Gromnir

nah, its you, not the teachers. "Ok, enough. My original intention was just to talk about possible increases in flexibility of the Fighter's role, that's all. " and "I thought I had said "enough", because I didn't want to keep contributing to pollute the thread." and yet here you is with this kinda post? at best you are a hypocrite. and again, the fighter's role is not essential. am having a hard time believing this ain't getting through. however, it is vanilla tank. other classes fill the roles you want the fighter role to be expanded to. and yeah, am questioning your intellect if you don't see that it took you a considerable number o' posts to get to the realization that your real problem were with the role o' the PoE fighter. as we noted elsewhere, other folks have questioned the necessity o' such a role and Gromnir were able to have intelligent and polite discourse with those folks. your problem (one such problem) is that you don't even realize who the clown is... clown mixing metaphors and bad logic. bizarre. or not bizarre. this is guy who is surprised that PoE combat is too similar to iwd in spite o' that being a stated goal on the kickstarter page, while at same time complaining that absence o' a mention o' kill xp on the kickstarter page prevented him from realizing that kill xp would be in the game... even though such info were emailed starting with update #7. you don't read. when you do read, you don't believe or don't comprehend. can't blame on Gromnir persona neither as it is clear that you don't comprehend when obsidian explains either. tragic. how much more before you show us that you were serious 'bout not wanting to further pollute the thread? am guessing not before a mod steps in. *sigh* leaves Gromnir having to play the adult... ironic. HA! Good Fun!

I said previusly, and quite clearly "the fact that the fighter's only possible function is actually so crucial actually exacerbates the issue". You know, that almost sounds like implying that I consider the role in itself, well, crucial. which is why your recent post referencing the d&d cartoon character is particular enlightening. you have a little hizzy fit and then you get clarity? don't feel bad. it happens. as Gromnir has noted many times in this thread, what folks say about the PoE fighter is countered as sooon as we see what they want to do to improve the fighter. you observe the role, even note the value o' the role (a mischaracterization as barbarian and even monk may serve adequately as tanks even if they cannot do so as does the fighter) then ask for changes that would change the role. is... amusing. folks don't even know what they is doing, and they invariably balk when confronted. HA! Good Fun! Cute! Well guess what: if the role is perceived as dull/inflexible/boring/limited, of course the proposed changes will aim at changing/expanding/variating such role. I'm blown away, really. By the way, the argument you never get tired of using, "you don't like feature X, but you are wrong in that, and that is because the status of things you say you don't like is actually intentional. And because it's intentional it would be wrong and misguided to change anything about it" is not especially clever. Ok, enough. My original intention was just to talk about possible increases in flexibility of the Fighter's role, that's all. thank you for responding. you is compounding and adding to your folly. would be soooo easy to go with straw man + irony given your recent elementary logic comment, but we will forbear. too easy. please note that we observed that karkarov were dubious about the vanilla fighter's role and you don't see us being critical o' him, yes? is 'cause he is not in denial. is 'cause he has been consistent. you, on the other hand... well, is no sense being mean 'bout your shortcomings. can scroll back up now that you is aware that you were posting at cross-purposes with yourself and either accept that the criticisms you garnered were accurate even if you not see as fair, or... you don't like PoE fighter? fine. sadly, am wondering just how long it will take you to realize how your criticisms and suggestions ain't helping solve that problem, if it is a problem. sheesh HA! Good Fun! Cuter and cuter. No, please, do be mean about my shortcomings and folly. I'm so scared of forum bogeymen. And please keep enlightening me with argumentations such "the fighter's current role is crucial, therefore nothing should be changed about it". I'll tell you what: an invulnerable, 1000+ damage-per-hit dealing warrior would play an even more crucial role for the party. Does it mean it would be good design, or that nothing should be changed about it? I thought I had said "enough", because I didn't want to keep contributing to pollute the thread. Of course, it did not work. Let's save time, and just stay away from me, in case shoddy argumentations are contagious. still wanna make this about Gromnir being mean? *sigh* and again, you pointed out to us that you recognized the near essential aspect o' the bb fighter... Gromnir actual disagreed and observed that while the fighter's role were unique, a barbarian and monk could serve as a tanky kinda character. is this an ADD thing with you? you don't recall your own posts or replies on this same page? you can keep doing strawman stuff if you want, but is making you look increasing nutty. am all in favor of making changes to the classes... Gromnir has offered a few change suggestions. nevertheless, am repeating our self at this point. can scroll back up and see where you is in error... or not. oh, you said "enough"? odd, looks like you is still responding. guess you were disingenuous and self-contradictory on this issue as well. HA! Good Fun!

am believing you are misunderstanding the criticism. perhaps a visual aide? PoE is being sold to fans o' the ie games. the whole concept is reactionary rather than progressive. yeah, the tech is 2014, but obsidian's fanbase is old timey crpg fans, many of whom still rage at the biowarian ninja-pounce enemies dragon age 2 added to their franchise. if obsidan had added rag doll physics or matrix animations, there woulda' been a collective howl o' nerd rage that woulda' been a crpg equivalent o' ben afflek being chosen to play batman. a desire for rag doll physics were making it clear to a few that you are unclear on the entire concept o' PoE. HA! Good Fun!

Gromnir has been doing his charachter for ~15 years now. You aren't the first to complain about it and you aren't going to be the last. Hell, Bioware put a charachter in Throne of Baal (I think?) based on him. When ever I read any of Gromnir's posts, they all sound like Jim Cumming's Gromnir in my head. as an aside, we has been told by more than one person that we sound eerily similar to jason bateman. ... am pretty sure that ain't a compliment. regardless, am suspecting that a tob Gromnir that sounded like jason bateman woulda' been wrong, just plain wrong. HA! Good Fun!

did a search for patch references and found at least one post suggesting that there would be something made available tomorrow. https://forums.inxile-entertainment.com/viewtopic.php?f=34&t=9017&p=123187&hilit=patch#p123187 but keep in mind this is a random poster and we don't see developer corroboration as yet. much o' the recent wl2 info we have received via random posts has been hit & miss. HA! Good Fun!

I said previusly, and quite clearly "the fact that the fighter's only possible function is actually so crucial actually exacerbates the issue". You know, that almost sounds like implying that I consider the role in itself, well, crucial. which is why your recent post referencing the d&d cartoon character is particular enlightening. you have a little hizzy fit and then you get clarity? don't feel bad. it happens. as Gromnir has noted many times in this thread, what folks say about the PoE fighter is countered as sooon as we see what they want to do to improve the fighter. you observe the role, even note the value o' the role (a mischaracterization as barbarian and even monk may serve adequately as tanks even if they cannot do so as does the fighter) then ask for changes that would change the role. is... amusing. folks don't even know what they is doing, and they invariably balk when confronted. HA! Good Fun! Cute! Well guess what: if the role is perceived as dull/inflexible/boring/limited, of course the proposed changes will aim at changing/expanding/variating such role. I'm blown away, really. By the way, the argument you never get tired of using, "you don't like feature X, but you are wrong in that, and that is because the status of things you say you don't like is actually intentional. And because it's intentional it would be wrong and misguided to change anything about it" is not especially clever. Ok, enough. My original intention was just to talk about possible increases in flexibility of the Fighter's role, that's all. thank you for responding. you is compounding and adding to your folly. would be soooo easy to go with straw man + irony given your recent elementary logic comment, but we will forbear. too easy. please note that we observed that karkarov were dubious about the vanilla fighter's role and you don't see us being critical o' him, yes? is 'cause he is not in denial. is 'cause he has been consistent. you, on the other hand... well, is no sense being mean 'bout your shortcomings. can scroll back up now that you is aware that you were posting at cross-purposes with yourself and either accept that the criticisms you garnered were accurate even if you not see as fair, or... you don't like PoE fighter? fine. sadly, am wondering just how long it will take you to realize how your criticisms and suggestions ain't helping solve that problem, if it is a problem. sheesh HA! Good Fun!

is an example of degenerative posting... or degenerative posters. whatever. HA! Good Fun!

I said previusly, and quite clearly "the fact that the fighter's only possible function is actually so crucial actually exacerbates the issue". You know, that almost sounds like implying that I consider the role in itself, well, crucial. which is why your recent post referencing the d&d cartoon character is particular enlightening. you have a little hizzy fit and then you get clarity? don't feel bad. it happens. as Gromnir has noted many times in this thread, what folks say about the PoE fighter is countered as sooon as we see what they want to do to improve the fighter. you observe the role, even note the value o' the role (a mischaracterization as barbarian and even monk may serve adequately as tanks even if they cannot do so as does the fighter) then ask for changes that would change the role. is... amusing. folks don't even know what they is doing, and they invariably balk when confronted. HA! Good Fun!

*nods head in agreement* d&d were/is poor rule mechanic for a crpg. is good you noticed. developers had to make concessions to d&d, and the level 1-3 nonsense were always a hurdle for bis/obsidian when doing the d20 games. as we said earlier, sometimes it is better to respond serious to silly. 'course as we stated earlier, and as namutree echoes, the initial goblins is as much a tutorial as anything. "B) Provide simple enemies for newcomers to the IE games to learn how the game works." HA! Good Fun! ps "but again, we specific avoided defining filler, and we will continue to do so, 'cause is your non-explanation. you may instead wanna argue with us that iwd2 game progression were not what we suggest or that we is wrong about varied combats, but until you actual explain, you is simply proving our point. " is like we is nostradamus, or some folks is so darn predictable. you choose.

I liked how you conveniently dropped out other examples. And yeah, IWD2 is pretty much a definition of trash mobs. No need to defend it. You are right to point out that it is the reason it was created; to be a diablo clone in IE with party. Frankly that is exactly how I would describe PoE combat right now. Except Diablo is a more honest game and plays better as it has no party. nothing convenient. look at time of the posting. we were writing and posting at the same time as your most recent reply. add lack o' observation skills to our grumpy old guy complaints. 'course you still actual haven't done as requested. HA! Good Fun! Maybe you should notice that I am talking about NWN and NWN2 ine earlier posts.... and in your previous example all you said were crap such as, "2) NWN2 : Zombies and Orcs. WHHHHYYYY?? " our point were that you haven't explained. to run down each of your examples o' non-explanation would be absolutely asinine. ... wth? as for 80, folks seem kinda schizophrenic as to what they wanna take as meaningful from the kickstarter. why should you be any different? 'course this ain't even a situation where you mistakenly infer something that weren't stated. still, have developers say they is gonna do combat like iwd, than have you surprised that combat is like iwd is... amusing. you is confused by kill xp because you is late to party and it doesn't mention such on kickstarter. you is equal confused when something is actual stated on kickstarter page. am kinda wondering what obsidian coulda' done to help somebody with your specific... needs. HA! Good Fun!

*eye roll* confronting you with a clumsy reply is what gots your shorts in a twist, but am not knowing you well enough to say if your response is typical or stale. whether you think the mechanic is dumb is irrelevant. so too is your peculiar change between into the fray being the equivalent o' a free movement or conversely, is forcing the fighter to be rooted. doesn't matter. josh has stated many times now, and recently too so you can't use the "late to the party" silliness as an excuse, that with 11 different classes you necessarily needs define the role o' each class. the role o' the fighter is straightforward and has been explained. people who keep wanting to give powhaz that will alter the role o' the fighter is either not reading developer posts or is being willful obtuse. the fighter is a low maintenance damage sink that will do predictable and reliable damage. knockdown and into the fray is powerful abilities that make it far less boring than the bg fighter, while reinforcing the advantages o' the classes role. the tactical options o' the fighter, within the scope o' its role, is quite varied. perhaps you do not believe that the role itself is of value. karkarov were worried about this point as it seemed limited to him. you, after a number o' posts and acting like a "whiny child" may finally have had an epiphany that results in you stating similar concerns... albeit you did so with far less style and were less convincing o' there being a potential problem. you don't like a low maintenance damage sink with a reliable damage output? great. even so, asking for changes to add tactical flexibility ignores PoE class structure and the role o' the fighter. HA! Good Fun!

I liked how you conveniently dropped out other examples. And yeah, IWD2 is pretty much a definition of trash mobs. No need to defend it. You are right to point out that it is the reason it was created; to be a diablo clone in IE with party. Frankly that is exactly how I would describe PoE combat right now. Except Diablo is a more honest game and plays better as it has no party. Sorry for the OT, but are the devs really taking IWD1/2's combat as a model? I thought it was just a rethorical thing, I mean, interactions like in BG2, exploration like in BG1, story like Ps:T, and of course, what have you got left when you get to IWD? you have to say 'combat' *shudders* IWD1/2, with their rail-roaded sequence of never-ending, ever-winding tunnels filled with identical trash-mob after trash-mob, no AI to speak of...oh, my. read the kickstarter page. late to the party or not, some o' this stuff has been thrown in your face and you still don't see it. HA! Good Fun!

I liked how you conveniently dropped out other examples. And yeah, IWD2 is pretty much a definition of trash mobs. No need to defend it. You are right to point out that it is the reason it was created; to be a diablo clone in IE with party. Frankly that is exactly how I would describe PoE combat right now. Except Diablo is a more honest game and plays better as it has no party. nothing convenient. look at time of the posting. we were writing and posting at the same time as your most recent reply. add lack o' observation skills to our grumpy old guy complaints. 'course you still actual haven't done as requested. HA! Good Fun!

ps iwd2 has little o' what we would define as filler combat, but again, you still haven't given a useful definition, so we cannot say what you mean by filler. as we noted above, mc is a boardie who has been open and honest about his preference for fighting... in tunnels. the game progression is iwd2 (am sure you mean something by this that is different than other folks) were right up his alley. game progression were achieved by providing the player with a multitude of varied combat situations. the fight against the goblins at the targos wall were a much different encounter and were requiring different tactics than were the fight against sherinical outside the ice temple, or the swarm o' hook horrors that dropped from the ceiling, or whatever. the story and rp elements were largely muted in iwd2, and the sequence of combats, which unlike bg were having us rely on a wide variety o' tactics to be overcoming them, were the raison d'etre o' iwd2 gameplay. fighting... in tunnels. arguably the only obvious filler combats in iwd2, for Gromnir at least, were the initial goblin encounters on the targos docks, but we recognize that the game had no tutorial and that level 1-3 is extreme lethal in d&d d20-- one critical hit = insta-death. first few encounters in iwd2 is a tutorial and a chance for some free xp to level beyond insta-death. so, in point o' fact, we wouldn't consider such stuff filler either. but again, we specific avoided defining filler, and we will continue to do so, 'cause is your non-explanation. you may instead wanna argue with us that iwd2 game progression were not what we suggest or that we is wrong about varied combats, but until you actual explain, you is simply proving our point. it's the schools. we hear critical thinking and analysis given as goals, but we so rare see any o' that stuff. and is not just US schools neither as we taught in europe for awhile... decades ago. HA! Good Fun!

you didn't say... anything. zombies and orcs from nwn 2 don't "contribute to the game progression." provide a why and not simple a conclusion based on some vague feeling. you aren't explaining actual complaints and we ain't gonna do your work for you. btw, as a hint, we would be much more likely to use various bg encounters as examples as filler. HA! Good Fun!

Actually I did explain what filler combat is some pages ago. I thought it was unnecessary to do so again, but here it is: I guess a little lining out of what trash combat is, will help here: When you have to fight enemies that do not in any way contribute to the game progression, except by making it longer, the combat can be considered filler/trash. Case in point: 1) IWD 2 Golbins : Yeah, there is a goblin invasion going on. But jesus christ, do I have to fight every effing one of them?? 2) NWN2 : Zombies and Orcs. WHHHHYYYY?? 3) Dragon Age: Darkspawns. Sometimes these "mobs" do make sense, but that does not mean that they should be there for you to make sweet XP-love to. The game content ought to come from encounters that tell a story. Not from dungeon hacks from Diablo. Which makes the entire dungeon level in PoE a brilliant idea: Those who are masochist enough and really like the filler content can go there to extinguish that hunger for morbid gut wrenching. The rest can actually play the game. To make things absolutely clear, this is not, I repeat NOT equivalent to saying that there should be no combat in RPGs. That particular sentiment has a copyright. This is to point out that fattening up the game with beetles/turtles/wombats is not really helping. *sigh* saying "zombies and orcs," or goblins and then stating that they don't contribute to the game progression is Not an explanation. ... we blame the fing schools. "And you can make the point "where were you 2 years ago?" Well not everyone even knew about this 2 years ago. " we answered this already... give us a sec to link. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/68476-discussion-the-poe-beta-xp-system/?p=1514497 and http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/68476-discussion-the-poe-beta-xp-system/?p=1514511 HA! Good Fun!

call us an obsidian/bio fanboy is... amusing, but am gonna let that slide. and you still haven't explained what you think filler combat is... and which PoE encounters were fillers. you has simply expanded your complaint so that it now includes other games. you did exact opposite of what woulda' been helpful. we now not only have the beta, we got a veritable horde o' games with literal hundreds or thousands o' different combat encounters. ... what is wrong with you people? HA! Good Fun!

"filler combat" is no different than grindy. you is simply tossing in a term that you believe has universal qualities, and am assuming that you feel that PoE combat encounters also have such qualities. explain your concerns, or don't. we can guess why you believe that some/much/all (?) PoE combat encounters in the beta were filler, but there is no reason for us to not only refute (if we cared to do so... hell, we might agree with you) but to also make your argument for you. people, explain what your actual concerns is. you folks is good at identifying problems, but you is extreme weak on the explanations. as for 789... *groan* the developers were very clear 'bout what they were doing with xp. is boardies, such as yourself, who got fixated on the labels and failed to realize you were arguing irrelevancies given what obsidain actual claimed they were doing with xp. HA! Good Fun!

the developer responses in the fighter update is enlightening. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/66380-update-81-the-front-line-fighters-and-barbarians/?p=1461112 into the fray and knockdown is both considerable more than passive defensive issues. and again, the passive defense issues further the fighter's role. so, in other words, am not seeing a valid complaint. sorry, we never played the card games other than stuff such as poker and blackjack. HA! Good Fun! So Into the Fray means a Fighter, let's say, armed with stiletto yanks an enemy that is outside his melee attack range (else what's the point if the enemy is already within engagement distance) into attack range? Does it use up a Grappling Hook? Or the Fighter just needs to be wearing a yellow-and-black ninja outfit and to yell "COME HERE!" very loud? I'm honestly failing to see the tactical flexibility: if I'm getting it right, apart from the fact that it's the enemy entering the fighter's engagement area instead of viceversa (not much of a difference, given how the Fighter's high defenses shrugh engagement attacks off), it seems to be the equivalent of the fighter taking a step forward. Besides, I have the feeling that knockdown by itself, in an interrupt heavy game like PoE, is not exactly a world-changer. am trying not to laugh, not 'cause you made a joke, but 'cause your reply is funny. in a game where the monk gets tougher with injuries and mages is hurling fireballs, this is the feature that breaks your suspension o' disbelief? okie dokie. and if you genuine don't see the added flexibility o' a tanky character being able to taunt or yank a particular foe from distance, then am gonna need far too much time and space to enlighten. am s'posing we could start with tic-tac-toe and observe that placing an X in a box compels your opponent to block your move or lose, but one would think that such fundamentals is obvious. if you claim you don't see value o' knockdown or into the fray, we suspect you is arguing for the sake of doing so rather than having a genuine concern. in most such pnp games and crpgs, such abilities run the risk o' being over-powered. *shrug* there isn't a need to respond 'cause we clear will never be able to convince somebody that they is incorrect if they ain't being serious or reasonable, and lord knows the developers, the folks who can actually change the features in the game, don't need Gromnir's tedious erudition. additional response would be pointless. HA! Good Fun!

maybe it is a side-effect o' the rise o' autism or the ADD generation or lord only knows what, but am amazed by how tenaciously folks latch on to irrelevant nomenclature. spiritual successor means nothing in and of itself. there is features that mc or amentep might see as essential in a game being sold to fans of the ie games that Gromnir does not. mc likes fighting in tunnels. Di, who sadly hasn't been around these boards for a very long time, observed that as much as she liked jagged alliance 2, ie game combat were meh, and so she dropped difficulty level and raced through the tedious combats as quick as possible. she were not alone. whatever you think is essential to achieve the silly spiritual successor benchmark that obsidian never claimed were a goal regardless, you is wrong... or right. is a pure subjective bit o' nonsense that bad writers and hack game journalists throw around because they has a surfeit o' imagination and cannot come up with a better way to describe a sequel, expansion of PoE kinda game. grind xp is a similar term... so too is immersion. the objective v. quest nonsense we saw from kill xp proponents were even more amusing. folks is using words that don't have specific qualities beyond what you imagine they have. a couple years ago, the fun way to be dismissive o' a crpg were to call it a console rpg. *shrug* such labels have 0 intrinsic meaning. people is doggedly pursuing nonsensical and pointless attempts to reveal poster A's definition o' immersion or gind xp as false. perhaps they note that poster B's definition is far more reasonable? is meaningless. *snort* http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/68476-discussion-the-poe-beta-xp-system/?p=1514480 now, perhaps you disagree with the obsidian developer goals and rationale, but use ambiguous and inherently meaningless nonsense such as spiritual successor to refute is revealing that you don't have a real reason or rationale, which is ok. in point o' fact, you don't need to have a reason or rationale to be demanding feature X or Y. some folks like chocolate ice cream better than vanilla, but we don't demand that they explain why they have such a preference, do we? nevertheless, watching some folks try and explain the superiority o' a feature through ambiguous nonsense labels is... amusing. kill xp is bad 'cause it has negative effects on balance, it fails to promote diversity o' character builds and it is lacking in the simplicity o' quest xp, simplicity which allows the developers to focus their limited resources on far more meaningful features such as pretty much anything else. kill xp is not bad because it is grindy or breaks immersion or other such vague bits. likewise, kill xp is not superior 'cause it is essential to making a spiritual successor to the ie games or because o' the simple fact that such a approach were used in the ie games. this is a stupid argument. HA! Good Fun!

the developer responses in the fighter update is enlightening. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/66380-update-81-the-front-line-fighters-and-barbarians/?p=1461112 into the fray and knockdown is both considerable more than passive defensive issues. and again, the passive defense issues further the fighter's role. so, in other words, am not seeing a valid complaint. sorry, we never played the card games other than stuff such as poker and blackjack. HA! Good Fun!

That's correct Gromnir I was an early naysayer and Sawyer made a post explaining things and such and such. My current stance is wait and see. As the BB stands there is no way to get a "real" picture of the fighters depth because the fighter can only go to level 8 or so. We don't know their full range of skill options or how the stat changes may effect it. Additionally there is always time to add some new powers if needed. My main point in my earlier post isn't so much that I love the PoE fighter as it exists now, only that it is very good at what it is designed to do and is kind of boring to play while still being far more interesting than a BG fighter of similar level. I would like all classes to have some level of maintenance that makes them a bit more hands on. They don't all need to be mage level hand holding but I would like to see a bit more for the Fighter and Rogue. to a degree, the bb fighter is boring compared to the other PoE classes. as josh described in the developer update, the fighter is meant to be low maintenance. every few seconds you gotta do Something with your mage or cipher or druid. the fighter stands in the midst o' a mob and gets hit. perhaps you focus on a spell caster or particular power foe with the fighter and attempt to knockdown him/her/it. hey, you might even need decide when to boost your defense, but the fighter's role, and one of its chief benefits, is that it is a low maintenance tank. if you wanna play a higher maintenance tank, PoE has the barbarian... and perhaps the monk. we said elsewhere that we don't get the boring rogue criticisms at all, but we do comprehend the claims that the PoE fighter is boring compared to other PoE classes. so, choose the barbarian, yes? however, what strikes us as enlightening is that many/most folks making suggestions to improve the PoE fighter is either trying to make the class play more like a bg2 fighter with boosting weapon specializations and various nifty offensive powhaz and/or they is offering "improvements" that subvert the design goals of the class. the PoE fighter is a low maintenance tank. most o' the suggestions for the PoE fighter we has seen thus far in this thread is either more appropriate to the barbarian, or they belong to the rogue. the barbarian is a tank that is s'posed to be more hands-on. the rogue is the weapons-based heavy hitter. using ie class names may have been a mistake. more than a few folks can't, or don't wanna accept that a PoE fighter is s'posed to have a different role than a bg2 or iwd2 fighter. another oddity worthy of note. some o' the same folks complaining about how frenetic PoE combat is were also complaining that the PoE fighter is boring. if combat is too fast and complex, then a low-maintenance tank would seem to be a boon to such people. for folks who were seeming overwhelmed by the pace o' PoE combat, having a damage sink that you do not need to babysit strikes us as a powerful motivating factor for desiring to have a fighter in your party. HA! Good Fun!

not even six whole days has elapsed since the game were released. did you use a beta save or somesuch, 'cause otherwise we figure you potential had maybe 20 hours or less where you were not playing the game this last week? ... am at a loss for an appropriate comment. HA! Good Fun!

am seeing that vol doesn't understand how kickstarters work. based on considerable experience, we start reading any vol response with an assumption that he doesn't know what he is talking about. thanks for reinforcing our current behavior. HA! Good Fun!

I see. My apologies for misunderstanding, and for the involuntary overdose of snarks and coattails.Which means that you probably didn't see my advice on post diversity... the material you quoted weren't yours. "I even gave him, ah, how did he put it? some "no-doubt well-intentioned advice that I delivered in such a polite and endearing manner that he will take it under advisement"..." bad form mate. and no, we didn't read, but don't feel bad or emasculated or somesuch as we ignore many posts. is so much noise. in any event, to stay on topic, we believe that the reflection that went into development o' kickstarter, and all the QA feedback the developers got, plus the two years o' arguing that were largely ending dismissive of kill xp, should not be ignored because some folks is loud on message boards. "Avoiding combat does not lead to less experience gain. You shouldn't go up levels any slower by using your non-combat skills rather than your combat skills. We plan to reward you for your accomplishments, not for your body count." tim cain were going in the right direction. throw a minor bone to the kill xp proponents? sure, why not? even so, we see no reason to give more than a token bestiary quest. HA! Good Fun! Apologies for the bad form as well, it's just that since you started that post referring to me, I wrongly thought that your following words were referring to this: P.S. Do you ever write anything that is not on the tune of " You think you don't like [current implementation of feature x] , but that's just because you only want a carbon copy of BG1/2/whatever. [Current implementation of feature x] is the best thing since sliced bread. Obsidian are never late, nor are they early. Obsidian arrive precisely when they intend to."? Oh, and apologies for this self-quote as well, it's just that I was feeling soooooooo emasculated, I'm sure you understand... you are not making any sense. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/68476-discussion-the-poe-beta-xp-system/?p=1514570 unless this is a weird mpd or dopple thing. as for immortalis lunacy... am assuming that the fact that you killed Gromnir in ToB is just you making a funny. is not relevant. however, am glad you brought up the fact that some folks is inspired to nerd rage based on the beta... which is an admittedly insular and scaled-down portion o' the game. so two years o' 70% folks being in favor of quest, or at least not caring either way is, in your mind, nullified by stripped down beta impressions? http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/61543-are-you-for-or-against-gaining-experience-points-only-for-completing-objectives/ the old polls got significantly more respondents. and keep in mind that the qa folks has been playing more o' the game for much longer, and their behavior did not indicate an issue. *shrug* is silliness. kill xp folks needed... something. feeling disenfranchised or unappreciated or somesuch? if josh throwing this kinda bone is enough, so be it. bestiary experience for kills is wacky and kinda irrational, but largely harmless. am wondering what the mechanic gets called. perhaps obsidian should consider Scientific Whaling. japan has a self-imposed limit o' ~1000 whale kills a year, for scientific research. *wink* am believing their actual kill numbers has dropped to 'round 500 whale kills per year, but don't quote us on that. regardless, is the explanation for gaining experience through the bestiary similar? is the beast kills rewarding xp for our advancement o' scientific research? ah well, that would probable work better for the south park game. HA! Good Fun!