Gromnir

during the hearing, Gromnir chose the clever options for our most recent paladin character. unfortunately, after making the cuckolding quip, we were barred from making a 16 intellect choice to presumably explain the joke to the leader o' the dozens. our intellect is 19. the character is currently receiving a +1 rest bonus to intellect. didn't have any intellect boosting items equipped. HA! Good Fun!

can't disagree more. we know you got issues with combat mechanics, but that is not the entirety o' poe gameplay. you have already conceded that you appreciated more than a couple quests and encounters in poe, so, am thinking you are possibly having a fundamental misunderstanding o' the nature o' gameplay in a crpg such as poe, or you misspoke. reactivity to chosen character development choices and c&c in general is as much gameplay as is attack resolution maths, perhaps more so... damn that opinion stuff. compared to the ie games as a whole, poe has much better reactivity/c&c. compared to most crpgs poe does such stuff better. so, 'bove average? yeah. am not gonna convince you that you are wrong about poe combat mechanics. heck, is more than a few changes we would like to see made to combat mechanics and encounter design. in fact, we believe that too often the mechanics is being blamed when more varied or intelligent encounter design would be a more compelling and significant solution to most combat issues people have with the game. the mechanics is already offering more complex and challenging combats than any ie D&D game that had similar level progression. regardless, sensuki doesn't get crpg gameplay... or simple overstated. HA! Good Fun! Well from what I've read of Sensuki's comments, combat is the only gameplay that really matters to him. As he says himself, he doesn't "LARP" [sic]. you are probable correct, but poe is a cRPg. those non-combat aspects o' gameplay are as much a part o' the game as is combat. HA! Good Fun!

can't disagree more. we know you got issues with combat mechanics, but that is not the entirety o' poe gameplay. you have already conceded that you appreciated more than a couple quests and encounters in poe, so, am thinking you are possibly having a fundamental misunderstanding o' the nature o' gameplay in a crpg such as poe, or you misspoke. reactivity to chosen character development choices and c&c in general is as much gameplay as is attack resolution maths, perhaps more so... damn that opinion stuff. compared to the ie games as a whole, poe has much better reactivity/c&c. compared to most crpgs poe does such stuff better. so, 'bove average? yeah. am not gonna convince you that you are wrong about poe combat mechanics. heck, is more than a few changes we would like to see made to combat mechanics and encounter design. in fact, we believe that too often the mechanics is being blamed when more varied or intelligent encounter design would be a more compelling and significant solution to most combat issues people have with the game. the mechanics is already offering more complex and challenging combats than any ie D&D game that had similar level progression. regardless, sensuki doesn't get crpg gameplay... or simple overstated. HA! Good Fun! ps an illustration to help with the distinction 'tween the relative importance o' mechanics and encounter design. bg and bg2 shared the same core combat mechanics. yup, balance changes such as nerfing grandmastery and expanding weapon proficiency lists were added to bg2, but bg and bg2 were having same core mechanics. unfortunately, in bg, the combats were all easily resolved with a single tactic. bg combat were suffering that endemic monotony you were perhaps misattributing to skaen temple area. bg2 changed combat. bg2 combat were often just as monotonous as were bg, but there were enough exceptional encounters to make us forget the terribad. we couldn't use a single tactic in bg2 as we had in bg, in spite o' sameness o' core mechanics.

agreed. is not a "discrepancy." it is a feature. perhaps it is not a feature that is appreciated, but the developers differentiated the cultures by giving them different starting gear *snort* and a single unique background. not like? sure. is possible not to like obsidian's solution for making the cultures unique. people don't appear to be unanimous in favor o' how the classes were made unique neither. "But I want my paladin to be able to kick some ass with a sword. MY paladin shouldn't have to be a second-rate support character with hopeless accuracy." *shrug* you gonna have cultures that is more than a starting perk kinda thing? if so, as a developer you need differentiate. at the same time, this is a role-play game, so the obsidians wanted folks to have choices. one unique background is Not particularly egregious. wanna play a highwayman from istanbul or chelsea? then role-play that for chrissakes. not need the specific raider background to role-play as a highwayman. HA! Good Fun! ps as an aside, it is our belief that the starting backgrounds should have more impact and not less. the classes is already unique and differentiated w/o the starting skill "bonuses." our suggestion would be to effectively double the significance o' the cultural backgrounds regarding starting skills, and complete remove the class bonuses.

and again, you seem preoccupied with quantity. is many small (fed ex) quests attached to thieves guild and many optional stuff in lower levels o' eyeless. great for many. compared to eyeless, which is almost complete on rails and has very little investigation, the blood legacy has more optional dialogues at beginning and end and you get to actual investigate. what you uncover during the investigation won't change the outcomes, but more important and more realistic, what you learn will give you reasons to choose different outcomes. we have different possible access points to the skaen temple, rather than the magic key approach from eyeless, and we were given options that involved skill checks or sneaking that allowed us to engage in very few combats (unlike eyeless). but again, is opine. "lots of little quests " "The thing that makes it more complex is the lower levels..." these is precisely 'bout more regarding o' the conflicting language you utilize. can't speak to witcher as we never played those games. your bg2 examples, however, is less than compelling. as noted, obsidian specific observed that they faced a choice with poe design to include more eyeless/durlags kinda quests and locales. am not the least bit confused. the developers had a choice to create more opportunities for exploration by creating a larger number o' smaller locations and less involved quests, or they could have a fewer locales with extreme dense questing. is zero sum. again, is kinda axiomatic that if you offer more o' the minor quests spread out cross a larger number o' maps, you cannot have such as many dense locales such as eyeless/durlags. people clamored for exploration, so obsidain chose the middle path. No one has asked for more D&D in PoE in this thread. Fact. I like the different types of ammunition in the IE games where I can have my characters shoot fireballs from their bow then instantly change to poison arrows then change to something else because I have three quiver slots where I can place three different types of ammunition. How is this only D&D? It's not. It's part of the IE games. Just because it's part of the IE games doesn't make it D&D. your response was unresponsive. illathid pointed out, once again, that the distinction o' whether hard counters and insta-kills in the ie games is d&d or ie game legacies is complete irrelevant as to whether or not those features is having merit. to be more dismissive o' a feature simple 'cause o' the d&d label is irrational and illogical ad to quibble over such is just as bad. the d&d origin o' the ie game hard counters and and insta-kill examples folks were sharing as superior to poe approach is both undeniable and ultimately irrelevant. sheesh. HA! Good Fun!

you got the wrong ragnar lodbrok for a barbarian. HA! Good Fun!

on the rare occasion we agree with vol on a specific issue, we always morn how the universe makes less sense as a result o' such extraordinary accidents. HA! Good Fun!

am actual understating the value o' mechanics for seal spells. a 10 mechanics is gonna get you +30% trap accuracy bonus to seal spells. the traps accuracy equation also results in an inherent, approximately, another 30% boost. ~60% accuracy midway through the game for extreme useful spells? HA! Good Fun!

our fist play were as a rogue... which got stymied by the reckless assault bug. even so, traps were not issue. our second run were a priest, whom we gave the merchant background precisely to get the +1 mechanics skill boost. as a priest, we frequent ran into traps/locks that were one level outside our disarm/unlock range, even with lockpicks. we lamented the absence o' a rogue companion for many hours. even so, being a stalwart gamer, we considered our options rather than weeping over the inevitable. we always took the mechanics bonus at inns. this were sufficient for better than 80% o' locks and traps we encountered, but it were still a bit frustrating. halfway through act 2 we found the +2 mechanics gloves... is a random drop though, so good luck. gloves made us finally sufficient. the thing is, even if we had a rogue in our party, we would still max mechanics on durance and any priest pc. mechanics math controls seal spells. not only is mechanics maths more forgiving than is priest, but we get to add traps accuracy from mechanics to any seal spell. with a functional 13 or 14 mechanics by end game, we would crit with seal spells more than a little. HA! Good Fun!

Sure it is. Because claiming that we want more D&D is a blanket generalization that includes things like: wanting to force XP penalties on weapon enchantment sessions; Wanting to incorporate material components on every wizard spell; wanting strict behavior codes placed on Paladins and Clerics; and a bunch of other things that NO ONE HERE HAS SAID THEY WANTED. Perhaps if Gromnir had shown a little more honesty and debate tact and said something along the lines of "yes, folks here want more D&D-like mechanics such as Hard counters and insta-kills", this discussion would have probably died down about a page later, or shortly someone came into the thread to tell Gromnir to kindly speak for himself. 1) no, it does not create a blanket generalization alternatively 2) such a generalization does not impact the strength or weakness o' the logic regarding hard counters and insta kills. such generalizations would be a wholly different fallacy and we sure as hell ain't making such a generalization. you don't like the d&d label? is all we can see as a reason for continued obstinacy. fine, but that ain't logic and it ain't strawman. do you not understand logic... at all? read copi. honest. will at least give you a start. HA! Good Fun! ps tact is also not function o' logic. fact that you think Gromnir is mean is a problem? (again, note the question marks as we cannot genuine be sure o' what your so-called argument is at this point.) well, toughen up kiddo, 'cause ain't never been a logic fallacy related to lack o' sensitivity. wanna misuse logic fallacies? then at least learn 'em first. don't confuse being reasonable or diplomatic with logic.

It matters because when I make an Argument, I expect people to respond to it, not to make up their own argument, attribute it to me, then respond to it. It matters because I love Baldurs Gate 2's combat more than 2nd Edition AD&D's. It matters because the devs did NOT promise us the tactical combat of AD&D, but rather, the tactical combat of Icewind Dale, and therefore, asking for Hard Counters and insta-kills is a VALID request, and very much within the scope of what they promised us. The sad thing is that I personally hate Save-or-Lose, although I think that a game without at least some degree of hard counters is idiotic, yet Gromnir would lump as all together into a single strawman instead of arguing the merits or lack thereof of either. Because, y'know, it's "D&D-like" or somesuch baloney. for chissakes. somebody explain strawman to lucky. we have tried more than once, but have had no, well, luck. if Gromnir is claiming that there is no functional difference 'tween ie insta-kills and d&d insta-kills, then claim that folks is advocating for more d&d in their poe is NOT strawman. am not attributing a weak argument to you and others and then beating the proverbial stuffing outta it. is Gromnir who is saying that it don't make a difference what is the label and you ain't offered any reasonable, rational or logical reason as to why the name matters. the examples o' bg2 insta-kills and hard counters offered in this thread is NOT better 'cause they is ie as 'posed to d&d, 'least not insofar as any Logical argument we can imagine. please. somebody help lucky. he and stun need help. HA! Good Fun!

answer the question rather than deflecting. is the ie game hard counters any worse if they is labeled as d&d legacies.? we quoted where you said the difference weren't important, but perhaps you have had a change of heart, or you were channeling demons or lord only knows why you would do a 180 so quick? does calling a bg2 finger o' death a d&d legacy insta-kill make it worse than it would be if we called the same insta-kill an ie legacy? what makes the label important? is getting ridiculous but this is always how we end up with stun. HA! Good Fun!

It matters because when I make an Argument, I expect people to respond to it, not to make up their own argument, attribute it to me, then respond to it. It matters because I love Baldurs Gate 2's combat more than 2nd Edition AD&D's. It matters because the devs did NOT promise us the tactical combat of AD&D, but rather, the tactical combat of Icewind Dale, and therefore, asking for Hard Counters and insta-kills is a VALID request, and very much within the scope of what they promised us. the hypocrisy is not lost on us. "YES Gromnir. The IE games had hard counters and insta-kills. And for those of us who enjoy those mechanics, it does not matter whether they came from D&D, or whether Ray Musyka invented them in a Canadian medical school. " your response ain't logical or even reasonable and you is actual arguing against self. you insist that d&d and ie are different, but you noted earlier that the hard counters and insta-kills distinction 'tween d&d and the ie games didn't matter, which is what is being discussed. so regardless o' your like feelings for ie and less like (?) o' d&d, is there a meaningful or reasonable or rational difference for contesting the d&d label o' ie game hard counters? what makes reference to the hard counters as an ie legacy as 'posed to a d&d legacy meaningful other than some kinda blue blankee nostalgia thing you got for one. is a d&d finger of death insta-kill bad, but a ie finger of death insta-kill ok? why? is this all just some ridiculous d&d is bad, but ie is good sillines? that is a question btw. if so, it ain't reasonable or logical or rational, but you tell us what the issues is if not feel. delusional, hypocritical and apparently suffering from short-term memory loss. we can't attribute an argument to you. we can't make heads or tails outta what you are trying to say most o' the time. am frequently left guessing, but that is why we is reduced to adding so many question marks in responses to you-- cause you make no rational sense. HA! Good Fun!

you can't be this logic challenged. answer the question: why does it matter? HA! Good Fun!

when folks is using their examples o' what poe should have done from a d&d crpg that has hard counters and insta kills that is lifted entire or largely from d&d pnp mechanics, it is not unfair to claim that the feature being requested is a d&d feature. those hard counter examples offered in this thread is d&d. 'course, as been explained many times now, the label were meaningless. call it more d&d or more t&t (tunnels and trolls) not freaking matter. *sheesh* suggest that a feature is inspired and inextricably linked to d&d does not make the actual feature anymore or any less broken... or valid. btw, you have vol on your side o' an argument. that alone should give you pause. HA! Good Fun! ps explain why the difference matters. what is so significant about calling a feature a d&d legacy or an ie feature?

have universal fatigue control all actions including combat moves and spell casting. this makes constitution universal vital. ... such suggestions, including mana, were made and near universal rejected when the wizard were being developed in earnest.... years ago. HA! Good Fun!

This: Not on this thread there isn't. So that comment of yours is nothing more than a pathetic and dishonest attempt to spin our arguments into something they're not. *groan* yes folks is asking for more d&d. the statement you quote were made in the context o' hard counters and insta kills. insta kills and hard counters from the ie games is a legacy o' the d&d mechanics. but again, label d&d is soooooo not the point... and nobody can be this obdurate. the d&d label in reference to insta-kills and hard counters is complete deflection and irrelevant. ... wacky. HA! Good Fun!

suggestions that the poe wizard and priest should be less vancian and utilize mana or universal fatigue pool were derided by initial backers on these boards. such mechanics were too removed from the ie games. HA! Good Fun!

the cipher is powerful, and given the current rest mechanic, it is a much more forgiving class o play til one hits level 9ish. frequently when folks want classes to be more fun, what they is actual asking for is more power. the kit offerings for iwd2 were illustrative o' what the community thinks is fun. iwd2 were, initially, gonna be a 2nd edition game, with kits. the black isle folks presented folks with a few kit options. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/54409-dragon-age-discussion/?p=1039586 funny stuff. HA! Good Fun!

ps am not certain how funny we find sensuki complaints about quest design given our perspective o' having actual followed the message boards during and after bg2 development as well as observing the development o' poe. following totsc, the Co6 boards were very much extolling the virtues of large, set-piece dungeons. folks wanted more durlags and less random wilderness map encounters... and get rid o' the mini-quests that were little more than a 1-2 step fed ex. mindless mowing o' wilderness maps were anathema post totsc. so for bg2, bioware builds eyeless, umar hills and the planar sphere, as well as similar locales. they also gave far less attention to mini-quests and wilderness exploration. following bg2 release, the grognards complained that there weren't enough wilderness exploration in bg2. ... *sigh* when poe development were getting started, the obsidans actual addressed the issue o' durlags/eyeless v. exploration. we thought it were a mistake, but obsidian stated that they would choose a middle path. there would not be as many durlag locations/quests, but they would offer more exploration (wilderness and otherwise) and more o' the shorter quests w/o devolving into the "bring me my boots" nonsense that were so common in bg1. given the scope o' poe, there were no way obsidian could do exploration + many smaller quests as well a numerous larger set-piece quests. so, middle road were the choice. sure enough we got sensuki lamenting that obsidian didn't provide enough eyeless kinda quests. could be a vaudeville actor doing rehearsed schtick if we weren't convinced he is serious. *shrug* almost makes us feel sympathy for obsidian. almost. HA! Good Fun!

Based on my memories of BG2, I'm not exactly seeing why people are calling the Eyeless and the Thieves' Guild "investigative" quests, so in your opinion, how does the Blood Legacy quest compare to the Tanner quest (AKA the one in which I never thought of going to the relevant authorities with my clues ) in BG2 as far as investigative questlines go? we liked the tanner stuff, especially when fully realized, but bioware did kinda railroad you in bg2. the tanner quest were not providing you with clues and allowing you to uncover the ultimate villain. we were allowed to follow bioware's investigation. nevertheless, we were responding to those investigation quests as presented. am agreeing that tanner is a much better example, but it were far more similar to final act than blood legacy. is no question in our mind that tanner did similar as final act, but better. HA! Good Fun!

Didn't say that either. actual, you kinda did. you insisted that thieves guild and eyeless were better because it had more steps. depending on you count, the optional steps in blood legacy can total 'bout same as total. "The investigation is optional. I posted that earlier in the thread. The quest itself is pretty straightforward as far as progressing through it goes but the fact that townsfolk have information on the quest is good design." am gonna stop and see if you see the conflict with earlier sensuki observations. oh and our rant about monster diversity were inspired by one o' your few factual observation: "On Hard difficulty there's like 70 Skaen Cultists, most are the same five classes and most encounters are makeups of these classes. It was literally the most monotonous content I played in the game. I absolutely hated it." clearer? HA! Good Fun!

What is this, a new tactic from you? You can't refute the points, so you'll just turn around and agree with them? YES Gromnir. The IE games had hard counters and insta-kills. And for those of us who enjoy those mechanics, it does not matter whether they came from D&D, or whether Ray Musyka invented them in a Canadian medical school. And it does not matter because we don't care about D&D... Our PoE vs. IE comparison arguments on this thread are based strictly on our IE games experiences, not our D&D ones, contrary to your incessantly repeated previous claims that we're just whining because we want more D&D. Duh. what on earth are you talking about? go back and review where we asked lucky why it freaking mattered that the origin o' the ie game hard counters and insta kills. if you are agreeing that identifying as d&d or ie origin makes no difference, then you are freaking agreeing with Gromnir and Not lucky. he were the guy insisting that those pointing to ie game insta-kills and hard counters could not be lumped together with those who were advocating for d&d insta-kills and hard counters. they is the same. you are being so obtuse that it is literal beyond our comprehension to absorb. is no way you can be doing this accidental. no way. HA! Good Fun!

Excuse me, but I never said that choice OR multiple resolutions were bad things. They are good things. Personally though I'll take better gameplay content with more linearity over worse gameplay content with more choice and multiple outcomes IF I have to choose between them. You said BG2 the game had larger scope. Yes it did. I was however talking about quest complexity and to me that involves steps required to complete a quests, quest overlap/intertwining and branching. I have not played the end of Pillars of Eternity, I stopped playing during Act 3. Maybe there is some better content there. I couldn't say. Act 1 and 2 quests were all pretty basic with a step or two with some choices. The Skaen Temple is the worst dungeon because it is a large dungeon that has very disappointing loot and the worst example of copy paste encounter design in the game. On Hard difficulty there's like 70 Skaen Cultists, most are the same five classes and most encounters are makeups of these classes. It was literally the most monotonous content I played in the game. I absolutely hated it. I didn't play that dungeon in the beta because of performance issues. I upgraded my PC to an i7 4790k shortly after the game came out so I could run the levels with more units. The game still runs badly in Copperlane though. The Skaen Temple should have just included the room with Wymund and maybe one other room. The rest of the dungeon was ****ing pointless. I never found myself saying "this should be smaller" in any of the Infinity Engine games. am not seeing why additional mandatory steps make a quest better. there is any number o' possible blood legacy steps you are ignoring by identifying that it is an option than you can simple bull your way into the skaen temple and kill stuff. you say you like options, but you ignore them? well, that is hardly fair, is it? is more than a few folks in dyrford village that can contribute to your investigation. is funny that you note investigation, 'cause you can actual do investigation in blood legacy that is absent in eyeles and the thieves guild quest from bg2. in poe we can ask villagers questions, and depending on our question, dispositions and attribute scores, our Investigation will yield different information. but again, you should at least be recognizing that what you think is objective is actual just sensuki opinion. more mandatory steps? oh, and multiple resolutions has never impressed us. is easy to add multiple resolutions at the end o' a quest where no more possible quest or dialogue bifurcation is taking place. multiple options previous to the end is far more taxin on the developer, and that is what poe were doing that bg2 often failed to do. and the monotony o' the skaen temple is, again, opinion. weren't our favorite portion o' the game neither, but the sacrifice pit is kinda unique, and the multiple ways to gain access to the temple make it less monotonous for people who didn't play it dozens o' times in the beta. heck, can skip a significant number o battles using sneak and the rope trick, which makes much o't the monotony you found optional. fewer enemies? well, again, that is part o' scope. bg2 had multiple games to build up a rogue's gallery. for example, the trolls that caused lucky such trouble were actual in iwd. is more than a few monsters bioware used in bg2 that were black isle work product... shoulda' used black isle elementals in our estimation. regardless, skaen temple area has two varieties o' beetles and four or five variations o' skaen cultists, each with unique abilities. the ending boss encounter has additional unique foes... 3 ish? compare to firewine bridge dungeon, or any bg1 dungeon. the largest single bg1 dungeon is under candlekeep where had skeletons, phase spiders, ghasts, and dopplegangers and greater doppelgangers. add the exit caves for basilisk and an enemy party. and lets be honest, the poe foes offer far more significant tactical challenge than any o' those bg1 critters. heck, it strikes us as fair to combine the wilderness map above the skaen temple to make a similar comparison as that is a possible ingress point. if we do so, those two maps got more foe variation than all the candlekeep catacombs, and each poe foe is presenting more varied challenges. "I never found myself saying "this should be smaller" in any of the Infinity Engine games." again with what you don't see as opinion? HA! Good Fun!

Excellent try! But we all know full well that the entire discussion saw us pitting PoE against the IE games, NOT D&D. If it was strictly about wanting D&D, then we wouldn't have a whole lot to debate here, since PoE itself takes so much from D&D already. In fact, it takes some things from D&D that the BG series (for example) doesn't. Will Saves; Fortitude Saves; Reflex Saves; Reach weapon mechanics; a modified attack of opportunity system; A Disintegration spell that isn't an insta-kill; A class that plays like a psionisist; A knockdown ability for fighters; Animal companions for Rangers; Stealth, lockpicking and trap disarming as skills that everyone can use; Wizard Spellbooks as physical objects that take up inventory space....ETC. ETC. No, man. It's YOU who are being an obtuse yutz. It's YOU who came here, spouted a retarded gross generalization of what others want. And now it's YOU who's getting called out for it. you are making no sense at all. the infinity engine game hard counters and insta-kills are problematic or not regardless o' their origin. their origin is d&d rules, but so what? if hard counter's had been dreamt up by kevin ohlen while running his pnp campaigns before working on bg, it wouldn't make one bit o' difference to a discussion o' their usefulness or detriment. talk 'bout deflection. you are pathological. Indeed and I remember those days too. Rather, now, he simply ignores criticism. It must be a frustrating babel for him, but I do wonder if he's perhaps too tin-eared nowadays? dunno. Gromnir has been more than a little bit harsh with josh sawyer over the years. even so, we don't feel that he treats us with any kinda animosity, though doing so would be understandable. yeah, he is responding less frequent or less open-- we suspect that josh is currently posting and fielding criticism with regularity on these boards albeit not as josh. we haven't noticed unreasonable pique from him. HA! Good Fun!