Gromnir

incorrect. the cops were called because two people were alleged involved in an illegal activity. is this a a shell game wherein folks is losing track? a citizen don't need produce id without cause, but the cops were called to investigate a crime, albeit a minor and silly one. this is Not simple a stop & identify scenario, so don't get confused. furthermore, and we know people has a hard time distinguishing, but real world cops always ask for id- is a way they gauge suspicion. like it or not, but cops asking for id is hardly compelling you to provide such even if you feel the weight o' authority 'pon you. however, if you don't provide id and refuse to answer simple questions, then cops who already had some level o' suspicion may become convinced that you really is guilty o' something. if you go bat-crap crazy while refusing to provide id and answer questions, they can claim that you were appearing drugged or intoxicated. illegal arrest is possible an outcome, but you is extreme unlikely to win any kind o' judgement 'gainst cops if they already has cause for suspicion, and in the meantime they can bring you down to the station and put you through a full intake process. "If you are carrying one, you don't have to show it or identify yourself unless you've been arrested for a crime, or in some cases ticketed for a violation people get very confused." law says you don't need provide info, but real world has you getting arrested needlessly for such defiance is jackarse stoopid. in All case you should show id if you are ticketed 'cause you can be detained for failing to do so. this ain't a "some cases" scenario. you get ticketed? show id. people get defiant with cops for various reasons and it rarely benefits the angry citizen. when cops show up and question you someplace other than your home, ask if you can leave. if they answer "yes," well, problem solved-- leave. if they answer "no," then you ask, "why" and they gotta explain. if cops wanna search you (or your home) ask for a warrant. if they don't have a warrant, make sure they know you is not agreeing to the search. IF you are stopped for questioning pursuant to a crime, give the cops your gosh darn name and ID, duh. that don't mean you gotta get chatty with the cops. if you don' wanna talk to cops, tell cops you don't wanna talk After providing id. if you are arrested, make sure the cops tell you why you is being arrested. do not resist a patdown pursuant to an arrest, and for the love o' gawd, do not run... particularly from a k-9 unit. those dogs do not f around. make sure cops know you is not volunteering, but don't resist or run. car situations is similar, but in all cases in which you are stopped while driving, you are required to provide id, so there is no ambiguity. refuse to sign a ticket doesn't do you any good, so find some other way to vent spleen. again, make sure you clear state that you is not volunteering to submit your vehicle or person to a search. regardless, not providing id is always a stoopid move. am knowing some folks gets angry 'bout what they see is their Right to be defiant, and you do have such a right, but it is, from a practical perspective, stoopid to exercise such a right without having a particular compelling reason to do so. you is likely to get yourself arrested, and you ain't gonna win some kinda multi-million dollar case 'gainst police department. oh, and while it sounds silly, particular if you is a minority, keep your car free of interior clutter. "plain view" rules is such that if cops are able to see possible evidence in plain view, they can seize that evidence. once the cops justifiably (or arguable justified) get you outta your car and they get into your car... *shrug* having a messy car interior is arguably providing cops with reason enough to search. HA! Good Fun!

There was a post somewhere where Josh said they added offensive abilities to Paladins because their previous version didn't feel IE-y enough. perhaps Gromnir is missing relevance. in that post about the paladins, did josh discuss classes in general or fighters specific? if the initial goal were to make PoE paladins play more like ie paladins, then am understanding why josh would think they need some offensive tuning, 'cause even now, our paladin contributes less to the overall offensive efficacy o' our party than perhaps any other class we have played. paladin buffs may be adding to the offensive capabilities of the party overall, but from a practical standpoint, successful battles resolved with our paladin character take twice as long to conclude. it is very possible that you are reading a specific observation about PoE paladins and are attempting to generalize about all PoE classes. "Josh has said many times that a player should be able to build a class so that it "feels" the same as the IE games." am seeing confusion. bobbin's assumption runs very much contrary to how rogues and fighters were described in the developer updates. it were made quite clear that the PoE fighter and rogue would be different than the ie iterations of those classes. nevertheless, perhaps based on simple naming quirk and a single misinterpreted post regarding paladins, bobbin made an understandable assumption that all PoE classes with the same names as ie classes should be customizable so that they is playable like their bg2 and iwd2 counterparts, yes? furthermore, there seems to be less resistance to the PoE changes in ranger, monk, and barbarian. this may simply be because they were less popular. sure, we has seen complaints about pretty much every PoE class, but the "boring" stuff seems largely reserved for fighters and rogues... and Gromnir when he complains about PoE priests. am not certain that such complaints is fair, but am increasing convinced that the problem with fighters and rogues specifically ain't so much that they is dull to play, but that they aren't proper bg2 and iwd2 incarnations. HA! Good Fun! ps the priest is not actual boring to play, just so long as you have a second heal-bot priest in your party to do the traditional, dull buffing and stamina boosting.

as an aside, while some folks inexplicably wanted to turn it into a Balance Is Bad debate, the developer's update regarding barbarians and fighters made it abundant clear that those two classes were, to use mmo parlance, tanks. is maybe one or two people that bothered to ask josh why the fighter looked like a kinda straightforward tank. the wacky thing 'bout our recollections o' that thread is that we see some folks in this thread that am recalling posted in the fighter and barbarian developer update thread, so is not as if these folks can pretend they were caught unawares. obsidian were not sneaky 'bout their implementation o' the PoE fighter (or rogue for that matter,) and is actual kinda weird to see some folks who were seeming positive 'bout the PoE fighter from the update that is now wondering why they can't be more like bg2/iwd2 fighters. perhaps the PoE fighter isn't the tank you expected, but it were revealed to be, unequivocally, a front-line, weapons-based combatant able to absorb a great deal o' punishment... a tank. defender & skirmisher vanguard & scout argyraspides & agrianes whatever. including eleven classes in PoE required considerable definition of roles o' those classes. the PoE fighter IS a tank. if a name change helps folks adjust to that change, so much the better. "There's something to be said for sticking with what players know, particularly with a game that's intended to provide a feel for the IE series. Providing that feel is what helped sell the Kickstarter, so I can't imagine they'll want to stray too far from it. Especially given all the changes they've already made. "A conservative opinion, I know." yeah, Gromnir recognized earlier that perhaps it is too late to save the current fighter class. more than a few folks is gonna want to play a bg2/iwd2 version of the fighter and rogue, and PoE doesn't have those. one reason obsidian doesn't have such is 'cause both those classes were broken in their own way. there was no point in playing a single-class thief in bg2, 'cause thieves were relatively crap in combat, and you could maximize their actual useful thief skills by level 7 or 9. fighters, on the other hand, were weapon-based juggernauts able to kill and defend with equal efficacy... and kits didn't help. play as a kensai and you became less defense oriented but you were able to do even more damage. play as a berserker and you got immunity to many o' the most harmful spells in the game. rogue and fighter is not ad&d or d20 versions. if they need to be more in-line with d&d archetypes... well, then they need serious overhaul. HA! Good Fun!

ps we edited our recollection regarding "massive" into our post above. however, if you think we is gonna type "josh sawyer" and "massive" into a search engine, you is freaking nuts. HA! Good Fun!

Most people on this forum over the last 2 years saw fighters in the previous IE games as just plain bad. The usual, You're trying to defend 2nd ed rules? LMAO. And we're still seeing that from some people. So you're about 18 months too late and arguing from the minority. The majority of posters on this forum will disagree with you. I'm not defending 2nd ed rules as there are problems with it just like any system. I have yet to see the perfect system. I'm just one of those people in the minority that liked how it was in the IE games. I liked the single class or dual-classing or multi-classing. I think you misunderstand. PoE fighters do not feel like 2E or 3E D&D fighters. Josh has said many times that a player should be able to build a class so that it "feels" the same as the IE games. I'm trying to come up with suggestions to make them feel similar within the framework of PoE rules. are you sure about josh quote on that? am not actual suggesting you are wrong, because we don't know. our recollection is that he said you could play a wizard in PoE same as an ie wizard. conversely, we recall josh making a point that fighters in the ie games were equally efficacious at defense and offense (perhaps excessively so... for some reason, "massive" is a word that sticks in our noggin regarding ie fighter capacity to deal damage) and that were something they were getting away from with the PoE fighter... but we could be wrong on that. am honest not certain. HA! Good Fun!

People read the OP before posting? you may not like our reply, but am thinking Gromnir answered your questions. "the developers no doubt had to ask themselves as they were designing a new set of rules for PoE, what features the fans o' the ie games would want in a new, story driven, 2d, isometric game with squad-based tactical combat that were set in a familiar, if different, fantasy world. " regardless o' your personal aesthetic regarding game design, the obsidian developers were very much concerned with including features that would appeal to fans of the original ie games. in spite of some posters who would suggest otherwise, there is no mathematical formula for picking and choosing ie game features and attributes that adequately pay "homage to the great Infinity Engine games of years past: Baldur’s Gate, Icewind Dale, and Planescape: Torment." when ford were redesigning the eventual 2005 mustang, no doubt they had many concerns, but clearly a prime concern were nostalgia. ford's approach was extreme successful, in case you were wondering. does nostalgia and homage trump every rational concern? 'course not, and thank goodness for that. but when a game is being sold by former ie game developers to ie fans, one needs at least consider what those fans might want in a modernized take on the ie games. obsidian developers decided rtwp were essential. you may not like the response, but we read the op before answering. HA! Good Fun!

complaints 'bout the rogue and fighter being boring make little sense to us until we see the proposed suggestions for fixing those classes. most constructive suggestions seen by Gromnir are ways to be making the PoE fighter function more like the bg2 or iwd2 fighter. similarly, most suggestions for fixes of the PoE rogue is ways to make it function like a proper ad&d or d20 rogue. if this were a matter up for vote, we would be in favor o' changing the fighter and rogue to matt's alternate suggestions o' defender and skirmisher. that being said, it may be too late and not enough. am realizing that the kickstarter built up from core classes, and the rogue and fighter were core classes. the rogue and fighter are crpg staples, and obsidian, perhaps, did not wanna disappoint the expectations o' the ie fanbase regarding obvious classes for inclusion in PoE. if PoE requires a rogue and a fighter, and if those classes needs be more in-line with the bg2 and iwd2 incarnations, then the name changes won't be enough... which is too bad, 'cause am thinking each class has a great deal to offer and radical changes will likely break those classes. regardless, am extreme in favor o' matt's proposed name changes: defender and skirmisher. HA! Good Fun!

"Project Eternity (working title) pays homage to the great Infinity Engine games of years past: Baldur’s Gate, Icewind Dale, and Planescape: Torment." now, admittedly, paying homage is kinda a vague descriptor, but the obsidian folks were not making a secret that they wanted to develop a game that would appeal to the folks that enjoyed the ie game. let's be honest folks, the ie games were not exactly hardcore crpgs. josh sawyer, tim cain, and other folks have an opportunity to build their own rules mechanics for this game, and they are incorporating many ideas they believe result in a superior role-play game experience. they got quest/objective xp to encourage diversity of play style and balance. they are going with health/stamina because they think it is superior to ad&d hp. similarly, armour class and To Hit has been abandoned in favor of attack v. defense with armour providing dt after the fact. etc. obsidian is doing things different. surprised? well, this can't be a D&D game regardless, so many things would need to be different, but again, sawyer and cain and others is trying to build a better mousetrap, and ad&d were never an example o' a particularly good mousetrap. however...or perhaps, HOWEVER, this game is being made for folks who presumably played and enjoyed the ie games. is also being made for folks who is simply fans o' obsidian and old-skool crpgs, but those folks is largely ignored in these parts. regardless, the developers no doubt had to ask themselves as they were designing a new set of rules for PoE, what features the fans o' the ie games would want in a new, story driven, 2d, isometric game with squad-based tactical combat that were set in a familiar, if different, fantasy world. "Combat uses a tactical real-time with pause system - positioning your party and coordinating attacks and abilities is one of the keys to success." obsidian made additional promises about features in the days leading up to final funding o' the game, but one o' the few concrete features we got described on the kickstarter page were the above quote. clearly the developers believed that fans o' an homage to the ie games would expect rtwp. the developers also went with a system that would eventual grow to include eleven classes. do classes maximize opportunities for customization and diversity? 'course not, but am suspecting that the developers believed that classes were a quality that many fans o' a new ie kinda game would expect. regardless o' quotes from josh or tim that appeal to you, keep in mind that PoE is also an homage to the ie games. the ie games were casual crpgs with classes and rtwp combat and included a relative extreme role-play spectrum with ps:t at one end and iwd2 at another. our advice: don't read too much into selective quotes. HA! Good Fun!

last post, 'cause this issue seems kinda minor, but why not start off the player with a handful o' copper and let them outfit themselves at the vendor that is available right near start of the game? currently, Gromnir is gonna chose culture based solely on role-play appeal, 'cause the +1 attribute may be redistributed as we see fit rather than locked into the culture choice. if within the first thirty minutes o' gameplay we have enough credits to outfit ourselves as we wish regardless o' culture, then what is the real point o' the proposed feature? am gonna assume that this suggested feature is more than simply a way to do an end-around on what you think is lame armour and weapon choices from the initial vendor. nevertheless, we can see choosing culture for rp reasons or, if the culture ability point becomes fixed, based on the ability point allocation, but starting gear? dunno. sensuki has had some excellent notions, but this seems... meh HA! Good Fun!

sadly, am thinking the greatest hurdle is nostalgia and/or nomenclature. testers o' the game and the folks in QA may not necessarily be bat-crap crazy bg fans such as seem to make up the majority o' the message board populace. heck, is so difficult to convince people on this board that folks who literal spend an hour (or more) on this board multiple days a week, may not represent average fans of PoE. point is, when folks in QA play PoE, they don't have the... commitment to the game that some folks hereabouts do. folks in QA will recognize that they got eleven different classes to choose from and that the classes is each distinct and having a useful role... other than paladins. unfortunately/fortunately, the QA folks may not know what a fighter is s'posed to be. the bat-crap crazies know that a fighter is not only s'posed to be able to wade into battle and laugh off direct hits from a trebuchet, but if that character switches build slightly, they should be "chunking everything." perhaps the biggest mistake obsidian made with classes were simply giving them recognizable names? doubt it. call the rogue a landsknechte instead,and am doubting obsidian board fans would see the class different. besides which, obsidian were obviously trying to replicate some o' the familiar ie game class archetypes. that being said, am seeing how the developers can be confused if their QA feedback is extreme different from the geek feedback they is current getting from boardies who admitted represent a small % o' the potential purchasers o' PoE. QA don't necessarily know what an ie game rogue needs to be for some folks. 'course, in all honesty, we is having great fun playing the rogue characters, so we ain't actually on-board with the agenda o' the thread. don't mess with our rogues and we is okie dokie. we haven't played a fighter other than the bb fighter, but it does seem more like an mmo tank than a bg fighter, but we don't see that as a bad thing either. regardless, we get developer confusion if QA and board feedback is extreme different... but the difference don't surprise us neither. and yeah, we is still figuring out the best way to manipulate the health/stamina mechanic... which is gonna be changing? perhaps the changes will make fighters more resilient, but won't that make'em even more tanky and less like bg fighters? "classes suck" is our starting point, so we could be doing the sinister laugh shtick as people complain. that aint the case. we kinda like most o' the classes, particularly the casters. the thing is, and we mentioned this elsewhere, we is already starting to play fighters a particular way... same with clerics and wizards and other classes. the obsidian goal were customization and diversity yes? nevertheless, we is already getting a fixed notion o' how best to play a ranger, and that shouldn't be the case. am looking at the changes to health and stamina and at least initially it looks like those changes reinforce our notions o' the proper roles o' classes, which we actual think is a bad thing. when next update comes along, we will reevaluate... again. oh, and as far as we can tell, paladins still suck. HA! Good Fun!

you got a serious problem with your number 3s. 'least this one ain't fraudulently edited. why "since the Beta's release"? is pretty darn arbitrary for a game that has been in development for two years. what % of backers are actual part o' the beta anyway? is a genuine question as we don't know the percentages. heck, b00b armour threads have gotten more responses over the years, and as we noted, the pre-beta kill xp poll had 2x as many respondents as the most recent versions. but honestly, post totals? have same dozen poster repeating themselves into insensibility is hardly compelling evidence that the issue is popular. *chuckle* as Gromnir noted in the most recent poll thread, we didn't even vote. the issue is, for many backers. dead. were dead and decided a Long time ago. nevertheless, the pre-beta poll actual had more respondents... post count is a silly measure... well, more silly. even the polls themselves that only reveal a few hundred responses outta the 74k backers is still kinda sad. *shrug* you are hopeless. if we can't explain "and" to you, we sure as hell ain't gonna figure out your recurring problem with #3. advice: don't number anything... or just make your #3 a joke in the future. thank goodness PoE ain't more o' a ps:t "spiritual successor" or you would be really screwed with all the rule-of-three content. we don't use board ignore function on anybody, not even vol, but this were our third time giving you a chance after we said, "no more." perhaps the rule-of-three has merit. HA! Good Fun!

disappearing seems highly unlikely... though we do leave the boards for extended periods o' time. last such absence were work related and resulted in an eighteen month absence. maybe put that on your christmas list? no? otherwise, well, as a frame o' reference, Gromnir has been posting as Gromnir since before the biowarians added the character to ToB... which is a considerable amount of time, no? we wouldn't put money on disappear. and why would we go on a rant? ultimately, and we has said this a few times, we thinks the xp issue is relative inconsequential. heck, we did implied that fact earlier in this thread. "first, that is the most narcissistic nonsense we has ever heard. the recent polls regarding kill xp actual has less responses than the older versions, and even then there were more contentious and popular subjects being debated on these boards. you care about kill xp, so is important to you, so you see as "more speaking" about the subject. " it really isn't a major issue. the game could survive and be perfectly playable with an ad hoc xp system. adding such a system at this late date is so unlikely as to be approaching utter impossible. indira likes to pretend forgetfulness, but even he admitted that implementing a balanced ad hoc system would be requiring considerable developer efforts. if obsidian switched, we would observe what a terrible waste o' resources went into the effort... maybe. would get one post... maybe two from us. sorry to disappoint. HA! Good Fun! "Selective editing? I edited it to match your exact wording "Admit you're wrong Gromnir. Really It's not that difficult. The masses that you believe hang on your every word will either miss your post, or forget this debate ever happened, or they won't care." HA! what a fraud. you figure out how "and" works in a sentence yet?

ah. we see that you are simple. just... simple. "anything AND everything" is funny that you don't understand basic definitions, but we now get your obscenely simple mistake. thanks for making this more amusing than we anticipated HA! Good Fun! ps nice selective editing "3) By Definition, An XP system falls within the category of anything. Check" that were your original... is still a fail.

Nuh-uh. Your willful, denial-based attempts to salvage your fragile forum Ego will get you nowhere this time Gromnir. I showed you Precisely what you asked me to show you, and what you've claimed you never said. Admit you're wrong, now. ... is genuine surreal. this can't be accidental. *shrug* full quote: please show where we has said that it is a bad idea to make requests o' obsidian. show where we has said it is impossible to change anything and everything in PoE even at this late date. josh checked and it turned out it ain't hard to change invisibility. he checked with The Team, the obsidians, got their input, and changed a feature that turned out to be relative easier to fix than he had believed. good job. is changing xp the same? we have already got comments from developers to the contrary. hell, we even got support o' indira that for obsidian to convert and maintain goals o' balance, diversity of build usefulness and simplicity would require a great deal o' developer effort... so is not analogous, not by a long shot. thanks for the link though. we did get a chuckle that somebody would try and educate Gromnir that poster feedback can create change in games. gosh? really? HA! but yeah, keep fighting. it doesn't achieve anything In This Particular Case, but it doesn't do any harm either... but that weren't the question either. you is making more noise as your response is irrelevant in the present context. there were a poster that acted surprised that no kill xp were implemented. the immediate question has nothing to do with the possibility o' changing a feature. end quote. we even capitalized "In This Particular Case." ... am not sure how we can possibly help you. you are missing something... basic. is our mistake to once again treat you as if you deserve a response. weird. HA! Good Fun!

"spiritual successor to BG" don't put in quotes. or if you do, find it. we will wait. "Obsidian Entertainment and our legendary game designers Chris Avellone, Tim Cain, and Josh Sawyer are excited to bring you a new role-playing game for the PC. Project Eternity (working title) pays homage to the great Infinity Engine games of years past: Baldur’s Gate, Icewind Dale, and Planescape: Torment. "Project Eternity aims to recapture the magic, imagination, depth, and nostalgia of classic RPG's that we enjoyed making - and playing. At Obsidian, we have the people responsible for many of those classic games and we want to bring those games back… and that’s why we’re here - we need your help to make it a reality!" closest language you get is that PoE will pay homage. please note that the second paragraph don't even reference the ie games but rather, "classic RPG's that we enjoyed making - and playing." the closest thing to a specific feature promise we can get from kisckstarter were the following: "Combat uses a tactical real-time with pause system - positioning your party and coordinating attacks and abilities is one of the keys to success. " you were not given false promises or mislead, and given the surfeit o' information on the initial kickstarter page, the only source o' info that woulda' clarified woulda been the innumerable updates... updates which included discussions o' quest xp. ... sorry, but you gotta accept some responsibility on this. btw, if you took personal offense... well, that happens. we actual were responding to others in this thread. nevertheless, we can see that you could be offended. it happens. am not particularly apologetic, but if you felt that Gromnir were overly harsh, we see your point and we shoulda' clarified who we felt needed chastising. our severity were directed elsewhere, but again, you fundamental complaint is not warranted. HA! Good Fun! ps stun is... epic obtuse? is no other way to describe. "please show where we has said that it is a bad idea to make requests o' obsidian. show where we has said it is impossible to change anything and everything in PoE even at this late date." am still waiting. we already distinguished the kill xp debate as no analogous. some things IS impossible or impractical to change, but not everything... which is why we is also making requests o' obsidian. duh. you can't be this slow on accident... you just... can't.

am always getting irony and hypocrisy confused. *chuckle* in any event, is more happenstance than anything that led us to respond to this thread. have been confining self mainly to bb and mechanics portions o' board, so your plan, if plan it were, was odd. if not for mention of paladins in title, we woulda' ignored. am serious that we believe we is playing paladins wrong. is hard to believe they is as ineffectual as we is playing them. HA! Good Fun!

As a fan of IE I am used to a more proactive role of fighters and all physical classes - like running around clouded in defensive buffs and Haste, chunking everything with a two-handed sword into little pieces. Less controlled and more lethal combat probably added to experience. God I'm almost in the "make combat more visceral" territory here. In the end there are just too many classes. Smaller amount of core classes with multiple specializations would have probably worked a lot better. But we're past that I get it. am thinking your experience with ie fighters is what josh is talking 'bout. maybe he needs be more explicit... not that Gromnir is suggesting that you are confused. shade seemingly grasps the concepts josh is presenting even if you don't like'em. nevertheless, there does appear to be... confusion. in the developer updates, Rangers and Rogues has been identified as the- what were the term- heavy-hitters? if rogues and rangers is now the weapon-based damage dealers, and that is their Role within the PoE 11 class system, then by necessity, fighters will be less good at "chunking everything." when the issue o' classes were first raised, we noted that we weren't a fan o' classes, but if you really wanted such things while maximizing customization, having two classes would have been more than enough-- split into casters and non-casters. 'course our suggestion were not popular. is a class system, with many classes. am thinking folks is gonna need to accept that if you wanna play a chunking warrior with a two-handed sword, you can do so in PoE, but you should probably play as a rogue. is gonna be different. HA! Good Fun! edit: changed melee to weapon-based. rangers is clear better at ranged combat than melee... unless you count the animal companions, which you should. is a bit confusing actually.

B...but...this is the spiritual successor to the IE games. Right? actual, "spiritual successor" is not something obsidian ever claimed... not that such a descriptor actual means anything. haven't we been down this road? observations from an earlier thread: the bb fighter is a functional mmo tank, and we ain't made our own fighter as yet to see what we may do to customize the class different. nevertheless, our 5th level fighter clear has far more options in combat than did any ie equivalent... and that includes an iwd2 fighter, which were the 7th or 8th improvement/incarnation o' the ie games. am not understanding criticisms that rogues is boring as they has considerable encounter abilities, and when we mix cipher with rogue escape, we get many extreme interesting results. oh, and as noted above in this thread, am thinking we might be playing paladin wrong because battles took literal 2x as long to finish with a paladin main as any other class we has played, and that is all but monk and fighter at this point. however, we ain't played paladin since the patch, so... anywho, our real concern is paladin. of the classes we played, which is almost all, paladin is least efficacious. we got buttons to push and abilities to activate with the paladin, but the paladin, based on admitted very limited gameplay, is weak. HA! Good Fun!

there is a vendor in the caravan that your adventuring party starts the game accompanying, yes? am thinking you understate just how "not a big deal." starting gear is. am getting that role-play value o' a culture might be important to folks. am getting that the +1 attribute point would be significant to many players. starting gear? honestly? the only thing we want changed 'bout cultures is the weird point loss that can take place if you change your culture choice. am assuming that is a bug. am also kinda ambivalent about which attribute the +1 ability is allocated to as you is able to simple click on ability distribution after choosing culture and readjust your points. the +1 attribute is functional not linked to any particular attribute even if it says +1 intellect or +1 dexterity-- racial limits still apply. HA! Good Fun!

please show where we has said that it is a bad idea to make requests o' obsidian. show where we has said it is impossible to change anything and everything in PoE even at this late date. josh checked and it turned out it ain't hard to change invisibility. he checked with The Team, the obsidians, got their input, and changed a feature that turned out to be relative easier to fix than he had believed. good job. is changing xp the same? we have already got comments from developers to the contrary. hell, we even got support o' indira that for obsidian to convert and maintain goals o' balance, diversity of build usefulness and simplicity would require a great deal o' developer effort... so is not analogous, not by a long shot. thanks for the link though. we did get a chuckle that somebody would try and educate Gromnir that poster feedback can create change in games. gosh? really? HA! but yeah, keep fighting. it doesn't achieve anything In This Particular Case, but it doesn't do any harm either... but that weren't the question either. you is making more noise as your response is irrelevant in the present context. there were a poster that acted surprised that no kill xp were implemented. the immediate question has nothing to do with the possibility o' changing a feature. review poster 1: I really am surprised this is even an issue, especially for a successor game to BG. Hopefully it all gets sorted out by release. XP for everything! poster 2: You're a bit late to the part on this matter. It's been known for ages. poster 3: That's not entirely true. I know plenty of backers, many of whom had followed the updates eagerly, who didn't pick that up. so again, before you get lost, what were obsidian's level o' responsibility? the obsidians explained numerous times what quest xp entailed, and they were even more clear that body-count would not be a factor in generating xp. this is not about possibility o' change question, but is rather an issue o' how obsidian could implement such a feature and have folks uniformed o' that fact at this late date. beyond actual informing the fanbase multiple times and in no uncertain terms that there would not be xp for individual kills, what more could obsidian have done? indeed, obsidian clear did not consider how to inform the cretinous and the illiterate and those who chose to be willful ignorant, but what more could possibly be demanded o' obsidian as far as enlightening folks? "Although you can hardly call this situation a 3 wise monkeys routine, since there's been more speaking on the subject than just about any other PoE-relative topic ever." first, that is the most narcissistic nonsense we has ever heard. the recent polls regarding kill xp actual has less responses than the older versions, and even then there were more contentious and popular subjects being debated on these boards. you care about kill xp, so is important to you, so you see as "more speaking" about the subject. also, please note there is three monkeys... am gonna let you guess which monkey(s) is most appropriate to your seeming confusion. three wise monkeys can refer to any and all the approaches to dealing with perceived evils. and yes, if a poster purposeful remained ignorant and did not see, hear or speak, then all three monkeys is evoked, no? HA! Good Fun!

oh sure, but there is some folks with poor reading skills, or who is willful obtuse, or simply do the three wise monkeys routine every time they get news they don't like. doesn't obsidian have a responsibility to retroactive protect the extreme foolish? and what about folks with crippling dyslexia? no doubt a tiny fraction o' a tiny fraction o' the kickstarter supporters simply couldn't read the updates or the developer posts on this subject. can obsidian escape responsibility on this matter because they were clear and unrelenting regarding quest/objective xp? no. hell no. obsidian owes it to the stone-dead oblivious and that one or two functional handicapped dyslexic PoE kickstarter supporters to... well, am not exactly sure what obsidian owes such folks, but lord knows that obsidian cannot avoid their burden o' responsibility just because they fully explained quest/objective xp two years ago. cretins and the functional illiterate dyslexics is people too and they can no longer be ignored by obsidian. HA! Good Fun!

you can go backwards in character creation... though it were bugged in the previous build. effectively, we could simply click on the attributes tab after choosing culture, and we could then redistribute our +1 wherever the hell we wished. nevertheless, we will agree that accurate point allocation is a genuine concern at the start o' a game, but starting gear is just so... minor. 'course, if we can choose the "pollaxe" at player creation, we would want to eventual upgrade to the famous Gallup Pollaxe... its main quality being that it is half as weighty as advertised. no? HA! Good Fun!

you were one o' the "spiritual successor" guys, yes? the stores at start o' bg, iwd and iwd2 also had, as we said, "a wide range o' mundane equipment." nevertheless, purchasable gear at start were hardly a complete menu o' all non-magical gear, and regardless, we typical couldn't afford to outfit our player with the gear we would most like right at the start of the game. what about the spiritual footprints left by the ie giants that have gone before us on this epic PoE journey? should we not show proper deference to the spirit o' the ie series by making sure you start with non-optimal gear? ... that were sarcasm... am knowing that without emotes, some folks don't recognize. HA! Good Fun!

starting gear concerns us almost not at all... and compared to the stat bonuses? am betting there will be a store somewhere near start o' game, and no doubt we will very quickly be able to afford a wide range o' mundane equipment shortly after starting game. HA! Good Fun!

OH and Yadda Yadda.. Combat feels repetitive because no Combat XP.. but Josh knows best. ... HA! that is the single most amusing thing we has read today and perhaps all week. combat feels repetitive 'cause o' lack o' kill xp? *chuckle* am considering adding your PoE insight to our signature. HA! Good Fun!