Gromnir

am going with seattle if it makes you feel better. bears, colts, chargers. the texans defense is not good. the texans secondary is terrible. the eagles defense is bad and they have no run game. am not gonna pick texans or eagles, regardless o' the cinderella fantasies people glomp onto in regards to foles. colts are a hot team playing well. colts is actual a good model for what giants shoulda' done the past couple years. oh well. chargers is arguable playing the best football in the afc, and lamar jackson is actual not a very good qb. sub 50 qbr. he has more fumbles than td passes? rookie run-first qbs have a tendency to do disproportionate well as teams is unprepared for something they rare see. can go back past rick mirer when he won rookie o' the year for such a trend. run qbs give opponents trouble in year 1. chargers has seen lamar. expect they is gonna be prepared. that said, ravens have a top-two defense and a top-two rushing offense. if year were 2009 instead o' 2019, we would reflexive pick ravens. is 2019 and chargers is most complete afc team in the playoffs. since the saints game (an aberration?) the boys have been struggling against mediocre teams, and they got shutout by the one good team they faced. best rush team in the league is seattle, but zeke is nfl rush yd leader, so... call it a wash? seattle has a decent pass rush even if sack totals ain't eye-popping. dak prescott gets sacked and fumbles far too often. boys have fantastic linebackers and their pass rush is also much better than sack totals suggest. front seven is gonna need play a great game. regardless, if boys is behind in the fourth, or even if they is only ahead by 8 or less, is tough to pick against russell wilson in such situations. boys need to get out ahead early. 'course, it is the playoffs, which means most prognostications is gonna look silly on monday even if actual picks is correct. lamar maybe puts up 300 yds and 3 tds with a qbr near perfect and still loses? it's the playoffs, so yeah. HA! Good Fun! ps if freezing rain comes on sunday night instead o' monday morning to chicago, am thinking the game is a complete forgone conclusion, even if am already picking the bears.

US system is not s'posed to be genuine representational. in point o' fact, the federal system were specific designed to avoid the previous fail o' representative models. federalist papers is a good starting point and still a prerequisite today for anybody curious 'bout the US Constitution. sure, conclusions from the federalists is one-sided, but the papers also layout fundamentals o' the proposed new government. such a read is helpful as it reminds the new generation what were foremost on minds of founders-- checks and balances 'tween the three branches is actual secondary to the checks meant to be imposed on the potential for tyranny o' the majority. the manifest inadequacy and potential evils o' democracy is precise why a Constitution were authored and ratified. regardless, you don't get changes to senate w/o approval o' every state affected. is hardcoded, so to speak, and ordinary amendment process or constitutional convention will not suffice. change the senate is thus a fun thought experiment, but is otherwise wholly impractical. HA! Good Fun! ps where the founder's intent is thorough undermined by passage o' time, alterations in society and incremental changes to Constitution is the executive branch, which would be complete unrecognizable to the folks who were part o' the original constitutional convention o' 1787.

am believing a few folks on these boards is dog lovers. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/story-dyngo-war-dog-home-combat-180971003/ HA! Good Fun!

mj in the 80s wonders if it is possible to have too many zippers. HA! Good Fun!

this is not the conflict you suggest. crpg players like overpowered and unbalanced even when such stuff does tend to ruin game challenges. you are assuming player rationality and reasonableness, when in practice, player feedback tells a different story. simultaneous complaints 'bout developer excessive balance efforts may be widespread even when same folks is complaining 'bout ease of game. player wisdom and self awareness is elusive. HA! Good Fun! Is this why players complain about OP stuff ALL THE TIME? Including this forum. We had a "Big nerf list" thread for PoE2. I didn't see any "Big buff list" thread. There's lots of complains that stuff is OP/"too OP". If UB was "too OP" too there would be such complains as well. Also, players can complain about game being too easy and devs nerfing class abilities. Because nerfing class abilities it not a good way to address low difficulty - enemies get nerfed too since they also use class abilities. It's better to improve encounter design or buff enemies (at least those that player can not summon). If only someone invented difficulty levels. And did them right. if you aren't seeing requests for buffs, you ain't paying attention... at all. "__________ sucks" is an implied request for a buff after all, and the board is ugly with such observations. abilities and subclasses and weapons is all targeted by folks who claim such stuff suck. heck, need only go back through this thread to see folks complaining. is folks hand wringing only a few pages ago, w/o being ironic, that some subclasses is current useless. and yeah, there is a few classes which could use a powerup, or at least a change. before (and after) release o' deadfire, there were a whole lotta complaints 'bout cipher and ranger in particular. if you claim not to have seen or remember such, you may do a quick search as am personal thinking is unnecessary to link such given how common and widespread were the negative feedback. obsidian addressed concerns. is multipage threads in which folks is almost exclusive complaining 'bout druid firebrand and other summoned weapons. thankful the obsinaties has ignored many such complaints, but firebrand got an upgrade. regardless, were considerable demand for improvement. didn't see? weren't looking. furthermore, the choice 'tween nerf op and improved encounter design is classic false dichotomy. is nothing preventing the developers from changing encounters and nerfing. in point o' fact, obsidian has done both at same time in a few deadfire release builds. even so, changes to encounter design doesn't do any good if player power is woeful unbalanced. is no encounter design so subtle and clever as to account for extreme differences in player power. if bob has a broken and op party and sarah has a broken and underpowered party, how is developers gonna alter encounter design to make so both sarah and bob face encounters which is challenging but not overwhelming? asking far too much o' developers. regardless, am much in favor o' developer altering encounter design based on feedback. am much in favor of developers continuing to alter encounter design, but such an observation does not eliminate or even reduce need for balancing player abilities and gear and whatnot. HA! Good Fun!

agreed. two most common complaints of every obsidian game, at least previous to poe: the game is too hard. the game is too easy. every game. all games has 'bove two as most common complaints. both complaints. same games. is folks complaining 'bout how game is less fun than they wish or hope. so how do you make game fun for most players? am thinking is pretty well established some amount o' balance in crpgs is necessary. refer to josh post if are still unclear why balance is essential even in sp games. so, how you gonna balance? balance the game so is fun for folks who is using a small number op builds and weapons? if balanced for op play, then for folks who do not use such op stuff, the game will be difficult and frustrating... less fun. balancing while keeping op op will also functional reduce customization options as actual useful builds is limited. an alternative balance scheme is to make op stuff less op... which is what the past few pages o' thread has addressed. the choice for developers wanting to maximize fun for most players is not gonna involve difficult calculus. HA! Good Fun! Blame the game is too easy on power gamers who turn everything into a chest beating competition. you do realize such folks tend to be same people who gravitate to op builds and sooper weapons, yes? regardless, is not a fault issue. it simple is. obsidian takes customers as they find 'em. obsidian is trying to make game enjoyable for power gamers and casual gamers and noobs. obsidian creates a difficulty slider and folks still complain 'bout same two issues: too ez; too hard. HA! Good Fun!

am suspecting some folks believe we eat extravagant all the time. am admitting to a certain food snobbishness, but as often as not am too tired or lazy to do anything but simple. have mentioned in the past how we like omelettes and frittatas... 'cause they is ez. one other sooper ez and cheap meal we make frequent am gonna share. prepare to be disappointed with plebeian. first time we tried this we went to the guy who sells us meat and he literal sneered when we asked for lean ground beef. slunk away with our culinary manhood emasculated by a hamfisted little man in a bloody smock. went to a soopermarket (hoodie and dark glasses to hide identity) and bought 7% fat ground beef. am thinking coca cola were also on sale and so we end up with 4 score cans o' coke and 1 pound o' beef. *sigh* prep is simple: fine chop 1/4 to 1/2 medium onion. mince 1-2" ginger mince 1-2tb garlic julienne 1/2 medium carrot. 1-2tb cornstarch 2+tb low-sodium soy sauce small lettuce leaves appropriate for wraps clean cilantro... chop if you wish... or don't. ok, am knowing there is much variation in the ginger and garlic, but am liking ginger and garlic so sometimes we use arguable excessive amounts o' the pungents. onion also varies based on how many meals we want this recipe to provide. mostly brown (not fully cooked) the beef in a non-stick pan. remove meat to plate with paper towel. as is lean beef, will not be much fat in the pan, but should be enough. add 1.5tb cornstarch to meat off heat and mix. if you have lady friends or like sweet, feel free to add a little brown sugar. now add onion to pan and cook to desired degree. if you like fully caramelized onions, go for it. when onions is almost done, add garlic and ginger and saute an additional 30 seconds just to release flavor. return meat to pan along with soy sauce to finish cooking and heat through. remove meat mixture from heat. is a simple and fast lettuce wrap meal. put meat on lettuce and add cilantro and carrot as desired. with prep, this 'bout 15-20 minutes total. HA! Good Fun!

agreed. two most common complaints of every obsidian game, at least previous to poe: the game is too hard. the game is too easy. every game. all games has 'bove two as most common complaints. both complaints. same games. is folks complaining 'bout how game is less fun than they wish or hope. so how do you make game fun for most players? am thinking is pretty well established some amount o' balance in crpgs is necessary. refer to josh post if are still unclear why balance is essential even in sp games. so, how you gonna balance? balance the game so is fun for folks who is using a small number op builds and weapons? if balanced for op play, then for folks who do not use such op stuff, the game will be difficult and frustrating... less fun. balancing while keeping op op will also functional reduce customization options as actual useful builds is limited. an alternative balance scheme is to make op stuff less op... which is what the past few pages o' thread has addressed. the choice for developers wanting to maximize fun for most players is not gonna involve difficult calculus. HA! Good Fun!

this is not the conflict you suggest. crpg players like overpowered and unbalanced even when such stuff does tend to ruin game challenges. you are assuming player rationality and reasonableness, when in practice, player feedback tells a different story. simultaneous complaints 'bout developer excessive balance efforts may be widespread even when same folks is complaining 'bout ease of game. player wisdom and self awareness is elusive. HA! Good Fun!

... ok, so to be clear, balance efforts, beyond an uncertain and elusive point, results in unacceptable tipping of scales? ... and two people (so far) liked. am... speechless. HA! Good Fun!

Do you only read every second line or something? Because I clearly said that respec doesn't solve everything because you can't change your class or subclass. Respec doesn't do **** if I'm stuck with a combination of classes that is suddenly weak because someone somewhere deemed it "op". calling bs for multiple reasons. at end of your response, you state, "And reset does not let you change your class or even subclass so it barely solves anything." and is inclusive. is an addition to that which you had stated earlier in the response. you explained (incorrect) reasons why respec were a fail for potd, as if potd made a difference. then you added an and. is simple a grammar fail? don't think so. regardless, no nerf has invalidated a subclass, much less a class. sure, loss o' brilliant for chanters made 'em less powerful and depowering summons made so beckoners were no longer op, but the idea that either were rendered impotent or weak is hyperbole... at best. w/o win button silliness o' chanter aoe brilliant, were chanters relative weak compared to previous state? sure, but has been no class or subclass rendered unplayable or even bad by obsidian balance efforts. less op is not same as weak. *chuckle* is where am gonna disagree with boeroer in fact. am thinking all too often people looks at individual nerfs in isolation. compare aforementioned set to their purpose chanter invocation before and after nerf and is no question the impact were dramatic. set to their purpose were a win-button ability which sudden became an invocation of middling value. however, to suggest chanters as a whole sudden became weak would be ludicrous. is one guy on the boards who simple will not shut up 'bout herald opness and while he is thankful an outlier, is few o' the build monkeys who resist notion o' herald or chanter efficacy. is they all wrong? perhaps, but seems unlikely. am disagreeing with folks who see obsidian tendency to over-nerf. josh mentions in linked balance commentary how most o' his poe adjustments were actual buffs. am thinking belief in a tendency to overnerf is only reasonable when looking at nerfs isolated from overall class efficacy, which is a mistake. am also guessing (pure conjecture on this point) boeroer and others is considering such nerfs from pov o' potd gameplay, which obsidian has stated ad nauseum is not the difficulty by which deadfire is tuned. only a small % play potd, though such players is obvious overrepresented on these boards. look to potd balance is a mistake, though am admitted as likely to do so as those am calling out on this point as have personal not played other than potd in a long time. in our estimation, the significant deadfire nerfs were not class specific. penetration were thankful nerfed during the beta. were not a bug which resulted in opness o' any penetration related ability or weapon quality. obsidian nerfed penetration in general, for balance reasons, and while certain classes and powers sudden became less useful, am not thinking any class or subclass were devalued to point o' unplayability. thank goodness for the nerf. might math were wrong all during the beta. weren't 'til release might got fixed. sure, such a change disproportionate affected helwalkers and various barbarian builds, but who wanna suggest the change made the monk subclass or barbarian class unplayable or even weak? anybody? thank goodness for the nerf. possible the most significant early nerf were the on-crit effects o' many weapons. any number o' weapons a significant depowering after the crit nerf. qq. is only one possible situation in which such a nerf would gain our sympathy, and even then is so meta as to make us derisive. devoted is indeed limited to a single weapon group to be effective, and a few o' the weapon groups is underrepresented in deadfire... which were even more the case at time o' crit weapon nerfing. am s'posing if one chose battle axes as a single-class, non-caster devoted, the nerf to crit weapons coupled with a specific upgrade o' magran's favor might be cause for dismay... 'course magran's favor is a late game weapon, so likely played successful tens o' hours before acquiring said axe, so... regardless, am calling bs. is no class or subclass we would deem genuine weak or unplayable 'cause o' a nerf. is actual difficult to identify a genuine weak deadfire class and the only real subclasses we don't like is a few o' the new offerings from the recent dlc... and am not seeing a point to a few o' the wizard subclasses. wit their grimoires, wizards is generally op, so even a bad subclass is nevertheless effective and viable. however, those new dlc subclasses need some balancing, eh? would be more than a little disappointing if obsidian simple stopped their efforts to fix oddities and bugs simple 'cause o' man123 fears. https://forums.obsidian.net/forum/132-patch-beta-bugs-and-support/?prune_day=100&sort_by=Z-A&sort_key=last_post&topicfilter=all is literal dozens o' posts identifying curious behaviour from the new subclasses. but man123 wants obsidian to play pontius pilate? is a dramatic scene, but while we may sympathize with pilate's choice, am not wanting obsidian to make similar choice.... regardless o' the howls from a few who seem intent on maintaining a notoriously broken status quo. HA! Good Fun! ps am knowing were in jest, but one o' the difficulties we had with avengers were thanos' big balance. too stoopid for words. a mindless and arbitrary halving o' universal population were an idiotic solution to a perceived problem. if obsidian cannot do better, we weep for future o' deadfire and tOW and... whatever.

https://jesawyer.tumblr.com/post/161302725596/balance-in-single-player-crpgs has been posted many times, but is worth a re-read. HA! Good Fun!

the developers mod the game to make it better. the crucial op builds which is nerfed by developers is actual busted and diminish gameplay options as obvious best builds mean folks gravitate towards such builds to the exclusion o' other options. regardless, you are able to respec a deadfire potd character or companions or sidekicks or mercenaries, so most o' the last post were... noise. yeah, rebalance exploitive gameplay or op features may annoy some group o' folks, but respec obviates any noteworthy burden. given the availability o' respec, to ignore need for game improvement 'cause some group o' folks is emotional attached to op builds would be childishly myopic. thank goodness the obsidians is a bit more mature. now, that said, respec were not working properly for first few months after release. as such, we were sympathizing with folks complaining o' balance changes at the time. respec fix shoulda' been more o' a priority if obsidian were gonna make significant mechanics changes which had game altering impact 'pon more than a few classes and builds. lack o' working respec did indeed compel a few folks to endure genuine bad characters or a restart following potential tens o' hours o' arguable wasted gameplay. HA! Good Fun!

is a good point. in our opinion, the best stronghold quest from bg2 were bard. in addition to simple fun o' gameplay, the bard quest were most thematic integral to critical path story and all the macbeth allusion which accompanied the irenicus story. unfortunate, given the general perception o' bard suckage, few players ever actual got to experience the bard stronghold quest. waste. on some level its gotta be difficult for a developer who knows they did good work but 'cause o' mechanics issues over which they personal had no control, little recognition ever comes their way. HA! Good Fun!

Exactly. As long as the options are viable, that level of balancing is not needed. unless you establish that deadfire as played now is worse than deadfire as played months ago, am not seeing how such a balance "criticism" is noteworthy. there is respec in game, which thanks to continued patching efforts, now works. so, overall positive balance changes, which improve gameplay as described earlier in this thread, is bad in what way? constant efforts to improve game would appear to be a laudable developer effort. is new content which is being added via dlc and chances for breaking the game by accident has been a constant possibility. even so, developers is not abandoning an otherwise broken game and is instead attempting to fix those bugs and mechanical imbalances which tend to diminish gameplay. now am admitting that w/o respec, major changes to a character even when such changes is well-intentioned, may be more than a little disruptive. is a bit hyperbolic, but if a player's entire character concept hinges on a specific synergy o' features which were emmasculated in buld X.x, then a player will understandably face frustration as they is stuck with a similarly emasculated character. the thing is respec is a reasonable solution to such problems. sure, is tough to feel too much pity for the player overinvested in exploitive gameplay, but even if such is the case, the player may respec character howsoever they wish rather than needing restart a game. is no loss o' tens o' hours o' gameplay 'cause o' the uncaring balancing efforts o' developers. and serious, we could deal with a bit less definitive when it comes to broken features in deadfire. find an easy way to overhaul penetration or make priest spell catalog less unbalanced even +8 months after release o' deadfire would be more than simple welcome. alternative would be to end developer efforts to fix and balance clear broken features for the sake o' definitive. am thinking snoopy "said" it best. when deadfire music inevitable stops, will be disappointing. HA! Good Fun!

in recent decades, urban fantasy has increasing been targeted by ya and romance elements. result is our near reflexive (albeit unfair) gut-clench reaction anytime urban fantasy is recommended to us by friends. am kinda voluntarily underexposed to 21st century urban fantasy. even so... nail gaiman will rare provide you with a bad option and most o' his stuff may be fitting into urban fantasy niche. start with neverwhere. do not overlook the graveyard book 'cause is targeted at younger audiences. gaiman, co-wrote good omens with terry pratchett... am thinking is final being made into a bbc tv mini-series. sandman graphic novels is also worth a gander. one o' the most recognizable urban fantasy authors o' late 20th century is almost complete unknown nowadays: charles de lint. newford books is all set in a vague north american city which is kinda kanadian or usa or both. have only read a few but were surprised in a good way. jack of kinrowan books were fun and fast-paced if not particular deep. gene wolfe. hmmm. is a handful o' urban fantasy from gene wolfe, and is all excellent, but is gene wolfe. there are doors and the land across is urban fantasy. is not escapist. wolfe can be dense and even impenetrable. there are doors is relative accessible. the land of laughs is a good intro to jonathan carroll. problem with carroll is he is stradling line 'tween light urban fantasy and heavier magical realism. is technical no difference in terms o' basic elements, but magical realism is label given to fantasy authors who the new yorker crowd ain't embarrassed to says they read so n' so's books. updike, gabriel garcía márquez and salman rushdie is gonna be more often referenced when discussing carroll books than would jim butcher. while is also a line blurring option, and likely not what many nowadays consider urban fantasy, something wicked this way comes is one o' those must reads for fantasy fans. not traditional sword and sworcery fantasy. setting is 20th century midwest usa. an obscure title which am believing would be appealing to shady is agyar. dunno if we would say it is a great book, but it is a modern vampire book and is kinda unexpected. am personal having a dislike o' most vampire stories, but we enjoyed agyar, though perhaps not as much as gaiman's graveyard book. urban fantasy ain't necessarily our thing, but is a few options. HA! Good Fun!

in a recent tumblr post josh opines those making grilled cheese sandwiches with aged cheddar should be put in jail. mr. sawyer's obvious lack o' culinary acumen coupled with typical wisconsin cheese arrogance has blinded him to the possibilities o' effective melts o' aged cheddar. so, our belated christmas gift to josh is a means by which a genuine gooey and melty aged cheddar may be incorporated into a grilled sandwich. steam and an emulsifier will allow even the most hoary and antiquated cheddar to melt like a slice o' american. gonna need experiment to get a proper steaming dome technique and am gonna suggest being creative with your emulsifier-- we freeze white wine or sherry and use resulting ice chips to steam. toast bread with small amount o' oil o' your choice. folks tend to use butter for bread, but am preferring homemade mayo. is gonna work best with a crusty bread, so if josh is a fan o' wonder or other so-called bread products, this will be an auto-fail. you will be applying limited 'mount o' steam to a medium-low, medium griddle, and a soft bread will tend to disintegrate even under gentle steam applications. have had people suggest higher temps and quickness works better, but have never had luck doing so. is a one-shot deal. no peeking. let out steam before done and chances are your sandwich fails. is gonna take practice. recommend starting with cheap cheddar products 'til you get a feels for right combo o' bread, emulsifier, steam source, temperatures and time. accept the inevitability o' practice fails... you will have fails. is an art and not a science, so am gonna avoid specific time and temp suggestions. ... now this may sound like a whole lotta extra effort for a grilled cheese sandwich, but results speak for themselves. HA! Good Fun! ps in case weren't obvious, the ice chips is scattered around the sandwich and not 'pon it. toss ice on griddle and immediate cover open-faced sandwich with dome to create steam and melt cheese gentle. don't wanna soak the sandwich. might opt for squirt bottle with emulsifier instead o' ice chips as temp can be lower to achieve steam, but doing so results in direct fluid and sandwich contact. pps 'pon momentary reflection, am gonna recommend practicing with cheeseburgers as a starting point. ground beef is much more forgiving on a griddle than is bread. can go higher temp with cheeseburger to achieve steam. will develop proper "feel" with cheeseburger 'fore transitioning to bread.

help? not much. am not needing steal crates if we collect enough by sinking ships before doing nekataka questing. is a two birds with one stone kinda equation for us. a little extra superb gear and functional pre-complete goods and services. HA! Good Fun!

is now a bottomless well o' ship combat 1007. personal, given the costs o' repairs n' healing n' such, not to mention the amount o' time it takes to be sinking ships, and recognizing the money glut which inevitable results from our completionist playstyle, am not certain how much use am gonna get from ship respawn. first thing we do following port maje is sink all named captains in deadfire waters. doing so provides much 1007 and experience. in the future we perhaps sink a couple additional vtc ships for adra crates and maybe a few expert or master ships to get a handful o' extra superb gear items for sale. also, for upgrading soulbound weapons, the ship boarding actions will provide toothless fodder for the degenerative gameplay which is completing soulbound prerequisites. huzzah. in any event, ship combat 1007 is now an unlimited resource. HA! Good Fun!

No its a pure game with all DLC-s am never using devil o' caroc breastplate, so cannot speak to its efficacy in 4.0. svef and spells such as litany for the spirit were working for one o' our shaman builds as o' a couple days ago... will check later. HA! Good Fun! ps (update) did a quick level-up o' a new shaman created post 4.0, jic is a bug which affects new characters. prayer for the spirit and litany o' the spirit counter confusion as one would predict. am honest not knowing the item code for svef as have never used the code. will check later.

given the efficacy o' heals, some o' the longer cast times seem warranted. then again, restore is a tier 1 aoe ability with a base half-second cast? am not certain how fast a cast you are expecting. there is chanter phrases and paladin auras which require no cast time if you prefer, but priestly holy radiance and restore is low-level heal staples which is, relative speaking, fast-cast. more powerful and enduring heals tend to have longer cast times, which is, in our opinion, a good way to balance heals. moonwell and consecrated ground have relative long durations to balance their lengthy cast times. fair. nevertheless, am thinking the herald healer might be worthy o' your consideration if you want persistent heals w/o casting times... coupled with a couple powerful cast heal abilities. lay on hands variations have a half-second base cast, and provides a strong single-target heal. am knowing some folks hate dying, but the reviving paladin abilities are also quick cast and provide a massive single health transfer. am admitting we never actual choose two-fingers of daylight, but is a quick invocation which provides restoration equivalent health to multiple allies. these kinda cast heals work in addition to persistent healing auras and phrases. but to the initial question, am s'posing the best way to technical "heal" a single target is with various resurrection abilities. no single heal ability provides as much health as the resurrection stuff. HA! Good Fun!

seems to be working same as normal in our game. HA! Good Fun!

I probably agree with most of your post, but this is just an internet platitude. You can google ANYTHING and be kept busy for a long time. The internet is strange. Very strange. *Goes to search 'purple eggs dinosaurs'* there is something 'bout the internet which makes folks wanna embrace absurdist. try and find internet support for notion the 2002 houston texans were the bestest nfl team ever. ... we can wait. even if you do find such support for ridiculous arguments such as intuitive d&d or the dominance o' the 2002 texans, such stuff will be outliers and fringe. yeah, the present situation is illuminating as is seeming proof o' the curious proposition that any thread 'bout the craptacular idiosyncrasies o' d&d, ad&d, and d20 will seeming attract at least one guy who argues d&d multiclassing, dual class and thac0 were not only superior to any other crpg system, but that such stuff were intuitive. the, "you can always find one guy" wackiness is maybe not universal, but is indeed approaching truism. again, am not suggesting the bare existence o' internet debate 'bout counter intuitive, nonsensical and exception laden d&d is proof o' counterintuitive d&d. nevertheless, if opposition to a belief is widespread and approaching universal, a reasonable person would at least pause to question their certainty. bleak wanted to avoid the "can o' worms," as he/she put it, no? Gromnir were identifying the actual nature o' the can o' worms and recognizing how the can were not some kinda balanced debate where reasonable minds may and do disagree. all you gotta do is look for similar arguments which has happened ad nauseum on these boards alone. d&d, for all its popularity and strength as an enduring crpg system, has never been particular intuitive.... though it does indeed feel as if there is always that one tenacious rearguard defender o' the faith. sadly, the argument itself is becoming predictive repetitive. https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/39400-intuitive-rules-2nd-ed-add-vs-dd-3e35/?p=526646 HA! Good Fun!

the single class melee classes are strong. paladin is technical a support class with tanking attributes and from our pov, its desirability does kinda peters out after initial power tiers. even so, deadfire is flexible enough such that paladins may reliable dps, but is not actual how they is designed. barbarian, monk, rogue and, surprising, ranger makes good melee, though we prefer our melee rangers to be multiclass. our main reason for multiclassing ain't so much 'bout needed power, but 'cause am greedy and we like stretching the rule system to come up with quirky builds. 'cause deadfire is a game, am thinking folks spend far too much effort trying to build winning characters in deadfire when is a whole bunch o' unique builds which is nevertheless powerful in a potd run w/o necessarily being exploitive. deadfire is designed so any yutz with a couple firing neurons will be able to win, even in potd-- waste effort trying to find winning builds is kinda silly. with single class, is actual gonna be difficult to fail. is only multiclass combos which makes it possible to create a character incapable o' handling a potd run. HA! Good Fun!

is fair and fine, but hard part for developers is absence of "why." Time available requires me to be painfully brief, unfortunately. Developers definitely do not expect to be enlightened by me, nor do I expect developers to read my posts. I just posted my preference. When I offer feedback, I usually devote time which is mostly wasted as you yourself imply in your last paragraph. Anyway here are some reasons: 1) Attributes - what they affect, how they scale. You already know how e.g. a +1 strength bonus affects dice rolls in DnD. Less linear, more impactful. Theme is secondary, but I find DnD attributes much more thematically solid when it comes to what they affect. 2) Attack resolution in general. Miss/graze/hit/crit margins and percentages when it comes to the game calculating the resolution and how they change depending on the accuracy/defense gap. 3) The fact that spells go through the same attack resolution and do not feel like a unique kind of attack like in DnD. I agree that balance concerns are definitely not meaningless, but too much attention to balance always leads to homogenization. Recognizable is not enough. Unique is better. As for unintuitive, let's not open that can of worms. not much to go on... 1) d&d attributes is far less intuitive.... and am still not certain which d&d you are speaking 'bout. lack o' intuitiveness is not actual subject to debate, is it? 3e attributes have every second point value provide gains, so +1 does not actual necessarily provide any benefit, and the +1 benefit, when it does actual provide a benefit, provides vast different benefits depending on class choice. the benefits o' strength 18/26 v. 18/27? there is skills which is modified by strength... and size modifies strength, but a few skills which is modified by strength might actual be diminished by size. strength doesn't affect ranged thac0 or damage, save for when it does. etc. 2) is not an observation 'bout d20 or d&d. gonna need clarify, but if you are saying miss/graze/hit/crit is less intuitive or more oblique than thac0 or d20 than am gonna need more of a response, 'cause am not agreeing. 3) am agreeing that the poe combat resolution mechanics is more unified and rational than d&d, particularly ad&d. already mentioned the complete arbitrariness o' ad&d saving throws, but we can post the charts if need be. if different is necessarily superior, then you might wanna argue ad&d is superior, but is tough to find another positive other than different. d20 makes caster dc utter and complete dispositive and is suffering from clear thresholds. if you don't have enough points in your prime casting attribute, you will fail regardless o' tactics or strategies or buffs or debuffs or whatnot. etc. 'course if different is genuine important, am gonna note how poe, unlike d&d, offers much more variety o' gameplay. chanters have phrases and invocations. is a much different mechanic than monk wounds or the more traditional casters. and 'course there is cipher focus which is generated by doing damage to foes. fighters have active abilities they may start using at early levels as 'posed to being reduced to making auto-attacks overandoverandoverandover. d&d core classes is easily dividing caster and weapon combat. less variety. sure, all poe classes use same combat number crunching, but such is rational and does not change fact poe offers more core gameplay variety. not enumerated, but the oft mentioned balance = homogenized bit is actual reversing reality. in games with poor balance, such as d&d and fallout, there is correct and wrong builds 'cause o' clear difference in efficacy. during development, poe developers noted how few different fo builds were actual utilized in spite o' the open rule system. d&d suffered similar, but worse. d20 has literal prerequisite feats and skills for a variety o' optimal builds. poe/deadfire made suboptimal builds much more viable than d&d counterparts. sure, d&d has decades o' splat books to provide options, but few such options is ever actual utilized. given the relative brief time poe has existed, the options per offering ratio is far greater for poe/deadfire. even the s'posed terrible poe options, 'according to the hardcore build monkeys, is usal not just effective but powerful. https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/96769-rogues-do-not-suck/?p=1993983 is kinda funny, but when full poe2 were released, most o' the "rogues suck" complaints disappeared... though such threads were replaced with a few "priests suck" threads... but priestly suckage were more 'bout curiously unbalanced spell lists and not lack o' efficacy. priests has clear right and wrong options for spells. lack o' balance is what harmed priest class playability. unbalanced spell lists means all priests has a tendency to look alike. homogenized. and why on earth would we wanna ignore the can o' worms which is d&d when it comes to being counter intuitive? simple do a google search with terms: d&d; counter; intuitive. will keep you busy for a long time. HA! Good Fun!