Kinowek

While that pet is cool, I'm sure, please don't support annoying promotions like this that deliberately spread content out and take it from the base game(possibly??). If this pet is achievable/included in the normal base game, disregard this post. If it is NOT included in the base game, I'm sure it'll be available via mods about 1 hour after the game is out.

Sweet! I'm torn between not spoiling any details about the game, and reading up on all the new mechanics... only a few months more to wait though! Hand mortars seemed like the logical progression for the sequel, I'm glad some version made it in. I'm thinking at least one of my characters will be an AoE fiend, between those weapon(s) and the grenades.

Some quick googling indicates that apparently you are right, although the mechanics of a Hand Mortar could be a lot different than a one use item. Well, maybe that will be good enough.

It's a little late now, of course, but I felt that their should have been some sort of single shot grenade launcher in Pillars 1, and thus Pillars 2, with an exceedingly long reload time. It'd give Rangers for example a nice AoE to use, basically once per fight because of the reload time, then they could switch over to their bows/crossbows/etc. for normal combat. The AoE targeting mechanic is already in P1 and P2, and very well done, just tie that style of spell/projectile to a mortar/launcher weapon. Before somebody complains, yes there was a historical precedent, Hand Mortars: https://www.thevintagenews.com/2016/10/29/hand-mortars-an-early-grenade-launchers-used-from-the-1500s-through-the-early-1800s/ Oh well, maybe via mods or DLC.

Sweet, now if I can just finish my two runs in Pillars 1 before April 3rd... who am I kidding, we can probably add a few weeks or a month to that, for patches. :| Seriously though, I'm looking forward to Pillars 2 with great anticipation. I'm also expecting some launch day build issues, as par for the course, but I'll probably start a playthrough the second the download finishes anyway.

Each of the Soulbound items has 3 tiers, as far as I know. So Unlock 1(usually not terrible), Unlock 2(somewhat harder), Unlock 3(depends on the item), for the most part. As I said, they are doable. For my first playthrough, I unlocked them all, just so I'd know what each one does, and so I could get to use it in game. Unfortunately it may be Obsidian's intent to have players NOT unlock them all, which I think is a mistake, but clearly you can just avoid the ones that don't seem interesting at first, or read an out of game website to see what each one does( I usually avoid spoilers! ). The problem is, the unlocks aren't exactly fun, and if you do WM last, after Act 3, you probably won't even have enough encounters to unlock them all without unusual, farming style play. I had forgotten about that one thelee mentioned, with the load times/drinking. I had hoped the Pillars 2 Soulbound items would be less of a hassle, honestly, but the example ones in the Deadfire DLC indicate they are doubling down on some of the items. Also I don't think it's possible for me to NOT have all quests/unlocks (that are possible) done in a game, especially on the first playthrough. :| I'm guessing there is a not insignificant number of other players who do the same thing, and will attempt to have all Soulbound items unlocked in Pillars 1 and 2. At the very least, I'd like for Obsidian to lower the requirements, particularly as I've noticed Procs can fire, but miss/be resisted/enemy is immune by default, etc. and they don't count at that point... really, really drags out the time to unlock. ie. hitting Shades with the Deadfire club, hobble procs, and it doesn't miss or be resisted, but apparently immunity by creature type just blanks out that successful roll, and the counter doesn't increase. *EDIT* As an example of tedious unlocks, look at the Unlabored Blade. It's GREAT when it's done, but I recall having to basically keep my entire team idle except the Rogue wielding the blade, as he slowly hacked away at enemy after enemy. (The Unlabored Blade's first two unlocks made the weapon WORSE, so it took even longer)

as the topic says, Deadfire Soulbound items appear to be broken with this new patch, in a game(Chanter group) I had started a few weeks ago. They definitely WERE working, as another run (Ranger group) has some of the unlocks done, for the Club and Crossbow, and Hat/Belt. Now, After the January 3rd patch (GOG version 3.07.0.1318) the war club is stuck at 9/10 in spite of Eder hobbling about 20 people today alone, and the hat/belt/crossbow refuse to increment their counters (Chanter group). Anybody else had this recent issue? For the record, does anybody have the Deadfire Hat unlocked? If so, how much standing around getting hit by mobs did that take to get Crit 15 times and have the Conufse actually work? :| (2nd Unlock, Ranger group)

In anticipation of Pillars 2, I've been running through Pillars of Eternity 1 again, with two different parties. With the Deadfire DLC, there's a Soulbound captain's hat (?) that you can get fairly early in the game. The first level of unlocks just require taking some hits. Fine, this is doable, even in normal play. The second level requires getting Critical Hit to trigger the Confuse Proc... okay, a bit more difficult, but doable. However there is the added wrinkle that it can only happen once per Encounter!? Hopefully the next unlock of the hat is extremely powerful, because that is statistically unlikely through normal play. In Pillars 1 there are probably enough trash fights to get this hat unlocked by the end of the game, but supposedly Pillars 2 has less encounters? *EDIT* Forgot to mention, the Confuse can also miss!? or be resisted, wasting that entire encounter and the critical hit. At this rate I will never get to the third unlock. As I type this, I realize of course that somebody already has this hat unlocked, via normal play or exploit, and is burning with desire to post a rebuttal. This brings up the inherent flaw in soulbound items, in my opinion. They do NOT encourage normal play (ie. not taking damage, whole team participating, playing smartly and efficiently). They encourage having the entire team stand around while the character with soulbound items either takes hits or hits a creature repeatedly to unlock the next level. (Excluding the few quest based ones, obviously) While I love the powers of the Soulbound weapons from Pillars 1, and I did unlock them ALL on my first playthrough(pre-DeadFire DLC), it definitely slowed down the game greatly and required me to actually save up groups of enemies just to use them to unlock soulbound items. It also definitely contributed to me NOT finishing a couple other runs I had going after that first playthrough, not wanting to grind soulbound items again. Is this intended? I would think most players would attempt to unlock all soulbound items, and there literally are not enough battles for that to happen if you play as 'normal.' Now, obviously it's possible with some unusual play to do in Pillars 1, but with all this talk of Pillars 2 having less overall combat, and apparently still including Soulbound weapons, could the requirements be reduced? As it is, they are not difficult or fun to unlock, they just require repetitive farming style tactics. Or, more quest based style ones, PLEASE. The quest based Soulbound requirements were fine. Doing 1000 damage/getting Critical Hit 15 times/etc. just lead to farming style play. As it is now, I'm leaning towards seeing if I can console in the soulbound weapons for my Pillars 1 Ranger and Chanter groups, instead of going through the hassle of going through the repeated hassle my first character's group did. PS. Minor note, the latest patch(as of today, apparently?) through Gog seems to have bugged Soulbound items in Pillars 1, Eder has Hobbled about 20 people with that Deadfire club and yet the count is still stuck at 9/10.

Speaking only for myself, I think this is a mistake by Obsidian to go with just 5. I prefer no party size cap at all, honestly, but that's another design path beyond the scope of this game. Less party members means less flexibility objectively, and in my opinion, will lead to less enjoyable, less tactical combat overall. But, this topic has been discussed to death already though, so at this point I'm just hoping the game is moddable enough to allow for more party members for those that want them. At least Obsidian realized the mistake it was to go with 4 in Tyranny, hopefully they will eventually come to realize 5 is mistake as well, but it's going to be well after the release of Deadfire. *Offtopic: I'm still halfway convinced Obsidian is doing 5 just to drive Baldur's Gate/Icewind Dale fans up the wall.

I'd prefer that Obsidian just keep the Pillars 1 system at this point. Their proposed injuries system sounds annoying, especially if it ends up like the Tyranny system. Pillars 1 had something of an injury system anyway, although most injuries seemed to be from game events or actually being knocked out in combat? It's been awhile since my last Pillars 1 run.

Well, you have the better part of a year (probably more, knowing Obsdian) before Pillars 2 is released. Then perhaps several months after that of patches. Plenty of time to play Pillars 1 through from scratch, let alone from your Twin Elms save. If you don't even WANT to reinstall at this point, don't? It sounds like you disliked quite a bit of Pillars 1, although to be fair it has been patched quite a bit since, several mechanics are revamped entirely.

No. This isn't a multiplayer focused game, and Obsidian is not going to have the resources to spare trying to tack on multiplayer. Sorry.

There's a small, aluminum foil covered portion of my mind(metaphorically!) that wonders if Obsidian didn't go with 5 companions on purpose, just to troll Baldur's Gate/Icewind Dale fans for some inside joke. I would definitely prefer 6, and hopefully this spurs the modders to really delve into Pillars 2 and open it up to allow for more companions at once in the party and bigger encounters, post release. That said, I'm still interested in the game even if 5 is all we ever get, and yes I did already Fig Pledge for the game. *sigh* I bought Tyranny also, without doing much research on it at all, and was underwhelmed to say the least. Combat suffered quite a bit in that game, in my opinion, from dropping party size down to 4 and spending resources on the combo move system. Hopefully Pillars 2 turns out well. For those of you sick of the party size topic, you have my sympathies. You'll probably be seeing these threads from now until well after the release date. :|

I disliked the Camping mechanic, but supposedly Obsidian is mostly getting rid of Vancian casting (yes/no?) in Pillars 2, so hopefully they scrap the Camping supplies along with it. If Vancian casting is gone, just allow resting out of combat, no limits. If you don't want to rest, don't. I'd prefer rest anywhere, with a chance to get attacked in dungeons, unless you get to a defensible spot or something, but even just resting without risk would be fine with me. Camping supplies in Pillars 1 were a band aid. Somehow being able to only fit 2 piles of logs in your infinite storage chest was pretty ridiculous. Luckily, you were practically tripping over piles of logs in each dungeon, apparently conveniently placed there by monsters for weary parties. If they leave camping supplies in, it'll be the same way in Pillars 2. Ridiculous, and jarring at best. Whatever camping solution they make is just going to get modded out anyway.

I've actually played Tyranny, where the combat was indeed more simple than Pillars 1. Generally I don't do betas, simply because I don't have the time anymore. I mentioned Numenara mostly because that game was altered due to console influence, whether you want to call it simplified or not is up to you at that point. Your point about a single character in Pillars 1 is flawed, no offense, because Pillars 1 combat was based around having the full 6. In that game, if you take fewer people, you are stacking the deck against yourself in difficulty since each encounter was based around 6, but obviously you have far fewer tactical options available to you. So yes, lesser complexity, more absolute difficulty(for most fights, exploits/tricks existed of course). Interesting but ultimately not quite pertinent to this thread. I'm talking base game design, not self imposed restrictions. Solo players can still solo Pillars 2(or attempt to) and face the same challenges of exploiting AI. Hopefully people don't somehow read my thread as some sort of call to boycott the game or something. I will indeed, survive the loss of 1 party character, as will almost all of us. However that doesn't mean I don't think the game wouldn't be BETTER overall with 6(or more) party members. None of us have yet played the actual game of Pillars 2... if they ever release some combat test or demo/beta or whatever, we'll obviously know more. Until then, all I can do is hypothesize that tactically, the game will be reduced, even if each character has more abilities. They already claimed they want to reduce the sheer number of bodies in each battle, because many people found it overwhelming. What would you call that, if not a reduction in complexity? Chaos and noise(signal, not literal combat noises) are part of the appeal of larger party combat, at least to me. Other reduction/simplification changes include mostly removing Vancian casting, etc. but those are other topics entirely. Aside from tactical concerns, I personally like having more characters in the party at once, whether it be 6, 8, whatever, so as to see more of each character's story and their interactions. If I had infinite free time, this wouldn't be an issue, as I'd just replay the game X times until I saw every side story, but unfortunately I do not. Also, on a more OCD-ish level, it bugs me to have the majority of my character's companions just standing around at the home base, staring at the walls and drooling. Hardly heroic or epic, and definitely jarring from a story standpoint. "Let's go slay the dragon!" - my PC "Yeah!!!" - all the companions "Wait, most of you stay here, only you 4 come with me, because...uh...I don't like most of you." -my PC

Where did I call Pillars 2 mainstream? Let's try to keep this forum civil and not go immediately to strawmen. But hey, look what happened to Tides of Numenara, I surely didn't back that years ago hoping for a small party, turn based console rpg, but that's what ended up happening. I'm still interested in Pillars 2, and will watch to see how it ends up, but yes, I see them simplifying the game to be a mistake. If they eventually announce Pillars 2 for console we'll know it was somewhat of a factor. Tyranny, while it had some very interesting aspects, ultimately was too simple in combat with the 4 man teams, for me. Obsidian recognized their mistake there, so they avoided going that small again this time, for Pillars 2, but yes, even 5 is still simplification and dumbing the game down. Interesting that you mention 8, I'd vastly prefer 8 or more characters at once, but that's not realistic to ask for, now is it? Hopefully Pillars 2 is mod friendly enough that those unsatisfied with 5 can adjust the party size and battles to their liking later on. I'm sure most people, like myself, who love good team based RPGs, can survive the 5 man team, but that's not really the point of this thread. Many, perhaps most of us, would prefer larger teams, and the greater tactical and story aspects they bring.

Archaven's sarcasm was a bit too subtle for some, it seems. Disclaimer: I voted for 6 person parties.

It seems like the Fig Pillars 2 will easily surpass the $3.25m stretch goal at this rate, congratulations. However that stretch goal is 4 more companions(excuse me, Sidekicks), whom most people will probably barely use, as the party size is apparently hard set at 5. Don't give in to console-money dreams. Stay strong, go back to 6 person parties. Winnowing down the team because people are too confused as to how to control 6 characters is a huge mistake. 5 is bad, 4 would be unforgivable. While there is still time, I beg of you, go back to 6. Multi-classing and sub-classes will NOT make up for having to leave most of your team at home, gathering dust. If whatever UI you are using works better with smaller teams, it sounds like that UI needs some work. Somehow Pillars 1 survived having 6 people in a party. Think this is an outlier opinion? Check the poll on these forums, look around at the majority of the people who backed this and the previous game. Old school Bioware/Black Isle fans, who cut their teeth on Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale series, who maybe even dabbled in Planescape:Torment and Temple of Elemental Evil. The vast majority of your target audience can easily and deftly use 6 characters. Newcomers can easily learn to use the full 6. Don't become the new Bioware, continually dumbing down your great games, trying to chase mainstream money.

I voted 6; I would love to have the 'full' 6 for the nice balance of plenty of options as well as redundancy, along with the ability to still get by without just the optimal Tank/healer/Dps/Control/Backup Tank setup. 5 means we'll always be leaving the less optimal characters home gathering dust, not to mention missing out on dialogue/quests. That said, if Obsidian is already set on 5(which it seems like they are) just allow us to EASILY mod it to 6 or 8 or whatever. People can always take fewer party members, but basing the game around 4 or less will just ruin it. I'm of the opinion it's seriously harmed even by just 5, but obviously none of us have had a chance to play it yet. I just hope the game is a lot more mod friendly than Pillars 1, honestly. There's never going to be a choice that satisfies everyone. Apparently quite a few people were somehow baffled by having 6 characters in Pillars 1, but on the other end of the spectrum, people like myself lost interest in Tyranny's 4 person, simplified combat extremely quickly. 6 or larger party sizes with a Tactics style mod could quiet any grumblings about the smaller party design.

Tigranes, I didn't bother to mention parties larger than 6 because of the cries of horror it would cause, but that would be awesome, in my opinion. Base the combat around 6(like Pillars 1), and just leave party size uncapped, with experience penalties for parties larger than 6. That won't happen in this game, of course, but it makes about as much sense as arbitrarily saying in game, "oops, no room for you to walk next to myself and these 5 others, so stay home, interesting NPC we just met." Dungeon Siege 1 had a setup similar to that; you could have 8 people, but experience was divided among them, making your individual characters weaker. It's been awhile, but I am reasonably sure I remember the vanilla NWN2 campaign allowing your entire host of characters to accompany you at the end of the game, which I think was 10 total? I could be confusing that with another game, it's been like 10+ years. Your slippery slope argument of no restrictions is a bit of a stretch, considering the previous game in the Pillars series went with 6, and it seemed to be alright. From the limited info we have, apparently they caved to pressure from people who felt overwhelmed by six characters for the previous game, and dropped it down. Personally I think it's a mistake, because it most certainly will lead to simplified combat in Pillars 2; just look at Tyranny's combat design. As you say in the end of your post, larger parties can help add tactical complexity, which some of us are actually hoping for. If they are dead set on 5, I'm just hoping for easy modability. If it's still up in the air, count me as a vote for the classic 6 person party. At least for me, I will DEFINITELY notice 5 instead of 6... and shed bitter, ocd nerd tears as I try to keep my lower lip from trembling at the shame of it all. Odd... numbered... party...less...than..6...don't cry, don't cry...

I would think most people who are huge fans of the IE games, like myself, would want a 6 man party in the sequel to a nostalgia-targeting game that featured 6 man parties. I've played through Pillars multiple times, and can't even bring myself to finish Tyranny, literally because it's too annoying leaving so many characters behind to gather dust at the home base. Also, the Tyranny combat is insultingly simple. If they know 4 is too little, why wouldn't Obsidian just keep the MAX party size 6, and allow people to do what they did in Pillars 1, run with 1 to 6 characters as they prefer? Others in this thread already posted similar thoughts to this. Obviously we haven't seen all the design details at this point, but I can see I'm not alone in thinking this is a glaring mistake. If you are dead set on 5(mind boggingly), Obsidian, please allow the party size to be modded without too much trouble. Honestly I feel a lot less excited about Pillars 2 after hearing about this. (First world problems, I know) Somewhat related request: mod/option for 6 man parties in Tyranny, while we're sort of on the subject. I don't even care how easy it would make the game, the combat is already simple. I just don't like leaving most of the team standing around, drooling on scrolls. I'm looking at you, Kills-in-Shadow!

Most of those proposed changes would be welcome, although I would not want to face any NPC rogues with a 100% Graze to Miss chance, or Barbarians whose leaps cast AoE prone. A little too strong those two, in my opinion. The rest would be great, except for: Smoke cloud... I've used it a couple times then respecced away from it. It is just inferior to other abilities, but I don't think an AoE Debuff cloud really fits with a Pillars rogue either, so I didn't vote yes to that either.

I'd like Pillars 2 to be a continuation of the story for the characters from the first game, even if that means a high level campaign setting. Obsidian should be able to develop high level content, and flesh out the rules for the various classes to around level 24-26 or so without much difficulty. I would still play a sequel if it wasn't a direct continuation of Pillars 1, but that seems like it'd be a bit of a cop out. I'm a bit surprised there is this much support for basically a complete wipe back to level 1... give Obsidian some credit; they have the design chops to extend the Pillars ruleset. Lean more towards BG2 than BG1, for the sequel, Obsidian!

After playing through Pillars a couple of times, I'd say just build the keep and forget hiring Adventurers. There are plenty of joinable NPCs available and the game doesn't require min/maxed characters to complete at any difficulty level. Adventurers also have no banter, as others have said. You will use up all your extra (non Keep) gold buying up every unique weapon from random and fixed merchants, if you're like me, and must possess every single magical sword, club, dagger or what have you. Then buying extra regents to enchant every one of those items...

Whoa... haha, I had no idea they could ever escape! Although my Rogue and Barbarian have basically taken almost no one prisoner, so maybe that's due to extremely small sample size. Maybe my Ranger will be more lenient, or at least more encouraged to prolong peoples' suffering in dank jail cells.