Gromnir

so, it appears you did want to get "into it." as we noted 'bove, were clear not simple a matter of mislabeling as you did selective choose... and the google search were precise the problem for you, which would explain why you didn't link. most such google search definitions for generic do not include denotative derogatory. google search is part o' your problem, not your rescue. you used a mislabeled and, in hindsight, anomalous dictionary definition to refute ninjamestar. try and reverse so is Gromnir error is amusing. Upon searching for "generic definition" on Google, the result I get *does* list the derogatory form as a definition for it. Likewise it is seen in the Oxford dictionaries site: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/generic I didn't feel further clarification was needed, but fair enough, since you're so bent on making a fuss out of it. ofcourse the definition you selective listed is at the oxforddictionaries site. we linked the oxford site earlier to point out how your efforts, intentional or otherwise, were misleading. https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/95496-inherent-flaws-in-soulbound-items/?p=1968447 "I've always known it as a derogatory term when used in a derogatory fashion, and it is recognized as such by all dictionaries I'm looking at. " again, no. you cherry picked. oxford is actual the outlier from the dictionaries you were likely looking at. https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/95496-inherent-flaws-in-soulbound-items/?p=1968620 is becoming spam with Gromnir need having relink previous posts from mere a page past. in any event, took you two days to correct your original misleading post, but am guessing you deserve some kinda credit for doing so. am suspecting you will need continue this... one wonders how long you can maintain the charade. HA! Good Fun!

so, it appears you did want to get "into it." as we noted 'bove, were clear not simple a matter of mislabeling as you did selective choose... and the google search were precise the problem for you, which would explain why you didn't link. most such google search definitions for generic do not include denotative derogatory. google search is part o' your problem, not your rescue. you used a mislabeled and, in hindsight, anomalous dictionary definition to refute ninjamestar. try and reverse so is Gromnir error is amusing. am only continuing 'cause you cannot seem to let it go. am not certain why we always need be the grownup in these situations. HA! Good Fun!

more awkwardness. example: we reply 'bout holy meditation casting time... observe how the problem ain't pregnant cast times but rather disproportionate short durations for a few such spells. is nothing inherent unbalanced with a level 1 single-person buff taking long to cast. only becomes an issue if melee folks is attacking multiple times for big damage during such a casting time, particular when the duration o' the buff lasts little longer than the cast+recovery. why cast the spell priest is gonna contribute much more by simple using his/her own melee weapons during the cast time? the payoff from the spell is only gonna come close to evening out if it has a long duration. 'course such a disagreement and discussion takes us further afield o' the point o' the thread... and much further than the direction o' Gromnir's posts which you is now s'posed responding to. however, we will observe how such illustrated disagreement does serve to undercut the consensus notions you embraced earlier regarding casting times. even so, am relieved you found clarification regarding our point regarding idiocy o' fan collective. baby steps it seems. HA! Good Fun!

adjective adjective: generic 1. "..." 1.1 "..." 1.2 derogatory lacking imagination or individuality; predictable and unoriginal. naughty boy let google light the way... at least this once. https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/generic sure, generic can be derogatory, but am suspecting we weren't only person to be surprised to see "1." for such a definition. HA! Good Fun! That was due to trying to cut and highlight what I wanted to. Quoting in this forum is... Weird. At least for me. It took a few tries to get it to look close to right. It's not that I was putting it as the primary definition, simply as *a* definition, which is the one used above. 10 second fix. and yeah, by labelling as "1" (unnecessarily we might add if you were simple posting a definition rather than the definition) you were being misleading, particular as you didn't bother to include the link, as did Gromnir. maybe a mistake. maybe not. HA! Good Fun! If you want to twist a minor detail into a deliberate attempt to mislead or misinform the rest, suit yourself. I'm not getting into this again. "The lady protests too much, methinks."-- hamlet, act 3, scene 2. dunno, this quote thing don't seem so difficult to us, but if you wanna actual protest, then we will continue. welcome. in addition to the clear mislabeling o' the definition, you chose the one readily available online dictionary definition which actual included a derogatory aspect for generic. https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS699US699&ei=-E9SWt38J8eV0gKD8ILgDg&q=generic+definition&oq=generic+d&gs_l=psy-ab.1.0.0l7j0i10k1j0l2.13117.14178.0.16155.4.3.1.0.0.0.187.540.0j3.3.0....0...1.1.64.psy-ab..0.4.542...0i67k1j0i20i264k1.0.czqc4hYKPmY dictionary.com merriam-webster cambridge etc. so, you cherry pick a dictionary definition which provides a derogatory aspect for generic denotative as 'posed to mere connotative, and then you mislabel and fail to provide linky. to a reasonable onlooker it would appear as if you tailored your response for effect... and you got caught. no biggie... but don't do it again. john 8:11. quack. HA! Good Fun!

adjective adjective: generic 1. "..." 1.1 "..." 1.2 derogatory lacking imagination or individuality; predictable and unoriginal. naughty boy let google light the way... at least this once. https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/generic sure, generic can be derogatory, but am suspecting we weren't only person to be surprised to see "1." for such a definition. HA! Good Fun! That was due to trying to cut and highlight what I wanted to. Quoting in this forum is... Weird. At least for me. It took a few tries to get it to look close to right. It's not that I was putting it as the primary definition, simply as *a* definition, which is the one used above. 10 second fix. and yeah, by labelling as "1" (unnecessarily we might add if you were simple posting a definition rather than the definition) you were being misleading, particular as you didn't bother to include the link, as did Gromnir. maybe a mistake. maybe not. HA! Good Fun!

That's logically true. Fans can be idiots. Uhm, sorry for nitpicking, but you said "can be idiots" (which is true), and not "we are idiots" (which may not be true).Also (in this context) it would probaly make sense to use "shortsighted" instead; because besides having low intelligence, it's also possible to arrive to wrong conclusion by not having enough/correct input data. That said I salute your call for improved transparency. Unless you meant unanimous consensus, don't you exagerate a bit?- topics with high consensus: casting speed, impact of melee vs ranged, beta 1 injuries being too severe - topics with average consensus: general talents, penetration system (some players still favor the flat and/or gradual approach; but still the majority as finding the iteration of AR vs PEN as being too abrupt) - topics with low consensus: MIG/RES vs STR/RES I'd just add that it's great when fans' input and wishes are constructive, concrete and taking an advice or pov, instead of the occasional enforcing form. reply/quote to small portions? is how these debates devolve as folks lose track of larger issues and then quibble over tangential details. we will note how we do believe it is fair to refer to fans, as a whole, as idiotic. am not speaking of individual posters, but of fans, collective. from pov o' the developer, the fans is self-contradictory, irrational, unreasonable AND myopic. as a group, those qualities, presented consistent, would be justifiable described as idiotic. will also disagree 'bout your perceived and arbitrary levels o' consensus. casting times is, for example, far less a consensus issue than you may believe. take a look at summoned weapon threads for example. like it or not, is including a cast time aspect and is not consensus. also, a few folks such as Gromnir who suggested the real problem for casters were the penetration mechanic and overpowered synergies available to many melee builds making casters appear weak by comparison, has begun to suffer fatigue and reduce posting. developers already heard us, so is no reason to beat the horse to death as those demanding shorter casting times has done. regardless, we stand by opinion the developers should be careful o' listening to fan feedback. at some point, listen to fan must end for a good game to result. HA! Good Fun!

adjective adjective: generic derogatory lacking imagination or individuality; predictable and unoriginal. "generic dance-floor fillers" naughty boy let google light the way... at least this once. https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/generic sure, generic can be derogatory, but am suspecting we weren't only person to be surprised to see "1." for such a definition. HA! Good Fun!

we mentioned how eastern europeans is general more friendly and less anti-american. have mentioned previous on these boards what a warm welcome we got in poland. gdansk is one o' our favorite places... anywhere. 3rd largest city in poland means it is relative small by our standards and while krakow and warsaw has become more cosmopolitan in recent years, gdansk stayed the smallish burgh we recalled. just a beautiful and friendly northern european town on the ocean with underappreciated food and entertainment opportunities. quaint is not a criticism. our observation 'bout growing racial intolerance were as follows: "also gonna observe how as a dark-skinned man, recent years has seen us receiving increasing chilly reception from locals in much o' europe. for all the talk o' american racism, europeans as a whole is having a hard time with their recent refugee crisis and as an obvious minority o' enigmatic origin, we draw more than a little additional attention than we is accustomed to. not many lakota on the streets o' berlin, eh?" the race problem were separate from our observations 'bout foreigners general friendliness and their dealings with americans. the race issue is widespread and includes scandinavia based on our more recent short trips to sweden and denmark. however, am gonna concede we ain't been back to eastern europe recent, but based on news and other more personal sources, we would expect a different initial reception than the one we enjoyed previous... at least 'til it became obvious we were American and not north-african/middle eastern/whatever. we got dark skin and straightish black hair, so in the US we is often mistaken for mexican or puerto rican or middle eastern, depending on whatever bigotry the observer suffers. HA! Good Fun! ps am thinking we mentioned once how am pretty certain we caused a car accident in russia as a passing motorist gawked at us in surprise.

Not the first time that animals have been shown to use stuff to get high or something, catnip for example. nobody suggested it were a first "humans aren’t the only creatures that suffer from substance abuse problems. Horses eat hallucinogenic weeds, elephants get drunk on overripe fruit and big horn sheep love narcotic lichen. Monkeys’ attraction to sugar-rich and ethanol-containing fruit, in fact, may explain our own attraction to alcohol, some researchers think." *shrug* HA! Good Fun!

the thing is, most foreigners find Americans to be friendly and welcoming... if stoopid, lazy, bigoted, etc. so regardless o' the preconceptions Americans got o' others, even the folks who appear to hate us thinks we are cheerful if dimwitted lot. HA! Good Fun!

Dolphins Seem to Use Toxic Pufferfish to Get High one can almost predict which obsidian forumites will be most intrigued by the linked article. HA! Good Fun!

visiting europe would be nice... if not for all the europeans. in our experience, the linked vid is kinda typical o' most western europeans. sub-saharan africa and much of eastern europe (not all) is suffering less ack jassery than western europeans when dealing with Americans. am admitted having little experience with south americans in their native countries, so got little input save for to note how we genuine need make a south american trip eventual. asians is weird split. vietnamese and chinese were great on our visits-- warm welcomes. south koreans and japanese were... polite, but... also gonna observe how as a dark-skinned man, recent years has seen us receiving increasing chilly reception from locals in much o' europe. for all the talk o' american racism, europeans as a whole is having a hard time with their recent refugee crisis and as an obvious minority o' enigmatic origin, we draw more than a little additional attention than we is accustomed to. not many lakota on the streets o' berlin, eh? HA! Good Fun!

old complaint from Gromnir, but is our opinion the obsidians were too reactive to fan input during poe development. https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/91392-the-loss-of-vancian-casting/?p=1880072 https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/71242-interview-with-josh-sawyer-tomorrow-thursday-the-19th-at-8-pm-est-on-my-twitch-channel/?p=1589870 repost from march 21, 2015: one of the greatest strengths of poe will also be one of its greatest weakness. josh did mention in the interview just how much impact the input the community had on the game, which should be reassuring. to know that there is a possibility that features will be changed based on some kinda community consensus, which is 'bout as rare as a unicorn in central park, results in more folks becoming invested in the game, and not just monetarily. fans already see poe as their game, which is a good thing. more than a few things has been changed in poe as a result o' fan requests, and so fans see that they has made a difference. unfortunately, reactivity is a double-edged sword. fans can be idiots. the fact that we can be idiots in large numbers is cause for concern rather than applause. josh, in the interview, made comment about dealing with the feeling requests. sadly, more than a few o' the feeling changes arguably make the game worse rather than better. a fighter that is exceptional at simultaneous exacting and absorbing damage were a given in the ie games, so that is what the fans o' poe expected and clamored to get included into poe even though the poe fighter had a more limited role in poe. similarly, the paladin, were meant as a support character that were excellent in defense. the paladin's role were important to the developers 'cause it helped differentiate the numerous classes they created. got multiple support characters that is all good offensive and defensive and is great with melee weapons? what is point o' making multiple classes f they is all capable o' fulfilling the same role? even so, the fans wanted a poe paladin who could smite the wicked rather than one who were mere able to hold up a shield and defend against such villains and monsters. well, in response to public demand, we received a smite ability. is not that smite is bad, but it don't improve the paladin more than giving folks more o' the paladin feel they expected. wasted resources? perhaps. from the interview we could see that josh saw value in the way 4e differentiated the roles o' classes. rogues and wizards in 4e played very different, they had different roles and each class could excel in that role. unfortunately, 4e rogues didn't feel enough like 3e or ad&d rogues, and 4e wizards didn't feel enough like mordenkainen or tenser to d&d fans. the obsidians ran into the same problem with the poe community. expectations got/get in the way o' obsidian making progress, and their obstacle is the feelings o' the community. is nothing wrong with fulfilling wishes based on nothing save feel, as long as such stuff doesn't measurably impact developer notions o' balance and their ever-shrinking pool o' man-hours. add token bestiary, exploration and traps/lock xp? were easy to add, and so we got such token features included in poe. why? feel. were not a tough fix and it appeased those who wanted some kinda throwback to ie game xp awards. token xp grants didn't fundamentally alter the quest & objective xp mechanic obsidian adopted and were a cheap fix. win-win, eh? Gromir paid money to obsidian to make poe 'cause we trust that they can make a good pc crpg. at some point we gotta step back and let the folks that know what they are doing, do their work. why hire somebody if you aren't gonna trust 'em to do the actual work they were hired to do? Gromnir wants input, but if developers offer a rational and reasonable reason as to why they chose to do A instead o' B, we typical trust 'em. yeah, we want explanations and, from time to time, we will rail and moan like a little kid if we disagree, but for the most part, what we is looking for is transparency more than control. am thinking poe will be a stronger 'cause o' its transparency. at the same time, we believe that the game were somewhat diminished by the obsidian decision to actual listen to us, 'cause as we said already, we are idiots. end repost terrible thing is, the obsidians attempted to fix some o' their poe mistakes and a great deal o' the pushback from fans you see regarding the deadfire beta is simple reactionary. the fans o' poe want deadfire to play more like poe, even if the stuff they want "fixed" is the broken stuff from poe the developers is trying improve. poor balanced classes which is able to excel at everything in part 'cause of obvious dump stats and universal available no-brainer talents is what the loudest fans want. so we is back to where we were in mid/late 2014 with a small but vocal group o' fans hijacking the dialogue concerning improvement o' poe/deadfire. sure, is no longer ie/d&d grognards making the most noise. instead it is the hardcore poe fans who resist mechanic and balance changes proposed by obsidian and instead want deadfire to be little more than poe + multiclassing. the developers spent years developing poe... they spent years coming up with ideas 'bout how to improve poe. unfortunately, the diehard fans get their hands on the beta for even a few days and many were already in full bedwetting mode. many were complaining 'bout how terrible gimped were ciphers and casters or whatnot 'cause o' changes made regardless o' the actual performance o' such classes in the beta. "but in poe my cipher could..." ... oh, and balance competing fan wants is dooming deadfire to mediocrity. look at fan feedback and recognize how divisive is the opinions regarding everything. even for a relative homogenized group such as the beta testers, there is little consensus 'bout... anything. make game so is acceptable to most number o' people is the same theory behind tract housing and fast food. try and make everybody happy and result is gonna be pleasantly inoffensive. might be good business for obsidian to shoot for broad appeal, but give folks what they, as a group, actual ask for is dooming the results to mediocrity. listen to fans is good. fan feels is important. nevertheless, there needs be a point at which the developers show confidence in their own abilities regardless o' the protests o' a few mouthy malcontents. the obsidian developers got Years of feedback and hard tangible data 'pon which to draw conclusions. has gotta be an end to it. obsidian should make what they believe to be the best possible deadfire even if the best deadfire is a fail for some number o' folks, 'cause it will be a fail for some no matter how many people they try and please. do something meaningful. "nobody hated it." developers gotta realize such an observation is a scathing critique and not a compliment. HA! Good Fun!

plugging the hometown is likely the most useful advice we can provide. Gromnir has been a tourist in hundreds and even thousands o' places, and while we lived in europe for a couple years, we never stayed in one place long enough to genuine know it. however, is a handful o' places 'bout which we can give shady the genuine insider info and only a few such places is vacation spots. cali has a number o' vacation worthy destinations and is a goodly number o' posters hereabouts who is residing in in the loopy state, and each o' us is gonna likely know something unique shady would never glean from internet searches or travel guides. heck, we can personal provide breakfast/lunch/dinner restaurant recommendations for bay area, monterey, carmel, paso robles/slo, santa barbara and la. as an aside, is worth going to la if only to get tacos and a t-shirt from a guerrilla tacos truck. HA! Good Fun!

we like new orleans music and food, but am personal disliking the deep south to such a degree that future trips to new orleans is only ever gonna be a work/business destination for us. the casual/reflexive/subtle racism o' much o' the deep south is almost as oppressive to us as is the humidity. the thing 'bout food though is it is easy to find good food in all the expected places. heck, hurl might as well mention the bay area, no? san francisco, palo alto and napa is all geographic proximate... with napa being a bit o' a drive. can spend literal weeks doing nothing but eating at fantastic restaurants in the bay area and napa. go to the french laundry for dinner and you should be demanding great food, not simple expecting. *shrug* spend less than $10 to get an enormous serving o' the world's best perogies from a little place in gdansk? one o' the three best italian restaurants we ever ate at boasted cracked red vinyl booths and honest-to-god christmas lights adorning the walls year 'round at a nondescript suburban chicago location. have spent rent money for a steak in tokyo which weren't near as good as the ribeyes from a little place in rapid city, south dakota, a place we sacrilegious refer to as heaven. for us, most o' the fun o' eating on vacation is finding the unexpected places which don't cost us the equivalent o' a night's stay at a 4-star hotel. regardless, whenever we go on vacations o' a week or more, we always get a room with a functional kitchen, 'cause chances are we is gonna be making most o' our own meals. HA! Good Fun! ps am suspecting any ca suggestions will be dismissed, but a highway 1 vacation is worth doing at least once in a lifetime. multitude o' great food options, a variety o' unique natural grandeur locales and seeming endless stretches o' water... though admitted teeth-chattering cold water in most places. yeah, the pch doesn't reach san diego, but is a great destination... and not just for the fish tacos.

gravy? am afraid shady is gonna be stuck with a montreal 2018 vacation. am not a fan o' montreal, but if it is gravy you want... HA! Good Fun! ps other thing for which montreal is deserved noteworthy is nudy bars and sex trade... so there is that.

and as Gromnir pointed out some time ago, if you wanna analogize to self buff, then you should accept reduced durations. casting time and durations is all part how such spells is balanced. the summoned weapons, with durations equivalent to other self buffs, will sudden become far less useful in the more challenging encounters of the game. HA! Good Fun! No. Because the universal self buff would give you +15 ACC for everything - while the +15 on the weapon is only useful if you attack with said weapon. But if shorter durations are required to make the summoneing process faster then so be it. Somebody who wants to focus on summoned weapons can call forth one and the same weapon twice per encounter - or just use a summoned weapon from another spell level. I'd rather have a fast cast with a shorter duration than a long cast with a long duration. you do realize distinguishing universal is simple another quality which is making the analogy less​ useful, yes? you made an observation 'bout self buffs being quick casts and analogized summoned weapons to self buffs. self buffs often have limited durations, regardless o' the effects. the more you help us distinguish summons and self buffs, the more you relegate durations and cast times to being nothing more than ordinary aspect o' balancing rather than some kinda inherent quality o' a class o' spells. HA! Good Fun!

and as Gromnir pointed out some time ago, if you wanna analogize to self buff, then you should accept reduced durations. casting time and durations is all part how such spells is balanced. the summoned weapons, with durations equivalent to other self buffs, will sudden become far less useful in the more challenging encounters of the game. HA! Good Fun!

kalbarri could appeal to shady. geographical it is as if somebody took the arizona desert and added nice ocean beaches to the scenery. however, am not recalling too many great restaurants. might need head down to perth to get a decent meal in wa. converse, san sebastián, spain is a coastal destination with fabulous food offerings... but it is an established resort town, with all the drawbacks o' touristy resort towns. will echo gd regarding kauai. is our typical annual hawaii destination. however, keep in mind we go to kauai to get away from everything but sand, surf, and sea turtles. HA! Good Fun! ps kalbarri gots a wildflower season similar to deserts of the american southwest... though, y'know, opposite ends o' the calendar year. can be a spectacular sight.

I'm struggling to understand why or how you extracted such an uncharitable reading from what I wrote, since I never said anything about experience amounts being relevant to boring/interesting. am not sure if you are being intentional obtuse to make some kinda point, so apologies if such were your goal. "No experience during side questing would make side questing boring." your words. the absence o' sufficient experience clear renders questing boring. is clear a claim that the measure o' experience affects "boring/interesting." regardless, arguing this point, you is reinforcing your initial mistake. the quests is no more or less interesting 'cause the xp reward for a late game quest resulted in 0xp or 1xp or 5xp. the quest itself is no less compelling for the absence o' xp, but this is all simple repetition bordering 'pon spam. if you genuine believe the xp reward can affect how boring is the quest, then am at an impasse. that said, we did already observe how failing to meet expectations would cause confusion and consternation and we already mentioned how for Gromnir solution to work, quest rewards would need be altered a bit as crpg players have developed expectations regarding the payoff o' questing. 1007 rewards alone would no doubt keep many sidequests vital with little need for change and as Gromnir can imagine alternatives to 1007 and experience (we mentioned stronghold prestige/security earlier) am suspecting the developers can do better. but again, am largely repeating self. why take xp out of the "toolbox"? *chuckle* answer is obvious... is the reason why folks is posting in this thread-- xp rewards from tangential and optional side-quests is causing xp bloat for completionists. the unbalanced xp a completionist will acquire compared to a critical path player is precise the problem being debated. as such, find ways to reduce completionist xp is a simple option for fixing the problem... if it is a problem. *shrug* relative overlevel results in a less than insignificant % of the game lacking challenge. possible more meaningful than the diminished challenge factor is our observation 'bout expectations. bis/obsidian developers, when making their d&d titles, mentioned how they were aiming for a rough level-per-hour kinda rate. am doubting developer goals for poe leveling differed much. the games is effective running a skinner box experiment and the rats is being conditioned with levels and 1007 as rewards. with an easily attainable level cap, sudden, midway through game, the rats is no longer getting the reward they expect. the poe rats is subjected to possible dozens of hours of conditioning, not to mention years o' previous conditioning from similar games. reward fail and developers end up with lots of unhappy rats. regardless, if cheese is making the rats sick, then obvious solution is to not use cheese to reward the rats. obsidian wants to keep the rats happy. with poe the obsidians genuine believed they had an xp scheme which would result in completionists reaching the level cap only near the extreme end of the game. fail. first step o' any real solution is to be certain obsidian understands how they could have been so wrong in spite o' their extreme confidence. btw, is a whole host o' pnp rpgs which do not provide individual quest rewards. even d&d, for much o' its existence, recommended dms to provide lump xp awards at the end of adventures. what has kept any number o' folks playing playing pnp rpgs for many years is not the xp grind. even so, am gonna observe how pnp and single-player crpgs is not the same. what works in pnp don't necessarily translate to crpg. need discover what works for crpgs. unfortunate, crpg xp bloat resulting from rewards for tangential and optional side quests doesn't work... or maybe it isn't the problem some suggest. regardless, the notion o' insufficiency o' xp rewards rendering quests boring is utter ridiculous. almost feel silly for responding a second time to such. HA! Good Fun!

we did a fair amount o' surfing while we lived in berkeley and santa barbara and while we didn't have a fear o' the unknown or of giant cephalopods, sharks scarred us more than a little. had seen shark bite damage on a few surfers and on more than a few boards... 'cause sharks is seeming more likely to bite boards. stoopid sharks. see a flash o' silver in the water and it could be a trick o' light, a school o' fish or a shark. got the heart pumping. more than once something big grazed our leg while we were in the channel island waters and am not too proud to admit we leaked a little urine at such times. HA! Good Fun!

trump reflexive threatens litigation whenever somebody writes an unflattering book, but typically he caves 'fore situation can get too ugly for him. nevertheless, the hijinks which would ensue if lawyers got another chance to depose trump regarding so-called defamatory statements would, sadly, be the highlight o' at least a month o' our life. maybe two. https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/2016-election/trump-lies/?utm_term=.e9f71a0dd1a8 HA! Good Fun!

first shot is free, however, am gonna make a couple observations: 1) "No experience during side questing would made side questing boring," made us guffaw. thanks. we rarely get to use guffaw legit in a sentence. so, the magnitude o' the xp award controls and/or limits the interest level o' a quest? good to know. makes quest design much easier for the developers. let josh know "boring" can be balanced with a bit o' a push to the xp award for a quest. we did observe in our post that folks would be unlikely to champion the idea o' zeroed out xp for optional side quests (you missed?) however, the reason for such universal rejection would hardly be the result o' the transformative impact o' absent xp rewards 'pon the overreaching evocative, compelling, intriguing, captivating elements o' quest design. finish raedric's hold and all you get for troubles is a whole lotta 1007 and a digital slap on the back from companions... am predicting many folks would complain. would need alter rewards to be a successful change. however, the complaint would not be 'bout lack o' stimulating or engaging gameplay, but rather the failure to match expectations, yes? regardless, if you genuine see "boring" as linked to magnitude o' the quest xp rewards, then am suspecting we will be at a functional impasse. 2) preventing overleveling avoids the diminution of late game challenges due to player xp bloat kinda axiomatic, no? suggesting we miss the "central criticism" appears to be on shaky ground as our solutions specific address the problem o' a player being too powerful for encounters to be challenging based on perceived excessive. you appear to believe fixing the problem should take place through level scaling of enemies. fine. is a different approach and far more difficult to balance than is Gromnir's solution(s). there is also a rather poor track record for games which attempt level scaling beyond very limited ranges. nevertheless, the perceived problem is hardly altered by the means which one seeks to fix said problem. 3) overlevel is not a late game problem you, and others, mischaracterize the problem as a "late game enemies" issue. where player level (and not 1007 or other factors is the real problem) late game is actual not an issue with titles such as poe. 'cause o' the level cap, late game level disparity 'tween enemies and the player will be negligible/non-existent. late game challenges is designed with capped/near cap players. yes, developers often fail to make late game challenges appropriate, but such is rare a matter o' xp bloat as the player is forcibly prevented from being overleveled late. is some nebulous region 'tween mid and late wherein xp bloat is typical an issue. will let the other silliness slide other than to offer an additional chuckle at your seeming pointless recharacterization o' our obvious tongue-in-cheek progressive tax bit. sure, our notion o' limiting the problem of excessive subquest xp grants through a progressive numerical penalty were serious, but your desire to redefine were... funny. HA! Good Fun!

the real issue is not what people believe it to be, but will get back to that in a bit. regardless, if overleveling is a real problem, then solutions is easy enough. no xp for side quests solves. a functional progressive "tax" for side quest would be more complicated, but would also solve. sure, the developers would need make certain there were still rewards for doing optional side-quests (e.g. 1007, stronghold security/renown bonuses, achievements-which-are-the-2010-equivalent-of-pog-collecting, etc.) but if overlevel is a problem, then alexander can sever the gordian knot with one stroke. the more optional xp rewarding side-quests a developer includes in a game will necessarily lead to a gap 'tween the xp achievable by critical path players and completionists. obvious solution is to nix xp rewards outside the crit path. completionists will still be completionists w/o the xp rewards just so long as is other meaningful rewards for completing optional tasks. socialists belong in dante's sixth level o' hell, no? am a little fuzzy on our dante at the moment, but while a progressive tax may be objective evil, such a scheme could be utilized to reduce the over level problem. have a player's optional side-quest xp totals tracked (should be easy enough based on how josh described the capacity for developers to track xp in poe) and at certain thresholds, subsequent xp rewards would be taxed. 10%. 20%. 30%. more optional xp you accumulate, the more xp you need to keep pace. won't be a perfect solution, 'cause progressive taxes never work as advertised anyway, but it would reduce a portion o' the bloat which is resulting from non critical path xp rewards. 'course the real xp problem is not what anybody in this thread is talking 'bout. the real problem is the mystery behind obsidian's poe xp confusion. Before the release o' poe, particular evidenced during the debates regarding per kill xp v. task/quest/whatever, the obsidians revealed their complete confidence 'bout relative leveling rates for poe. the developers had access to tools which made it easy and clear to be seeing possible xp rewards and to alter such rewards w/o much fuss. when exploration and token per kill xp were added to poe later in development, josh shrugged off any sorta balancing concerns as baseless given how easy it were to maintain a kinda xp homeostasis with poe developer tools. pre white march, obsidians were certain they had a handle on xp rewards for poe and they were extreme confident a completionist would need be near exhausting all possible tasks to be achieving the level-cap. now admitted the bounties threw the obsidian math outta wack, but even when the bountie rewards were corrected soonish after release, the over-leveling issue remained. developers were wrong-- they didn't understand xp and their predictions were much off-target. ... again, the "solutions" is easy and obvious, but is likely less than appealing. am suspecting critical path only is a solution few will champion. 'course there is a question as to whether the problem needs be solved as the xp bloat issue only affects hardcore completionists and we are, by-and-large, a negligible minority-- will leave that debate for another thread. however, the real problem is the obsidians and their capacity to correct xp bloat. we never did hear an explanation as to why their extreme confident prognostications 'bout xp were so flawed, so for all we know, the fog which obscures obsidian vision regarding xp rewards remains. gonna be difficult to fix an xp problem (short o' Gromnir's proposed crit path solution) if the developers have no idea why they got xp so wrong in poe. if the developers have not experienced some kinda epiphany regarding the accuracy o' their predictions o' poe xp rewards for completionists, then am suspecting most changes the obsidians seek to implement will be of limited efficacy. is tough to fix a problem when you do not understand the problem. HA! Good Fun! ps the ie game purists should be happy 'bout xp bloat. for all the unwanted improvements forced 'pon them in obsidian's "spiritual successor," the developers managed to flub the xp bloat issue near as bad as did bioware with bg/totsc.

aside: the ship naming convention problem is not. is not a problem and am not sure why josh is making it so. doesn't matter what pronouns or articles russians use for ships. similar, doesn't matter if folks germans use fatherland as 'posed to motherland. is no germans or russians in deadfire. duh. solution is simple to establish via lore/dialogue/whatever the gender o' eora (or at the very least, deadfire archipelago) ships. problem solved. HA! Good Fun!