Gromnir

while this observation is failing from a fair bit o' reductio ad absurdum, it is also not complete wrong. as we observed earlier, ignoring feel is as much a mistake as is simple abandoning rational and reasonable. ultimately, regardless o' whether a game system objective provides more options and flexibility, if the folks playing and purchasing feel more limited, then the additional options is wasted. am not denying the importance o' feel. we explicit stated the importance o' feel. nevertheless, our query remains: how should the developer judge competing feel arguments? In what way does the observation fail from reductio ad absurdum. Why make dismissive and wholly unqualified claims like this about about someone's statement. And it is a developers job precisely to use their experience and judgment to balance competing feel arguments (among other things). That's why they are paid for it. It has nothing to do with whims. Again, experience and judgment, and above all iteration. if is based on judgement and experience, then is not actual arbitrary, is it? the fact the developer must use own judgement as part o' the equation it does not mean everything ultimate comes down to feels. absurd. is the core o' the fallacy. use extreme example: if after careful analysis one comes up with two very different solutions to a problem and then tosses a coin to choose 'tween final two options. to suggest "it all comes down to feels" is misleading, no? is ignoring all the hard and objective analysis which went into the decision making process. "how should the developer judge competing feel arguments?" for poe, josh would mention how the developers had hard data feedback to be observing just how people play games. poe beta has some kinda telemetry, yes? the developers is using statistics and cold-hard numbers to see just how folks is playing. to somehow suggest that the judgement element renders all decisions arbitrary is reductio ad absurdum defined. very few rule mechanics decisions is gonna be genuine described as arbitrary... not without reductio ad absurdum fueling. silliness. and to kat21 ar·bi·trar·y ˈärbəˌtrerē/Submit adjective based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system. HA Good Fun!

*sigh* perhaps you genuine believe the developers should make fundamental design decisions based on whim. am doubting you will find many who agree. HA! Good Fun!

Ah yes but that's an appeal to feel, which is not rational, so you should be ashamed of yourself or something praytell, how should the developer judge competing feel arguments? we almost never see consensus on these boards. so why is one fan's feel more relevant than another's? we linked an interview with josh in which he described, 'mong other things, the difficulty in choosing 'tween competing emotional appeals. can review... or not. your choice. regardless, is some insights to be gleaned from how the developer sees the problem o' choosing 'tween emotional appeals and feel arguments. HA! Good Fun! At the most basic level it all comes down to feels. while this observation is failing from a fair bit o' reductio ad absurdum, it is also not complete wrong. as we observed earlier, ignoring feel is as much a mistake as is simple abandoning rational and reasonable. ultimately, regardless o' whether a game system objective provides more options and flexibility, if the folks playing and purchasing feel more limited, then the additional options is wasted. am not denying the importance o' feel. we explicit stated the importance o' feel. nevertheless, our query remains: how should the developer judge competing feel arguments? HA! Good Fun!

difference in nomenclature and content. companions = most story integration sidekicks = limited story integration --party banter and a single quest hierlings = no story integration if you want the companions and their story aspects, you will not be able to mold them like sculptor's clay. HA! Good Fun!

Ah yes but that's an appeal to feel, which is not rational, so you should be ashamed of yourself or something praytell, how should the developer judge competing feel arguments? we almost never see consensus on these boards. so why is one fan's feel more relevant than another's? we linked an interview with josh in which he described, 'mong other things, the difficulty in choosing 'tween competing emotional appeals. can review... or not. your choice. regardless, is some insights to be gleaned from how the developer sees the problem o' choosing 'tween emotional appeals and feel arguments. HA! Good Fun!

well, the priest subclasses current have school prohibitions and a few bonus spells. priests o' skaen get the baby sneak attack too. the school prohibitions is impactful and a few o' the bonus spells is intriguing. in spite o' limited options, skaen and wael appear to have particular but very different advantages o'er the other subclasses. *shrug* am gonna wait to see what is done with the altered subclasses. feels a bit pointless to rail 'bout something which will be gone like a fart in the wind after the next build release. am glad something is being done as the priest does have potential, but options is so limited at the moment. HA! Good Fun!

earlier we made this same observation 'bout ap piercing weapon lack of diversity. warhammer isn't an ap weapon on par with stiletto or estoc, but is a possibility for a weapon-focused build which stacks ap. am suspecting is one o' the reasons why devoted, after the proficiency bug is fixed, may become far less appealing than it current is. take estoc and then face a high armour and high deflection foe immune to piercing. ... well p00p. now face the fire blight boss... of DOOM. "sorry guys. i am gonna need to sit this one out." HA! Good Fun!

am disagreeing 'bout a lack o' a selling point. the first tier heal is amazing potent given the instantaneous casting. am suspecting there will be an additional insta-heal in the higher level priest talents we ain't yet seen. in addition, and am knowing it is a far less salient boon given the inexperience we all got with deadfire at this extreme early stage, but afflictions and inspirations is gonna complete change how folks face battles. in poe, a bunch o' cheesed off druid foes could serious ruin your day by casting recurring storm. could feel like your party were stunlocked into ineffectuality. in deadfire, if you got a priest in your party, then is likely you got a counter to a large number o' afflictions. cast the correct might inspiration on your party and then laugh off those tree-huggers and their recurring storm. well, not laugh off 'cause you will still take damage from the lightning. remind us, which class is the best healer? dire blessing is a bit op at the second. sure, the graze aspect is not a big need for many classes, but for casters unleashing debuffs and afflictions o' their own, the capacity to graze is hard to appropriate quantify. sans graze, casters as a whole is punside by the current penetration scheme into ineffectuality. with graze... *shrug* if for no other reason, we would find it difficult to voluntarily build a party w/o a priest at this moment. etc. priest has loads o' potential. as a caster, multiclassing is inherent suspect. next tier o' abilities is hard to forgo, and is amazing how impactful a well-timed empower can be. we got a helwalker/priest build am serious considering for our first deadfire run, but if we do so, am thinking it makes sense to take the companion priest as well. hard to justify two priests with a five-man party, but... HA! Good Fun!

Right, you are the only rational person here. Standing on the hill of sanity and reason, waving the flag of prudence. All those people who oppose you are obviously sentimental, unreasonable or outright stupid. am clear not alone on the hill, but you are correct in observing how the mob has responded in predictable fashion. as an example, you didn't reply to us by explaining why a paladin w/o weapon and shield is current inadequate. instead, you went with... emoji. way to prove our point. HA! Good Fun! How can I? I'm obviously mentally unstable and can't think straight for two seconds. Please cut me some slack. Wait... forgot emoji... never made such a claim or even insinuated such. even so, we will defer to your expertise on the matter o' your mental stability, clarity o' thought, and your facility with emojis. HA! Good Fun!

above quoted is the point. can't look at weapons with blinders affixed. estoc is superior 'gainst high armour, and 'gainst low armour it is hardly doing paltry damage. more significant, bosses will predictable have high armour. being able to mop up mobs a bit quicker with the great sword makes up for relative ineffectuality 'gainst high armour foes? play long game and estoc wins as particular with overwhelming ap it is doing good consistent damage 'gainst low armour adversaries and will continue to be a far more viable option 'gainst the handful o' heavily armoured foes. with the new announced scheme for weapon proficiencies, there will be a much greater motivation to choose a particular weapon with which to specialize. am not seeing such as a particular difficult decision making process. HA! Good Fun!

Right, you are the only rational person here. Standing on the hill of sanity and reason, waving the flag of prudence. All those people who oppose you are obviously sentimental, unreasonable or outright stupid. am clear not alone on the hill, but you are correct in observing how the mob has responded in predictable fashion. as an example, you didn't reply to us by explaining why a paladin w/o weapon and shield is current inadequate. instead, you went with... emoji. way to prove our point. HA! Good Fun!

in our opinion, the overall caster gimpage appears to be a function of penetration and not related to the absence o' universal talents. with dire blessing in effect, debuffs from casters at least graze frequent enough to make casters highly useful. unfortunately, other than lightning bolts with 9 penetration, most non empowered damage spells from casters is shrugged off by all but the most vulnerable o' adversaries. is a penetration issue. 'course your observation is unexpected reasonable in this swamp o' a thread. is neither reasonable nor rational to demand talents which does not actual improve customization or increase functionality o' a character. nevertheless, in spite o' the fact you has recognized by implication how weapon damage potential for classes 'cross the board is already effective in the beta, such weapon focused talents is what obsidian is giving... 'cause such is what folks want... and folks cheered the addition o' such talents. for reasons stated already, making such weapon focused talents available will actual reduce customization as they will be no-brainer choices. none o' this makes sense. we have seen numerous appeals for making weapon and shield talent available so paladins may get the talent as they did in poe. this need is expressed in spite o' a complete absence o' even the suggestion a deadfire paladin who does not have weapon and shield is particular squishy or ineffective as a tank. our personal experience having played as a single-class paladin more than a few hours suggests a deadfire paladin tank is highly effective, but we ain't actual seen any folks demanding weapon and shield for their paladins claiming the absence is current a problem requiring a solution. folks want weapon and shield for deadfire paladins 'cause they had it in poe. feel diminished by the absence. is very definition o' entitlement. HA! Good Fun! ps as an aside, tanks are a bit op at the moment. with non magical brigandine armour and a mundane medium heater shield, we rare need concern our self with paladin or fighter tank survivability. will make a chanter tank and see how it plays, but am thinking the tanks is a bit too resilient at the moment.

What happens if you add in damage bonuses like Might, Soul Whip and the like? My worry is that the change to make it more granular and less punishing is that high penetration low damage weapons will be marginalized and it'll be back to damage is king just like in PoE. Having a reason to not take Sabres and Great Swords would be nice besides self gimping. am agreeing to a point, but keep in mind the high penetration weapons is doing significant more damage when overwhelming. there is a damage multiplier for overwhelming. am not convinced a great sword is a no-brainer choice as posed to an estoc. actual, at the moment, we would likely continue to use stilettos, warhammers, war bows and estocs as 'posed to sabres and great swords. will need wait and see how the changes playout in the new build, and am thinking the changes will much benefit casters, but am believing the previous all-or-nothing penetration mentality regarding weapons is gonna be replaced by a bell curve which leaves the majority o' weapon choices exact where they is now-- in the rubbish heap. three kinda viable weapons: 1) accurate to maximize crit chance, 2) high penetration, 3) bonus damage. other weapons will only have appeal based 'pon meta-knowledge. find a sooper powered flail o' stunning with a penetration modifier? well then, our opinion 'bout flails will no doubt change. such reliance 'pon meta is another example o' bad design though. HA! Good Fun!

I kinda get it from a lore perspective but it'll be a royal pain if the Priest Companion has the same restriction; from what I understand she's supposed to be an eothas worshipper and that's a really harsh limitation. Mechanically right now it looks like the "best" option is a priest of Wael, but it's hard to say definitely and I haven't play tested. enoch hazarded a guess regarding the companion priest which sounded plausible. no school prohibitions-- gaun worshiper gets to be the sole generalist priest. irrespective o' lore, allow the companion to be a generalist with no prohibitions makes gameplay sense. am thinking o' dualing her into a priest/monk regardless. as an aside, a pc wood elf helwalker priest o' whatever is more effective than we first suspected. helwalkers typical see kinda dramatic might increases which has a considerable impact on priestly heals and holy radiance burn to say nothing o' damage spells. helwalkers tend to suffer more damage, but this shortcoming is largely countered by the incredible heals the multi-class can generate... insta heals. a wood elf self buffing with the monky quick inspiration from flurry talent will never suffer paralysis, and most other afflictions can be addressed with inspirations as 'posed to protection spells if you wanna go with eothas as your patron to get the firebrand and chunkify weak mobs. given how poorly understood is afflictions and counters, priest potential is being underutilized and underappreciated. even so, other than skill choices, there isn't much to do with a single-class priest after level 1. too bad. waste o' a interesting class. HA! Good Fun!

is still beta, but am actual surprised obsidian pulled the trigger so fast. people cannot know what choices they have in deadfire. is not good design, but maybe the developers think it is good business. It's week one of beta and the game is not out for at least 6 months. Relax, if it sucks they can change it again, plenty of time. A huge part of game design (or any design) is iteration. If they just leave everything the same for the whole length of the beta then it's just a fake "Beta" like AAA studios do these days (which is just an early demo). And I think if it makes people feel more in control of their character's archetypes then it is good design. game is current scheduled to be released by end of 2018 first quarter... 4 months at most. could run longer depending on how smooth is the beta, and Gromnir almost invariably guesses longer rather than shorter... which is why we managed to guess closest to actual poe release date in the s'posed official release date thread. https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/66536-guess-the-release-date/?p=1470995 is too early for us to guess if deadfire is on schedule. give us a couple build releases and then we will give a serious prediction. even so, is current an approx 4 month release... which is also why we predicted the deadfire beta would begin late november 2017. similar window when looking at initial announced late 2014 release date for poe. 4 months. *shrug* so, what if obsidian does the obvious and increases all adversary deflection and health to counter the increase in weapon efficacy o' all classes? from a practical pov, weapon power is currently much more effective than offensive spells. based on our play o' deadfire, weapon effectiveness clear didn't need a boost from a balancing pov. so it makes sense to balance new proficiency tiers by increase all enemy resistance to weapons. end result is players got 0 net gain in power, and by needing utilize the tiered weapon proficiency talents to keep pace with stronger foes, players would actual lose customization opportunities by functional giving up a broader range o' weapon proficiencies. feels or not, players would actual have less customization options. sure, most folks wouldn't realize they had been duped, but options would actual be reduced. am all for making changes during the beta, but less than one week? am also a bit less enthusiastic 'bout obsidian response to fan feedback during the beta than most. https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/71242-interview-with-josh-sawyer-tomorrow-thursday-the-19th-at-8-pm-est-on-my-twitch-channel/?p=1589870 am thinking obsidian gots great feedback during the years after the release o' poe, but the poe beta feedback, when looked at with the benefit o' hindsight, were a mess, and as often as not led to the diminution o' the game. so less than a week passes and instead o' the broad universal options people claimed they were wanting, obsidian struck at the heart o' the matter (as Gromnir insinuated earlier) and is providing a functional boost to the potential weapon powha of all classes... and the people rejoiced, not realizing that their approval were little more than a tacit admission o' their desire for a handful o' specific poe power talents from the very start. huzzah. HA! Good Fun!

My lollipop metafor for priest would be one dropped lint-coated lollipop caught in a God-forsaken sofa crack. is clear the developers believe the fanbase desire for more customization as a whole is a bit illusory as their announced fix is to provide weapon-based powha via proficiency increases. am genuine hopeful such a fix does not result in less motivation to improve specific classes such as the priest. the universal talents folks demanded is offered up like john the baptist's head does little to improve the priest situation. HA! Good Fun!

is still beta, but am actual surprised obsidian pulled the trigger so fast. people cannot know what choices they have in deadfire. less than a week of gameplay. believe or not, but Gromnir has 54 hours invested in the beta. no joke. shoulda' let folks delve a bit more 'cause discovering what they got in deadfire is less obvious than realizing what they lost from poe. am knowing one thing for certain after dozens of hours in the beta: we have only scratched the surface o' deadfire options. rather than give the community a chance to see what can be done with deadfire, obsidian is caving and repeating the same mistake they made in poe: offering universal talents, a handful o' which will be functional compulsory. worst o' all, the addition o' the talents folks want (not field triage) is not even increasing customization as folks hope. by offering talents/abilities which only a brainless twit would fail to choose, there is no increase in meaningful customization. anybody other than a pure caster is gonna take the weapon focus talents, just as they did in poe. heck, with the way spiritual weapons and former universal weapon spells such as firebrand is current implemented, a few pure casters may feel the need take such talents. is not good design, but maybe the developers think it is good business. HA! Good Fun!

I mean, this above ain't exactly making a CRPGer drool. Right now the only word I can describe single class priest choices with, qualitywise and quantitywise, is "snorefest". even before the beta release, Gromnir were concerned 'bout priests. mandatory school prohibitions coupled with anemic spell catalogs were meaning the functional choices after level-up were near non-existent. likely gonna eventual pick two of three or four total possibilities, and a few o' the choices is highly situational. won't see much difference 'tween ten different priest o' eothas as built by ten random players. still, spells seeming to be replicated in the priestly spell catalog is not as the editorialized picture would suggest. 'cause o' affliction tiers, am suspecting a number o' priest spells will be getting repeat performances beyond what we has seen thus far. the priest is clear the most straightforward affliction killer in the game. face a foe who spams tier 2 might afflictions and first thing the priest should do is lay down a tier two might inspiration... or tier 1 if the entire party is the coastal aumaua. on the positive end o' the spectrum is priestly heal kewlness, which is far more significant in deadfire than poe 'cause o' the change to health/endurance. like or hate the health change, heals is more significant in deadfire. priestly heals is, for the most part, fired off instantaneous... which is huge. not need be concerned 'bout concentration if you is gonna use heals. the spiritual weapons appear to be an attractive nuisance or a trap spell. seems useful 'pon reading as such scale and have powerful lash, but unless something changes, most such weapons is penetration weak. there is considerable reason to avoid such weapon choices at the moment... though will see how announces upcoming penetration changes impact. regardless, the post level-1 customization options for a priest, other than skill choices, is most limited to their spell choices, and with compulsory school prohibitions, a priest gets far fewer choices per ability level than the other casters. a few o' the spell choices is stuff nobody would/should take so is even fewer functional choices. many folks complain (a bit unfair) 'bout the customization options o' deadfire fighters or paladins, but is priests who is getting the fuzzy end of the lollipop. HA! Good Fun!

this is an example o' the fundamental difference 'tween boeroer and Gromnir pov regarding poe. provide a talent which then becomes a no-brainer selection is, in our opinion, bad design. if weapon focus or weapon style feats is utilized by every weapon user with firing synapses, then such choice is not actual meaningful. might as well simple have the initial weapon proficiency selections scale. is no different with a potential passive penetration talent. the current most appealing cipher abilities for us is passive penetration boosts. we would be similar inclined to take such a passive for any other caster if such were available. boeroer has stated more than once how his current deadfire character build philosophy aligns with Gromnir's: stack penetration. am not seeing a point o' general available talents which is well-nigh compulsory. there is an issue with the penetration mechanic. the suggested upcoming penetration change from josh might be going too far in the opposite direction by diluting the impact o' armour in favor o' potential overwhelming damage builds, but is a beta so am not concerned-- let it play out... literally. regardless, whatever is fundamental wrong with penetration will not be fixed by throwing no-brainer talents at the problem. HA! Good Fun! ps for ciphers the body attunement ability is kinda keen as it lowers foe ar and raises the cipher's by 5... is single target, but unlike the chanter invocation, it provides considerable offense and defensive power.

penetration still makes weapons such as flail and great sword sucky, regardless of lash for the falil and in spite o' the burn/pierce for the firebrand-- the weapons am particular familiar with is firebrand and the flail for eothas. sure, with a chanter skald constant reducing armour we can achieve functionality, but is not worth usage save in extreme limited situations... which would be fine in poe, but not deadfire. the priest spell catalog is far too small. even for specific multiclass builds, am not seeing much utility as long as the current penetration scheme is in place HA! Good Fun!

@ jkruger: only needed response to the reply/quote mess: we keep saying reasonable and rational. is an observation 'bout the lack o' both necessary qualities and defaulting to a feel response. though we will say we don't mind if you wanna quibble over insinuation v. opinion. *snort* every other development o' a sequel has faced similar issues. the folks demanding bg grandmastery or lamenting the state o' iwd ranged were similar riled. those folks lamented the loss o' the distinctness o' their previous builds. rare did such folks come out and says that their concerns were simple power-related. you see insinuation? fine. would be foolish and unreasonable to ignore parallels to every other sequel development we has followed. this time is different? this issue is different? people are not asking for universal access to field triage. be reasonable. *chuckle* in the absence o' rational and reasonable, we look to dozens o' similar parallels, including every bis/obsidian sequel. and to kat21... you are simple repeating same empty argument. there is no question you can build a weapon-based druid in deadfire. is ridiculous to claim otherwise. the method o' achieving is multi-class. the fact deadfire and poe weapon-focused druids is not the same is a given, but so what? you get more options from deadfire, far more. sure, you cannot exact replicate every old poe build, but such is not a flaw in and of itself. is no more meaningful than any other random observation. "i like trees." well, good for you. the method obsidian would use within the current system to addresses concerns 'bout lack o' customization in the 1/2 talent trees we has seen for classes so far is to make adjustments to individual classes. again, am assuming overall scheme stays same. add talents to a class is relative insular changes. even so, add talents to priest tree and one must consider impact o' not only multi-classing, but the plethora o' gear we ain't even seen yet. make changes to priest alone is having impact on many other classes. can't see how universal talents much complicates balancing? multiply the possible changes and breakages one would need contend with if only making adjustments to the priest. nightmare. furthermore, which talents is folks clamoring to be having made universal accessible? inspite o' jk three wise monkey routine, there is clear talents which folks is clamoring for to be general accessible, and many others they is less concerned 'bout. classes is, like it or not, requiring defining features and abilities. is no point to a class if all talents is general accessible. is far less motivation to multi-class when multi-class carries with it the handicap o' power level reduction and ability level diminution w/o making particular compelling builds achievable only through multiclass. is a trade-off. start making certain talents general accessible and you necessarily diminish the appeal o' multiclass. etc. but am simple repeating self as is kat21. game has been in our hands less than a week. we advocated obsidian waiting to make any kinda changes for obvious reason we has had game for so little. is immediate obvious what poe builds cannot be replicated in deadfire, but none o' us has experience with the full range o' possibilities o' deadfire. compare the two systems (and again, we only got 1/2 o' deadfire talents n' a fraction o' gear) and find deadfire lacking would seem a premature conclusion for obsidian to make at this point. sure, some folks has already played dozen o' hours and has reached a conclusion they will not budge from regardless o' developer feedback or recognition this kinda reaction has happened with pretty much every sequel evar, but obsidian should be more measured. most o' us has played, at most, a couple-handful of different builds, and not have much time invested in such builds... and only at levels 6-8 (or 9). premature. HA! Good Fun!

you continuing to gloss over how are able to create many more new builds in deadfire than you could create in poe. is not a different problem. you ain't making sense. to make a weapon-focused druid in poe, the character chose the appropriate (essential) general talents. there were no multiclassing in poe. poe2 achieves greater customization through multiclassing. can make a weapon-focused druid in both games, but the method to achieve must needs be different. the options for a weapon-focused druid in deadfire is much greater than those available to a player o' poe. can choose to multi-class with fighter or rogue or paladin or barbarian and each has unique advantages and drawbacks, but if goal is to make a weapon-focused druid, then you got far more options in deadfire. is no denying such an observation. sure, you lose poe specific builds, but ultimately the range o' options for customization is massive improved in deadfire. with all the new multiclassing options, were a forgone conclusion there would be balance issues. (see josh pinned tweet 'bout balance if you are one o' those folks irrational dismissive o' all balance concerns.) the new scheme allows base classes to remain distinct and controllable. more options and better balancing scheme. so why the reluctance to use multiclassing to achieve a weapon-focused druid? naming nomenclature? please. there is a cost for achieving customization through multiclassing. is that the issue? claim is a separate issue is silly. is 'bout achieving a character concept and putting tools to match such a concept in the hands o' the player. compartmentalize single class v. multiclass is illusory. HA! Good Fun!

It also relies on you trusting the devs to make cool weapons of every type. In PoE1, some weapon type had almost no uniques, and this'll be even more obvious in Deadfire because of the changes to enchantment, so you can't just make a good weapon of that type. If you end up of a devoted of a weapon type that has very few uniques in the actual game, you're screwing yourself at character creation without even knowing it. soulbounds were the obsidian solution to the difficulty o' making certain every poe weapon had equal appealing uniques. it makes sense to have the soulbound solution carryover to deadfire. however, soulbounds, if implemented in deadfire same as in poe, would likely result in a significant dilution o' the devoted's penalty/handicap. as far as we can tell, priestly spiritual weapons and the firebrand are not current having the universal quality. am admitted not certain if the lack o' universal is intentional, oversight or bug. absence o' such a quality does make spiritual weapons and similar such far less appealing as other than skaen stilettos, the weapon choices is armour piercing weak. at the moment, a weapon-focused character not utilizing an ap weapon is a suspect proposition. didn't check, but am assuming skaen priest spiritual weapon is stilettos. if such is the case, am seeing early game benefits to taking spiritual weapon on a skaen priest or skaen priest multi-class. otherwise... HA! Good Fun!

There's plenty of evidence that builds or options that I, or others, might want to use can't be done, or require multiclassing to achieve. You don't think that's a legitimate criticism of the system but to claim otherwise is simply wrong. this is the kinda thing am talking 'bout. is a given you cannot replicate every poe build in deadfire. keep repeating the deadfire impossible builds tragedies is pointless. nobody is arguing with you on this point. is unreasonable 'cause you see such an axiomatic result as a problem w/o describing why is a problem beyond feels. not rational. even the folks complaining 'bout their inability to replicate specific poe builds in deadfire freely admit that deadfire is giving them more customization options in total. folks such as boeroer were concerned during development 'bout the balance problems inherent in multiclassing poe with so many distinct classes and talents and the current multi-class scheme allows for far more control o' such balance issues than would universal talents. etc. each additional posting o' impossible poe builds using deadfire is irrational. it proves nothing and nobody is arguing the point you believe such postings is making. am thinking you would admit how ridiculous it would be if every time a poe impossible build were submitted as evidence, the response were to post two deadfire builds which would be impossible in poe. nevertheless, while the inanity o' such evidence seems obvious, you nevertheless proffer the impossible poe builds as meaningful. irrational. unreasonable. and if you got hung up on Gromnir stating an alternative rationale in the absence o' reasonable responses from the poe universal talent advocates, feel free to add the obvious implied "it is Gromnir's opinion," to such posts as necessary. *eye roll* HA! Good Fun! ps throwing up your hands and dismissing the entire issue as an emotional appeal is equal ridiculous. reductio ad absurdum is not a good way to respond to Gromnir's claims. you do not honest believe the changes made by obsidian were based on gut-level feel, do you? is hard and cold reasoning from obsidian which resulted in the current multi-class system. changes made achieve increased customization while also maintaining the ability to better regulate and balance o' the much expanded customization options. as Gromnir observed earlier, every sequel in which the developers removes powerful features has resulted in negative backlash. the current fanbase reaction to multiclassing is hardly unpredictable. in spite o' predictable outcome, obsidian changed the poe system anyways.

alien spaceship? https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/more-details-released-first-interstellar-object-cross-our-solar-system-180967277/ probable not a spaceship, but kinda nifty. HA! Good Fun!