Matt516

Derp. Well, we'll see if it's fixed in the next build I guess. If it's still broken, moar bug reports.

Yeah... you could do that... but I'd rather just right click to cancel. Adam (if you're still reading), is right click to cancel a planned UI feature?

Bump because although the incoming 16 boxes per character change is a welcome improvement, there's still not much point in even having separate character inventories. I'm with Sensuki - remove the per character inventory and just have the stash accessible everywhere but in combat. OR add encumbrance back in and tie it to Constitution (since it wouldn't make sense on Might). But the current system doesn't make sense.

Adam - Silent Winter's suggestion is good. Another option would just be that when you (left) click on the new weapon set it switches to it and changes to attack cursor. Then a right click will remove the attack cursor if you didn't want to attack. Speaking of - is right click going to be a universal cancel out of whatever the cursor is currently doing? I.e. if you have people selected, right click deselects them. If you've got a spell readied on the cursor, right click removes it. Etc. Not sure if that's the planned implementation, but if not, it'd be a very good idea to consider it IMO. Having a universal cancel helps a lot with UI usability and intuitiveness.

I suppose you could argue that if you wait for a good opportunity to use it you may never get to, but that doesn't really hold water because nothing is stopping you using it at the tail end of an encounter and getting the same benefits you would have from using it at the beginning. But blowing it at the very start is not optimal play - it's getting less out of the ability than you would if you waited for a good opportunity to use it. If you wait the enemies will live longer and thus do much more damage. So using the abilities at the tail end of the battle is not nearly as effective as using them right away. Also, as I said there are a few exceptions. "Tail end" = using it as a finishing blow. Sorry, should have specified. If you wait to use it as a finishing blow, there is 0 difference in total enemy life and you've also had the chance to use it for something more optimal than just damage. This isn't an exception, it's the rule. Firing off all your knockdowns blindly at the start is never the optimal way to play . Like I said, I agree that some per encounters need to be looked at - but please don't base that argument off of a flawed understanding of the "optimal" strategy.

Interesting suggestion, but I'm a no as well.

BS. They are better than standard attacks and not using them every encounter is sub-optimal. Period. No thought needed. Fight starts; use them right away. There are only a few exceptions to that situation right now. If they worked as you suggest they do there wouldn't be a problem, but they don't. We aren't against the idea of per-encounter; only the implementation of them right now. As Sensuki said, the rogue ability is great because it has to be used correctly; you can't just haphazardly spam it every battle without a single thought. That's the way all the per-encounter abilities should be. Otherwise they're just a more tedious form of auto-attacking. But that's simply not true. Using Knockdown to interrupt a powerful ability or trip up a fleeing enemy or break engagement so you can go elsewhere or reduce enemy defenses so your caster can crit with their spell... EACH of these is patently better than using it blindly at the start of the fight. I suppose you could argue that if you wait for a good opportunity to use it you may never get to, but that doesn't really hold water because nothing is stopping you using it at the tail end of an encounter and getting the same benefits you would have from using it at the beginning. But blowing it at the very start is not optimal play - it's getting less out of the ability than you would if you waited for a good opportunity to use it. Not that I don't think per encounter abilities need to be tuned - but let's drop this business of "the optimal play is to use per encounters instantly at the start of a fight". That's foolishness. It depends on the nature of the ability, what it can be used for, what a "best case" opportunity for using the ability is and how likely that is to occur, etc. TL;DR - Using knockdown blindly at the start of a fight is a very good example of bad (i.e. suboptimal) play.

Well, with our suggested system, DPS benefits primarily from MIG and secondarily from DEX, PER, and RES. Casters love MIG, DEX, RES, PER, and INT, and Tanks love CON and PER. While I understand your sentiment re: each type needing all 6 attributes, I don't really think such a goal is realistic without making the attribute system needlessly complicated (i.e. MIG gives 3% damage, 1% speed, CON gives 2% HP/Stam, 1% Concentration, DEX gives 2% speed, 1 accuracy, 1 deflection, etc...). If we want to keep the attribute system simple and easy-to-understand, there shouldn't really be much more than 1 or 2 stats on each attribute. This means that some attributes will, be nature, be favored by some character archetypes. What we tried to achieve was a system in which each class could benefit from any attribute, but not necessarily each archetype. Which (IMO) is as far as it needs to go. After all, we want there to be interesting choices between the attributes - and if not only any class but any character type period will benefit from all attributes, that interesting choice goes away. After all, if all DPS characters and all tank characters etc all benefit from the same attributes, how do you even know what the difference is between the two anymore? Anyway, YMMV - but we aren't really all that interested in taking the all-inclusiveness of the attributes further than the "any class" level. The idea is that the attributes define the archetype, and the class gives "flavor" to that archetype.

Reporting bugs from playing a modded version : BAD. Testing out mechanic "feels" and tuning using a modded version: GOOD. It doesn't have to be all bad or all good.

Well, we did suggest lowering the percentage interrupt per point though. I'd say it's about the same. Either any, it looks like the interrupt stat is going away.

Just wanted to point out that the issue of strategic resources being functionally infinite when in a city is hardly a unique feature of the health/stamina system. Making city encounters a bit harder is an attempt to mitigate that issue - but the issue itself isn't the fault of the health/stamina system, it would happen in any game with strategic resources when fighting in the place you replenish those resources. Stop pretending that this is some revolutionary problem caused by the HP system...

On a slightly related note, I'm going to go ahead and try and run the numbers at some point tonight or tomorrow on a few interrupt cases. I'll be making some simplifications, but hopefully we can get at least a decent idea on how concentration affects your DPS in a few example situations. My suspicion is that interrupt will create a significant DPS loss, but that one percentage point in concentration won't have a huge effect on that.

Well, just because each attribute is equally worthwhile does not mean that each attribute is the same. The idea is that every attribute spread is viable, but you still have to play to the strengths of that build. If you want a fast striker character, you have to put points in different stats then if you want a defensive character. That's the idea, anyway. Equal, but different.

We're not geared towards min maxing any particular build... We just want to make it such that any attribute distribution is viable. I apologize for my inability to convey our goals better than that, but there it is. You're welcome to insist that we're trying to make everyone minmax our way or that our system is overwhelmingly geared towards a maxed Might build, but from where I sit I don't see it. We're trying to combat that by giving the attributes commonly dumped by such a build valuable bonussen that will hurt if not present. For example, in our proposal a character with 3 Resolve would have 7 less Deflection than in the current system while still having less Concentration. If that's not a painful stat to dump, I don't know what is. And that's our goal - to move away from the current system's "RES and PER are dumpable, therefore max MIG and INT and DEX to win" to a system where every attribute is valuable. And that's really all I can say about that.. If you still think we're trying to make the max Might build king and force everyone to minmax characters "our way", there's not much else I can say.

Josh is awesome. Metacritic is BS. That is all.

How would you not be dual weilding using a pistol and blade? I count two hands needed? Well I meant from a perspective of recovery time. Dual wielders have shorter recovery time than sword and board or just sword people. I was saying that if using this style, you shouldn't get the speed bonus from dual wielding even though you are holding something in both hands. Can understand how my statement would be confusing though. EDIT: That said, another (even better) option would be to have the pistol function as a 1H fast weapon with no special advantages (i.e. no DT piercing, Deflection bonus, etc) after it's fired. Pistol whipping, basically. Then you WOULD be dual wielding, it would be reasonably well balanced, and... Yarr. Obs pls.

I believe that's incorrect - the 50% damage reduction from graze should apply before DT (so you rolled 42 damage, then it was cut in half to 21). The incorrect math is just that, bugged math (or not displaying everything, or something like that). I've got a bug report about that somewhere in the bug forum (on mobile so I can't really link it at the moment). Glad you're trying the Beta, OP! Don't get discouraged - the game is in a very rough state right now and a lot is subject to change. I've high hopes for release day.

Well, I should preface this by restating that I no longer thing it's a good idea due to the difficulties it would present for balance, but... No, I wasn't imagining single target abilities being AoE - any that had a Duration though would just have the Duration increased to the max. And as for AoE of Non-DoT spells, i was just thinking the AoE would still be customizable but there wouldn't be any other tradeoffs at play.

My hope is two years from now, a patch will be released with Sawyer still trying to balance the game with tweaks to the attributes, skills, etc. Eh. Realistically, I don't see balance changing after release - until the sequel, at least. Outside of a few overpowered skills that will inevitably be discovered, that is.

Well, you get +15 Accuracy for using a 1H weapon without anything in the other hand. So presumably, if this were implemented as a full feature (AS IT SHOULD BE ), that Accuracy bonus wouldn't be present when using this system. You'd also (presumably) get the extra 1s of recovery time since you're not dual wielding. Not sure how it works at the moment though. That'd be a more than decent tradeoff though. Missing out on 15 Accuracy for the sake of an opening salvo - it'd be UP, but who cares? It'd be fun.

Please reduce the tooltip delay for spells significantly or make it customizable in the options menu. It's really annoying hovering over every one of ~10 spells for about a second just to find the one I want. Personal preference would be for near-instant, but it should really just be a slider in the options menu.

A dedicated slot for pantaloons would be nice. :3 In all seriousness though - rings and amulets and cloaks are fun! :D

Well, here's how the math for any individual interrupt roll works: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3593502&userid=17931&perpage=40&pagenumber=10#post434357315 Since the constants in that post were from memory and subject to change, I was (and am) hesitant to do the maths on how interrupt affects expected DPS. That and the fact that it's dependent on a number of random factors like attack speed ratio, who attacked first, what weapon they're using, etc. To complicate things further, how much you get interrupted also depends on if you're attacking them and what your interrupt (and their concentration) is since when you interrupt them you reduce the number of times they attack (and interrupt) you. It's very difficult to boil the value of a point in concentration to a single graph without doing some kind of simulation of a bunch of different battles with a bunch of different values for parameters and averaging out the results or something. Even then, my results would largely be dependent on my arbitrary choices of which conditions to test, how to "average" it, etc. It's kind of a mess. Here's a quick summary table I put together from page 22, Gromnir. That should catch you up on the major attribute systems suggested up to that point, though it won't catch you up on the other random discussion re: AoEs and the like (much of which was very good). http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/68526-how-to-fix-the-attribute-design-in-pillars-of-eternity/?p=1509826 Cheers!

Stahp hijacking our thread with bickering. Fight elsewhere pls.

Yarr.