Gromnir

is a pretty big "if," no? and ciphers are current only bounded by their focus generation. a current poe cipher can cast infinite spells if the encounter lasts long enough. also, keep in mind you aren't actual using an actual encounter as an example. can you think o' any battle where you had the opportunity to cast spells 36 times? the tactical decision-making will, one hopes, be determined by the encounter design rather than how temporal remote you are from your last rest opportunity. HA! Good Fun!

such scaling is a prerequisite for balancing given the addition of multi-class. such balancing will be imperfect. will be interesting. HA! Good Fun!

oh and the following is complete untrue: "but the fact of the matter is that the only actual experience we have right now with per-encounter spellcasting in a PoE game is high level Wizards, Priests and Druids in pre-Spell Mastery PoE1." the post-release (post-release o' the game obviously) bandage o' spell mastery is not the only example o' per-encounter spell casting in poe. am sure you will realize your error. HA! Good Fun!

am agreeing... sorta. there will be exceptions. unforeseen gearing, talent and ability synergies will result in a few no-brainer multi-class combos. perhaps a priest/paladin will be balanced, unless he/she has a particular helm equipped and your party has at least one cipher with access to _________. is so tough to predict such stuff, and poe has so many customization options. HA! Good Fun!

As much as this makes sense, I don't like super-long cast times (battle-speed in PoE1 was such that lengthy chants evocations (4-5) didn't get used much if at all as the battle was over already - summon drake to deal with the one ooze that's left). that's the kinda trade-off being proposed though, yes? is more powerful, but takes longer, so why would you use your tactical nuke to deal with the single ooze? with per encounter, your are less likely to have exhausted all of your useful solitary ooze killing spells during your previous two encounters. Yes, yes, you keep bringing up how much you dislike Vancian, but the fact of the matter is that the only actual experience we have right now with per-encounter spellcasting in a PoE game is high level Wizards, Priests and Druids in pre-Spell Mastery PoE1, and it's not a great one. That's a compelling enough argument to me. yes, yes, you keep bringing up how much you like vancian, so am understanding why you see an attempt by the developers to fix broken poe vancian casters by adding per-encounter abilities would result in you finding a compelling argument for per-encounter fail rather than the more obvious conclusion. nevertheless, the reasoning is baffling. HA! Good Fun!

The issue here is not just whether Vancian is good or bad. It's also that the suggested replacement for it, full-blown per-encounter spellcasting, has already proven to be a pain in the ass - see PoE1 before Spell Mastery. not a particular compelling argument. poe 1 started with a vancian and per-encounter caster frankenstein system and then tried to add/subtract more per encounters to find a balance. the cobbled-on per-encounter additions to an already broken vancian caster with excessive spell catalogs is hardly an accurate measure o' the viability o' per-encounter casters. *chuckle* what should be noted how is in spite o' the dedication to vancian casters in poe, the developers kept trying to add per encounter aspects to try improve/fixh the inherent problems o' vancian. again, poe is the exception. vancian is anachronistic. is only a game such as poe where we even see this debate. HA! Good Fun! ps am not understanding the peculiar convoluted reasoning whereby every failure o' vancian is somehow seen as proof o' its greatness. is not as if the developers attempted to improve ciphers by adding vancian. nevertheless, post release attempts to fix vancian by adding a per-encounter bandaid to the classes is somehow a condemnation o' per-encounter? how does such make any sense?

am thinking folks are purposeful or accidental reducing josh comments for reason o' finding some, any, reason to be rejecting. the change away from vancian is not simple 'bout purging a resting abuse. and the fact o' the matter is that at mid and later levels, whatever tactical considerations related to resource management concerns o' vancian casting has largely evaporated. before every major encounter, a player is likely to rest regardless. get caught unawares by an unexpected boss fight or particular tough encounter and have significant diminished spell repertoire is not a measure o' the increased challenge resulting from vancian so much as it is proof o' the idiotic limitation o' vancian casting. moderate difficult encounters become near impossible 'cause o' depleted vancian casters. prompts a reload. converse, tough encounters become relative easy 'cause vancian casters recent rested? stoopid. folks want better encounter design but ignore how vancian makes such a task far more difficult. that the number o' vancian casters in a party so profound impacts the potential difficulty o' any encounter should be seen as an inherent flaw, but for some reason is being described as a strength. curious. vancian is increasingly anachronistic in crpgs. if we weren't discussing a game inspired by 2e d&d mechanics, we would be unlikely to need have this discussion. in spite o' the claims o' vancian being such a kewl and nifty tactical option, not even the d&d/ie game grognards would wanna vancian abilities to a fallout game. vancian is terrible, but is having such a nostalgia grip on folks that they see an obvious flaw as a strength. HA! Good Fun!

agreed. is possible the reality o' new features and mechanics will disappoint, but thus far we have been happy with announced changes-- save one: unified health. is this the "winter of our discontent?" we think not. in short order we will no doubt yield to our natural cynical bent. am expecting increasing familiarity will build if not contempt, then, at the very least, a kinda jaundiced caution. even so, at the moment, health is the only change which vexes us. HA! Good Fun!

not nerfed, but scaled. HA! Good Fun!

one reason we want a more expansive beta which allows greater access to a more complete range o' levels, abilities and talents is 'cause the developers will, regardless o' their best efforts, be caught off guard by the manner in which people actual play their games. the original poe developers no doubt assumed they had considerable diversity o' encounter challenges, but the reality is players found optimal tactics which made adjustments irrelevant. the developers is gonna fail to recognize the manner in which players exploit obscure synergies-- is a given. is not a criticism o' the developers. is axiom. with new mechanics and multi-class we foresee fertile soil for exploitive gameplay. let players break the game so developers can fix exploits before release. HA! Good Fun!

it's a single-player game, so why not let let the player name their multiclass combo? when first taking a second class, player gets the option to name their new combo. sure, a Black Isle Bastard would still be a fighter/rogue for purposes o' the game and any content, but am thinking the folks best able to come up with an appropriate name for a combo is the player. just a thought. HA! Good Fun!

until the beta am not gonna say whether poe2 multiclass is good or bad, but as josh clear identified the same problems o' multiclass as we did earlier in the thread, and recognizing how he has at least considered how to deal with such problems, am gonna be optimistic with some caution. HA! Good Fun! ps the more we see multiclassing and hear 'bout all the changes to poe mechanics, the more certain we is regarding the need for a more encompassing beta. again, we don't want more content such as quests and locations, but find some way to give the beta folks access to as much o' the full range o' talents and abilities as possible and let folks try and break the game in beta.

if "black isle" is the problem, then simple change to black island or isle of black. as for "bastards," well, the board software don't mind, but if the black isle folks find it discourteous or vulgar, am understanding. fluffle wouldn't be happy as we can't think o' a replacement which results in the same alliteration, but we can change out "bastards" and revote. misbegotten mutineers o' black island? the possibility o' obsidian objecting to a combination of "black isle" and "bastards" were contemplated in the other badge name thread. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/91356-community-pirate-order-unique-forum-badge/?p=1879750 given how aarik wants a final by friday, we hope he informs us asap if there is a need for a change. HA! Good Fun!

"the way we look at stretch goals, we ask self to consider if the goal were the final goal for the campaign, and the goal were not attained, how bad would we feel." ideally, every stretch goal should makes us feel significantly diminished and disappointed if there were a failure to fund... which would be a hell of a stretch goal: at $2.6 million, all further stretch goals will make you consider self immolation if they fail to fund. HA! Good Fun!

bad reasoning is not a posting style, but as for the rest, you prove our point 'bout taking us further afield from the topic at hand. wanna bleat and moan 'bout Gromnir being a meanie? is more appropriate for pm. to stay on-topic, we will once again observe how obsidian were trying to get rid o' vancian in the last poe incarnation. it would seem they are doing so again after seeing how a frankenstein system o' vancian tacked onto per-encounters actual worked in poe1. given the power curve issues o' vancian which has plagued every ie game as well as poe, am thinking we will happily look forward to seeing what obsidian comes up with after having fully exorcised the last vestiges of a dying earth. sorry, dying mechanic. HA! Good Fun! ps added another favorite viking funeral

*insert silly eye-roll emoticon here* start off with questioning the posting style o' Gromnir is never gonna make your argument stronger. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYSNxrtq5QY is better than vancian deserves. HA! Good Fun! ps please note how your inartful response had you discussing other than vancian casting. reply to posts rather than snippets will benefit you as much as does exorcising logic flaws. helps keep on-topic to respond to posts.

77,000 backers, and we only ever say a dozen or so folks demanding such on the board. we never made claims o' the total folks wanting vancian, but reason for the change were protests, and the number o' board protesters were never large, even when compared to total board traffic. "small number o' vocal protesters." again, reading skills is useful. "Small vocal number of vocal protesters" reminds me more of yourself (and your second personality). Actually, you could say that about ANYTHING that is discussed on this board and elswhere... so? we have made such an observation many times. one o' the biggest flaws o' poe were the obsidian reactiveness to a handful o' mouthy boardies. the developers no doubt spent many hours deciding best ways to do stuff, but in part 'cause poe were crowdfunded, the obsidians would cave to perceived public pressures, when the pressure were never anything other than a relative small quantity o' over-invested and mouthy boardies with too much time on their hands. if developers is convinced by a good argument from the boardies, then numbers shouldn't matter. if is good for the game, then do it. and sure, sometimes player ineffable feels and emotions is actual as important as is cold, hard facts or well crafted logic. can' t dismiss the gut impressions o' the mob before or after release. even so, am thinking the obsidians realized, too late, that trying to make everybody satisfied tends to be resulting in nobody being complete happy. but again, what you think is an argument 'gainst Gromnir observation is actual one in defense. we have been a vocal proponent o' the notion that the developers should actual be less reactive. yeah, listen to boardies complaints, but don't necessarily change the game simple 'cause o' loudness or number o' complaints. we paid money for poe 1 and poe2 development because we trust OBSIDIAN to make a good game as 'posed to lc, sensuki, or even Gromnir. HA! Good Fun!

77,000 backers, and we only ever saw a dozen or so folks demanding such on the board. we never made claims o' the total folks wanting vancian, but reason for the change were protests, and the number o' board protesters were never large, even when compared to total board traffic. "small number o' vocal protesters." again, reading skills is useful. HA! Good Fun!

we only ever had vancian casting in poe 'cause a small number o' vocal protesters wanted those spell casting classes with familiar ie/d&d names to have familiar ie/d&d vancian casting. so we get a mess where the power curve o' a handful o' classes is the same, old, busted arse d&d nonsense where wizards and druids and priests is weak at low levels and op at higher levels. were a mistake from the start to cave to the whim o' the mob in spite o' obsidian belief o' the more appropriateness o' per-encounter powers/spells. if obsidian is final giving vancian casting the viking funeral it deserves, then so much the better. will admit some minor surprise. as broken as is vancian, particular in a game which also has classes using per-encounter, poe2 is being sold to folks who bought poe1. didn't think obsidian would mess with a working, if broken arse, formula. HA! Good Fun!

like others, we would leave sex and race as being fixed. am also suggesting culture should remain locked-in. however, given how the skills system is likely entire revamped, we would allow players to alter their backgrounds. is no story-supported rationale for allowing background to change, but am thinking one must also needs be practical and fair. am suspecting if backgrounds exist in poe2, they will be providing different bonuses. allow change. HA! Good Fun!

suggestion: add the black isle logo lightning bolts so as not to confuse the island with a lump o' dog doo-doo.... and perhaps a skull. HA! Good Fun! yeah, didn't want to be too on the nose with the black isle stuff but if you insist. http://imgur.com/7pQ7Lxd *chuckle* that might indeed be too on-the-nose. but give it a shot. still needs a skull. HA! Good Fun!

suggestion: add the black isle logo lightning bolts so as not to confuse the island with a lump o' dog doo-doo.... and perhaps a skull. HA! Good Fun!

count us as voting in favor o' anything with "bastards" and "black isle." HA! Good Fun!

the black isle bastards (and variations) has advantage o' multiple meanings... and is a bit irreverent for folks who like that kinda the. if the former black isle folks is offended, then am guessing we can drop from consideration. HA! Good Fun!

in which a pirate crew o' gaunites manage to kill the aedyr emperor/empress by setting a theatre ablaze while the high nobility o' the aedyr empire watches a propaganda play 'bout the fall o' st. waidwen. call dibs as the bear gaunite. HA! Good Fun!