armour or a chainmail bikini). Obsidian changed it - fair enough. Doesn't make anyone else's opinion on the matter less valid - just moot. But the current wiki has the concept art of Cadegund with a protruding chest in her plate - it's still feminised armour and has made room for breasts - http://hydra-media.cursecdn.com/pillarsofeternity.gamepedia.com/thumb/3/3a/Cadegund.png/463px-Cadegund.png so I wouldn't say Obs did a total u-turn there. Remains to be seen how it'll look in-game. (Plate on P1 of thread may well be just the male version). Yes - but those were just examples of names in PoE - illustrating that a name won't tell you that they're female - which is what you suggested as an alternative to boobies - just pointing out that it wouldn't work in a fantasy setting

But your 'Why' is aimed at people not arguing in this thread (AFAIK) - you're asking why people can say 'no' to boob plate but 'yes' to boob scale - whereas many here are saying 'well, boob-plate is actually ok too so it's 'yes' to both' Again - I missed the one-sided outrage against boob-plate back then. 'Cadegund' ? Is that necessarily female? - what about 'Sagani'? If we were talking Earth-based fantasy and had 'Susan' as a name, that'd be a good point. But we're not. Having said that - I agree on other points that 'female armour' doesn't necessarily have to have boob-swell. It may or may not be important to display visibly female guards depending on whether or not Obsidian want to emphasise the gender-equality in the PoE world's employment system or just let the player assume an equality or lack thereof.

The Kickstarter Backer achievement is probably going to be just that - a Steam achievement that says "Backed on Kickstarter" - not exactly something to have in your game if you didn't. As for the item - they've said it'll be nice but not uber-powerful so you won't miss it if you don't have it. 'Completionist' can still be completionist by getting everything in your retail copy of the game.

Can I just add that I'm not against boob-plate either exactly - I'd only be against huge exaggerated 2 separate boobies stuck on the plate. General form fitting (ie slight curving out at the chest in a single bit and then tapering a little at the waste) would be fine with me. Same with the scale/leather/any armour. (Clothing that's not armour can have any form it likes, of course) I missed the whole 'community outrage' over boob-plate - was it really a hundred united posters with only 1 or 2 detractors or were there pages and pages of debate like this one? Again - have it in or not, it won't affect my game - though 'female armour' should be in (whether that's just size/fitting or slight chest swell isn't all that important to me)

That's plenty then for the male/female distinction Of course, but in a computer game we can forgive a lack of diversity based on budget. Call me odd but I actually dislike that at first glance - too colourful for a UI element. I never thought to need a different colour to see who's who in the IE games (it was always easy enough with race/gender/gear distinctions).

In those screenshots it certainly looks like the female armour is different (more tapered to the waste perhaps?) - or is that an elf-human thing? Info on race/class for those 2 frontliners? And are they both wearing full-plate +0? I take it that's the EE with the different coloured circles and new UI? It is easy to distinguish in that case anyway - hopefully PoE will also be easy to tell characters apart at a glance - whether male or female or human or elf - gives them some character. (Can't boot up BG myself to check it out as my home-PC isn't responding to the power button )

I have a sudden urge to try this Ah - 'Solo' playthrough, gotcha Actually, that'd be fun for the character creation potion alone

BG might not be the best test for this - since the extra party members are of differing standard companions - anyone tried this with IWD? In BG2 I tend to max out my party of 6 (I like companions, even though I used to rpg with a 'standard' 4) but an evil playthrough had just my PC and the 3 evil companions (Edwin,Viconia,Korgan) - all of whom are the best there is at what they do - definintely found that easier but then I wasn't reaching the TOB level cap with any of my parties so my fewer-member party was always higher level. So back to the game being "nigh impossible" for a solo - it should definitely be a lot harder at the end (level cap reached) (other than in terms of resources) but I repeat that it shouldn't be specifically designed out of the game as that would be a waste of dev resources. Just design a game to be challenging to the party and if people can think of ways to solo it, great for them. (Hopefully those ways won't include silly exploits that the devs should have caught in development (like standing on an island and shooting the boss who can't swim)