Abel

In the world of Eora, this claim is false. All right, first of all, mechanically speaking: power of your character's magic depends on Might (direct effect on endurance), Intellect (direct effect on AoE and duration) and Perception (direct effect on Accuracy). So three stats you can use to form a character that'll have his/her magic much more powerful than the average. So it's not like you don't have a choice in writing any backstory you'd want around that considering half the attributes describe magical strength on Eora. More importantly tho, you're fitting a square peg into a round hole. I like that you write your characters before beginning a serious play, it makes me feel less weird - thing is, before I start putting a lot of thought into who the character I wish to play is, I first put some effort into understanding how does the setting I'll be playing in actually function. And then I create characters that I believe could be interesting and fun to roleplay in terms of that setting. In terms of Eora, your priest woman who believes that power of her magic comes from strength of her soul would be like a silly little squire standing in front of a charging horse, believing his silly little shield is enough to protect him. In other words, she's about to find out how wrong she was in her beliefs. Which, incidentally, could also be a fun character to roleplay. However, Eora is the first setting that actually allowed me to create an idiot whose inborn magic ability and great physical strength allowed him to become a rather formidable opponent that people don't particularly enjoy parleying with since his unpredictable nature may mean they'll get hit by lightning. That was fun, I never could really do that in an RPG. At the end of the day, you're trying to create a character that bends natural laws of the setting that character exists in - which makes no sense from the perspective of the character you're roleplaying (unless said character still has a lot of illusions about how the world works) nor from the perspective of gameplay mechanics themselves. It's like I played DnD and said that I really wanted to create a really fit, powerful and durable fighter that also has really low strength, dexterity and constitution and then added that because this character won't work, attribute system is broken. Well, i don't quite understand this whole post. I thought i spent more than enough hours reading about the lore of Eora before writting my background. My only concern was about the lack of details about the social organisation of pale elves in the White That Wends, which contrived me to be a bit creative with the lore of Pillars. Actually, it seems to me that when you speak about PER and magic, it's a mechanic matter more than a lore one. It's chance to hit. It does not influence the spell itself, unlike MIGHT and INT. Is it part of a setting, according to people here? I ask the question genuinely because to me it definitely isn't: it's part of a ruleset. But i guess it's just a detail. Maybe what you guys are telling is "in the world of Eora Physical and Magical strenght are governed by the same thing, so if your character has great magical power, it has great strenght, regardless of it having muscles or not". Hum? sorry i can't process anything like that. It's too alien to me. I may lack of imagination? Hu? I always could write my backgrounds and distribute my attribute points afterwards without a problem. Strenght, Dexterity, Luck, Charisma, Beauty, ... All this is pretty self explanatory i guess. I fail to see that with Pillars. Then is it my fault? How do you write a backrground with PER or MIGHT in mind? I use to start with race, country, backstory, beliefs, hopes for the future, goals, physical appearance and characteristics and so on... I never included or even considered any attribute statistics in my backgrounds. I just write the whole starting background of my character and determine what is fit attribute wise once i'm actually creating the character in the game. Magic does not come from the soul? Hu? I was pretty sure it was the case. Like... I was absolutely positive it was stated in various places. Well, my character does not bother with this. But i have to in order to create it .

All right, now I'm just confused. At character creation, you get X points to distribute in any way you see fit - there are absolutely no restrictions, aside from that you have to distribute all of them. If you don't want her to be strong, you just... Don't put those point into might, or even drop it slightly to make her weaker than average? And this will then be reflected in scripted interactions where she won't be able to pull off any feats based around might. And... That's exactly what you want, isn't it? From what I can understand your only problem with the system is that there are no stat requirements on equipment, to which I can only say just... Well, don't use it if roleplaying is what you care about the most. If there's something I always appreciated about system present in Pillars of Eternity, it's precisely that it allows me to design my character in any way that makes sense to me from RP perspective - and since there are no dump nor required attributes, that character will work, unless I make that character do things that go directly against those attributes (like a weak and fragile man donning full plate and standing at the front) - but regardless, if I want to roleplay an especially ambitious weak and fragile man that wants to don a full plat and stand at the front, there's nothing in the game that'd stop me from doing so. Well, no that's not it. It would be a bother to explain the whole background of my character. But suffice to say that as a passionate Eothasian Priestess living in the White that Wends, she once heard about the story of the Saint's War. Her faith was huge and her disarray became huge accordingly. Which convinced her to smug aboard a ship en route for Dyrwood in order to find out the whereabouts of her shattered god. And everything she experienced from there just shook her to her deepest fundations. Because she is shocked by the differences in culture, because of what she learns from Eder or Durance, because she finds out she may lose her mind like Maerwald, because dead people come to speak with her, because she lives the death of others again and again, sees ghosts, and discovers that people can hang people on trees and let them rot just because, and so on... (which is the purpose of the in game journal. It helps me define how she will evolve, depending of the things she experiences, and how she will bear with them). Magical Power finds its source in the soul. Since she has such a deep faith, and since the values Eothas always rerpresented are so much who she truly, deeply is, it would not make any sense to dump her magical power to me. Her faith is pretty much everything to her. In the same way that paladins gain powers from their convictions, you could tell that the deepest the convictions, the more powerful the power. She would not bother to go on such a perilous journey if her faith was shallow. There are 2 attributes that define magic (MIGHT and INT). And faith can't have anything to do with reason or intelligence for me. To me, INT is more like the talent to use this great power properly (defines AoE and duration). That's why i figured she should have a really high Might. But as i said, she can't have more than 8 strenght either. Because she is a female, she is a pale elf, and she lived in a kind of protected, secluded place ever until she secretly departed from her home. There is no way she could have more than 9 strenght. I don't really want stat requirements on items. I don't need requirements to define what she should/could wear or do. The system of Pillars does not allow me to play the character i want in a roleplay perspective. It's the first time i find this problem in any iso RPG i played. This system is probably effective when it comes to statistics and combat mechanics, but to me, it does not make sense to have magical and physical strenght depending of the same attribute. It only makes sense that from a roleplay perspective, some characters will have strong magical powers and low strenght, or, on the contrary, some will have low magical powers but high strenght. I don't know who could argue about this simple point. They could say that they don't roleplay and as such, don't care. But it's a wholly different argument for a RolePlaying Game.

Why did you create her that way then? Max out her INT and her PER instead and chuck the rest of your attribute points into whatever else you'd like. She's suddenly an extremely potent priest/wizard/cipher/chanter(?) that excels at support and crowd control. Most buffs/debuffs are way more powerful than spells directly influencing endurance anyway. Another thing that gets conveniently forgotten in "Might influencing spells" discussion is that Intellect also does that, and arguably in a much more essential fashion, as long as you're not playing a Druid. Actually, it's an eothasian priestess/fighter (or kind of, since she only has melee talents) played in hard difficulty. Her attributes are between 11 and 14 (no dump stat, no maxed one), 13 might (i would like her to have 8 strenght and 18 magical power for role reasons. So, i was confused and chose 13 as an unsatisfying in-between. I roleplay her a lot, writing a lengty diary of all she feels and experiments in her difficult journey, using the in-game journal (end of act 2, 206 hours)). In combat, i mostly use her as an off tank (i guess) rather than in a support role (spells are limited and i barely ever use camping supplies (especially in dungeons: i only use these outside dungeons when night fall and there is no inn to be found in the area), so melee is a good way to use her while sparing her spells for truly challenging encounters along the way). Would be better with low level single target melee buffs, like the ones in BG, though ^^. I gave her 13 intellect for role reasons. 14 dexterity and perception. Her attribute statistics are pretty much in accordance to who she is. Aside from might... I could not find a way to deal with this problem. Regarding combat, my goal is to make the best of her sub optimal build. Even though she'll always be sub optimal in the end. As you may have understood by now, my character is not all about role in combat. So, i don't really care if putting INT or PER and using her for crowd control would be more effective. I just want her to be the character i roleplay in her diary, and the character i wrote a lenghty background for. I use to write the background first, and to distribute afterwards her attributes accordingly Not the other way around (which is pretty obvious). And she should not have the strenght to use Nightshroud (which looks really heavy). That's why. Might as it is may be a pretty effective ARPG gameplay thing. But i don't care. I never considered RPGs to be all about effective combat mechanics. I always expect my character's sheet to reflect the character itself rather than anything else.

Because people don't want mental and physical prowess to be tied to the same stat due to the disconnect it causes with reality. I think it has been said in different ways for quite a few times already in this thread alone. Might indeed works as designed, but people don't like the design in the first place so that point is moot. When you say people, you mean some people. Some people may not like it, some people actually like the consistency of a damage stat being all in one. That's exactly accurate. There's, what, ten people in here that care? Not even the majority of *this thread*. Let alone *this board*, which is only a tiny fragment of PoE players. *PEOPLE*, in general, really don't care. PoE players, in general, really don't care. Most of them don't bother to comment or remark, let alone go to a message board and complain about it repeatedly. Most people who have played PoE have never complained about Might, because most people who have played PoE--the vast majority of the over-one-million--don't care enough to do so. Well, sorry. I did not bother to launch some kind of worldwide poll about it. But... I care. And looks like Ninjamestari or i are not alone in this case. I guess you did not bother to do a worldwide poll about might either. While Ninjamestari should not claim "people care", you probably should refrain from claiming "people don't care", too. I did not read the last few pages, but while it's hard to tell how many people care and how many don't care (which is pointless anyway), i still have a big problem with my tiny pale elf priestess being able to lift a truck barehanded. Which is, to me, one of the dumbest thing possible in a RPG. Period. She is not Luke Skywalker you know. "Might" is not ''that'' powerful in her family... Anyway, about the thread's topic... I always felt the fact that all characters gain experience points at the same rate is a problem. One thing i loved about the old IE games was that while characters leveled slower, you had one of them leveling every now and then, which guaranteed you always had one of them being pretty close from a level up. In Pillars, you would kill a xaurip, and BING. All party gain a level at the same time. I would rather have them level up at different times, rather than having to take care of all of them at the same time. I used the console in my playthrough to tweak the experience gained by every character, in order to emulate this. I would not be bothered from having characters lvl 10 and others lvl 8. I guess the best for Pillars 1 would have been a max level of 9 with characters leveling up at different paces, and Pillars II starting with a lvl 9 Watcher. At least, in my opinion.

You can purchase an add-on in your Backer Portal. You have to connect on your Backer Portal and chose the corresponding extra. I still haven't confirmed my pledge on the Portal, coz' i'm too lazy right now, but you should find the option quite easily while browsing. You will be able to reclaim 2 steam keys or to link the copies to 2 different GOG accounts when the game is released. So, you don't need to pledge twice on FIG. Just upgrade your current one.

It was part of the 3.5M stretch goal. It's included already thanks to Obsidian's commitment and backers' support. https://www.fig.co/campaigns/deadfire?update=277#updates Look at the details in Fig Update 16. As you can tell, it was not this hard to find out.

Yeah, it's always the same problem. If i want to roleplay a character with great magic powers but no physical strenght, i just can't. It would just lead to dumb things everywhere where your frail character will have better odds than Eder to move this 1T rock out of the way... Sigh... Ninjamestari is exactly right. Might is a pure concept that serves game mechanics. It could be a great idea in many game genres, but i still fail to see "Why? Why in a RPG?"

I'm not a game designer, nor are you i guess. Fearing that something is not balanced because one fail to see how he could make things interesting and somewhat balanced is underestimating way too much game designers, especially game designers at Obsidian. It's their job to fine tune things, not mine. So, while i feel magic should be way more than just colored DPS, i will refrain to speak about class balancing and advanced game mechanics, especially when i don't know this much about Deadfire yet.

It's all about having different ways to do things. Not to have spellcasters being OP. It's a RPG after all. Plus, there is a difference between making spellcasters OP and giving them opportunities to do things with magic others can't. BG was not perfect in this regard, but if you take a good look at 1st level spells in this game, you will see that there were some pretty nice ones which, while not being OP, granted some fun and made the player feel that magic was not just another weapon to kill things (which is very important). Charming Glaicas at the De Arnise Keep was not an OP solution. It was a way to avoid the combat for players who did not want to kill a possessed good guy. Allowing the player to think of this other way to handle things and then, granting him another neat possible outcome was rewarding and made me feel my wizard/priest was not limited to one of the traditional tank/DPS/... MMO role. There are ways to achieve this kind of thing inside and outside combat. That is one of the things i'm looking forward regarding magic in Deadfire.

Rosting wild boars in the wilds, performing shows in the streets, turning grandma's cat pink because it's fun, solving quests, opening doors, reaching areas, infiltrating a den, charming a stubborn guard to have our way, avoiding combat by dominating this soldier beforehands, getting informations or exploring ahead through divination magic, all utility magic... There are infinite reasons why this would be useful. And i'm just someone without much imagination. If anything, RPGs and magic should not all be about combat. And to me, that's the first reason of them all. Thankfully, Pillars is not a A-RPG where magic is only another way to have some DPS with spell effects of different colors... It's not this boring. Or should not.

I'm pretty sure that by "subtle" he meant... "subtle". Like in "not so much in your face" design style. It could mean "not this big", "not this flashy" or even "not this saturated" or whatever.

Thanks for having clarified my point about fetch quests. While reading some answers to my comment, i felt too lazy to argue further.

At least complexity is interesting. Just compare Baldurs Gate to Diablo. I played a *lot* of both BG 2 and Diablo 2. I played quite a lot Diablo 1 too. But you don't play Diablo and Baldur's Gate for the same reasons. At least i don't. Complexity for the sake of complexity is not usefull, and i guess Ninjamasteri is right when he says "a solution can be simultaneously simple and deep. That is called eloquence. Overly complex solutions lack this sadly underappreciated quality. It is the fool that mistakes complexity for wisdom." But on the other hand, i think you can't achieve certain goals while designing a RPG if you refuse to invite a certain degree of complexity in your creation. I don't want to post one day in a thread called "I did not finish Deafire" something along the lines of "the over simplified game system, while efficient at a certain degree, feels way too shallow, and fails to take into account way too many things for me to be bothered anymore by the game".

The only thing i said is that i don't think you can discuss the topic of pre buffing while ignoring the problem of spam rest. Some here really *want* to discuss pre buffing, while i'm pretty sure there are countless threads about it in Pillars 1 forums already. Do i really need to urge all these people to look once more to the poll as a *whole* ? The thread's name is "Casting outside combat", not "Do you want pre buffing back?" Just because pre buffing is a thing for you does not mean that this is all there is about casting outside combat. You keep bringing the same thing without even trying to imagine what "casting outside combat" could mean with a creative approach. While you seem to urge me to stay on topic, i feel the urge to do the same for you. Though, i said this twice already, and probably won't bother to do so thrice.

I barely ever used Haste. The reason is that my characters would be tired afterwards. Which is a bad thing, unless you love to spam rest. Actually the spam rest problem is linked to the pre buffing one. If you can't spam rest and still mean to use half your spells for pre buffing for each single combat, you'll have a hard time. I used some pre buff for battle against Kangaxx or Firkraag in BG2, but aside of this, one blessing spell here and there and that's it (and that's the reason why i used to have 2 priests in the party, which ended up being really usefull while playing like this. Especially their healing spells outside combat). People like me who will hardly ever use the rest feature outside of an inn have no problem with pre buffing. It's all about power gamers' bad habits, i guess. So, if you're complaining about pre buffing the way you do here, i think i kind of understand where you come from. I feel the "tired" status could simply be used to determine when you can rest. Since it's pretty hard to have 8 hours worth of good sleep when you woke up 2 hours ago, it would make sense that your characters would not be able to rest unless they have walked for 6 hours in the wilds, or unless it's night time. As for the combat being the most important part of the game... While i won't deny that there are quite a lot in Pillars, i don't feel that it's the most important thing in the game. At least, for me. But anyway, magic outside of combat could bring a lot more than pre buffing. Especially with imaginative game designers.

Yep, grey sleeper looks great. Maybe the one i like most. And it looks even greater associated with ryona's breastplate imo.

Well, the fact that there are no icons showing NPCs "having quests for you" has nothing to do with a lack of polish you know oO. But polish has something to do with the game having no icons. You understand things backwards. I'm pretty much sure that a vast majority of the backers of Pillars 1 definitely did not want these icons. And Obs has stated since the very start that the game would not take the hand of the player. "No icon that shows "this guy has a quest for you" means i have to click everyone of them.". This part struck me hard. That's pretty much the purpose actually. Named characters often have more to say than characters with "townspeople" as a name. Most quest givers are named. Although i saw quests given by "townspeople XX" in past RPGs. I would like more of this, because this means your exploration and research is rewarded, as it is in a tabletop game. That's precisely the point of having several different ways to solve quests: the point is to reward players for thinking. Having quest markers would defeat this whole purpose. Originally quest designs implied players have to think for themselves in order to solve them. There were not any usefull quest log either. You could even fail them if not careful enough. Fetch quests is a pretty recent lazy game design style, which take great care into making sure the player can't lose, and don't miss them (quest markers) (lol. I despise this type of design so much, i can't even tell). Don't expect to see these icons in Pillars 2 either. If there are added, i would feel utterly outraged. Like... utterly.

Anyway, i fail to see how dropping strenght of female characters a bit compared to male characters and "fantasy tropes" have anything to do with each other. I do the same in Fallout. By the way, i, personally, have nothing against tropes or clichés. It's all about the way you use them. Use them badly, it will be boring. Use them wisely, it will be great. I think it works for cinema or books, too. Using clichés does not necessarily means being lazy.

While writing another post on another thread, i remembered one more thing that may be a cause of me not finishing this game. It's about items. I struggle quite a lot with equipment. I will use the examples i took in this other post. I have a hard time finding a good way to equip my characters. I think the first reason of that, is that many items don"t have a clear focus. As an illustration of what i mean, if you take Carsomyr, from BG2, you could tell that the weapon was useful for dealing damages and dispelling effects on evil targets. While, in, Pillars, if i find an axe (which has bonus critical damage) with 20% hits to crit, i may want to use this ability that improves my critical hits. But if i find an axe with the marking attribute, it's not the same story. Many items in Pillars have several different enchantments that don't synergies well with each other, making hard to grasp what the item is actually useful for. While it would be ok for some items to be like this, i feel that it's the norm in the game more than the exception. The non-stacking rules adds to this problem for me. While a few overlaps may involve some interesting sense of choices in order to balance the equipment of a character, in Pillars, it just gives me headaches. Everything overlaps with everything, and while the mechanic about things that don't overlap is well explained, reality often contradicts these rules (especially when it comes to abilities: it's a mess. I still don"t understand anything about galant's focus' overlap rules). If i find gloves that add 2 might, 1 cons, and boots that add 2 cons, 1 res, what should i do? Take this cape granting 3 might and lookfor something else as gloves and boots? But how will i make sure that the 3 might don't overlap bonus on other items? It puzzled me. And since it's hard to have a clear idea of the usefulness of an item, it makes things even harder. At one point, i sighed when i found new magical items because i knew i would have to spent 1 hour figuring out what i should do without even finding the answer. To sum it up: lack of clear focus of items that would help figuring out their usefulness (generally speaking or for specific tasks); unclear overlap rules due to poor tooltips; waaaaaayyyy too many overlaps on items, and even at times, several possible overlaps on the same item. That goes everywhere and nowhere at the same time.

I may be the only one, but i feel what you say in this last post is pretty clever (did not read previous ones). Though, i would not use the word "politics". Maybe "Culture". "Tradition". "Social beliefs". "SJW lobbying". Or such things. I can understand why you would say what you say. And it makes sense. Even though i can't agree about everything, and since it's the Pillars' forum, about female characters. Hum... It may be because i have progressists ideas about females in real life. I just can't stand the idea of my girlfriend or anyone being limited in his potential by core determinism. I feel that everyone should have the freedom to try to go beyond them. Female playing soccer or rugby? It's true they don't have the physical abilities to make the same spectacular plays, but i like very much what they bring to these sports that guys can't. And it's pretty much the same with female characters in a fantasy RPG. I like the idea that women are more than in traditional real life societies. I can understand why someone who would see fantasy universes as "alternative medieval settings" would feel that most historical facts are completely ignored and that that makes immersion harder. I even think it's a valid point of view. As valid as mine, at least. But, to be honest, i can't stand societies or religions which see women as "reproductive material". I have a big problem with that, as i said above. But, still. As for the sports, i think female warriors should have their own interesting way to fight. I love playing female warriors. I use to drop their "strenght" and up their "charisma" and "dexterity", while giving them light 2 handers (not abydon hammer) or 1 handed weapons, to reflect the difference in their abilities compared to male warriors. Dexterity has a great advantage in Pillars, but i would argue that Might is a problem for me. Because if i play a female spellcaster with high magic power, this means that she will be able to lift a truck barehands, too. Which is ridiculous to me and a HUGE problem when i try to roleplay (especially in scripted interactions). In the end i would agree that our way to play and enjoy games is for part influenced by who we are, where we have grown up, our beliefs, past, traditions and everything else. And that modern, new beliefs of our societies, while imported into a fantasy setting, may be pretty disturbing (the whole concept of social justice is a good example for me). But i am not bothered by some of them, like having female warriors. We had Jeanne d'Arc in France. It may be a reason. Finally this means that you're entitled to your own opinion. As everyone else. And while your point may be valid for some of us, i fail to see how the whole debate helps figuring out what tried to outline the author of this post: the reasons why one would not finish the game. Which i understand as "Let's figure out what would improve the game experience for Deadfire".

Yandere, definitely . I can't imagine Ydwin as a "Te nori Taiga".Though i'm more in the kuudere thing :D. Ah, but, actually, i'd rather no -dere at all because >>> exit stereotypes. Funny poll by the way

True. They said they had to exaggerate a bit some designs in order for them to look good in an isometric view. Parts of armors are an example, though barely noticeable at first sight. It's obviously not the same idea that is behind Nightshroud. Which would probably look impressive as a 2 hander on a muscled, fierce barbarian. Not so much as a 1 handed weapon on a tiny female pale elf. Though, after reading this thread, i'm quite surprised to realize that this is a matter of personal perspective.

Looks like the topic has badly shifted. If i read the OP correctly, the poll was not about pre buffing. It was about magic outside combat. Don't tell me that one goes necessarily with the other. There are probably plenty other ways to prevent or limit abuses (granted that they are a problem in a single player game). And magic outside combat allows way more than just prebuffing. I quoted you, but my post is not for anyone specifically. I just happen to have read this several times already.

I voted for yes. The main reason is that i feel it's unbelievably silly that you can cast a fireball when someone need to kill you but something prevents you to so when it's not the case. Like in "oh! i suddenly find the urge to cast a fireball, just because. Let me find someone who want to kill me in order to be allowed to do so". It's cringing as hell. Sawyer seemed to forget a bit too often, while designing the game mechanics, that this game is meant to be a RPG. If my character feels like using a fireball outside of combat in order to start a barbecue in the forest, it should be up to him. Not restricted by dumbed game mechanics. Plus, i desperatly miss utility spells (even hardly usefull ones). Inside, and outside of combat. I seem to remember that there were a third reason why this mechanic exists. And it's that it was a way to solve a nasty bug. Regarding save games i guess. Not sure anymore.

No, you're definitely not alone. I'm in the same case regarding sould bound weapons (with the exception of grey sleeper so far). I used console commands on a test save to have an idea of what most of them looked like, and i feel soul bound weapons definitely look over the top. Biger is not better. I could not even bother to equip most of them once i found them. I would have expected more intricate visual designs, like in more subtle. Currently, they are all but subtle. Make me think of an old, cartoonish, hack and slash. It hurts...