Gromnir

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!

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!

"But I didn't even dream to complain about it, 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"... actually, the parts you quote were directed at ph... no taking credit for the other kid's work. you wanna throw some snark our way, have at it, but don't ride ph coattails. is bad form. as an aside, and has mentioned before (we should link this stuff or create a word doc or something) but Gromnir were 'posed to be included in bg2, but if you recall those inexplicably empty maps that were available after you emerged from the underdark, Gromnir and draconis were gonna have "quests" on those maps. due to time constraints, we got cut. our guess is that we woulda' gotten treatment similar to lanfear, but dave and the biowarians felt guilty about the 11th hour cut. heck, we mighta been meant for inclusion along the lines of del or mencar pebblecrusher. anywho, dave were primary responsible for tob design, so he makes draconis and Gromnir portions more substantial than we likely woulda have seen in bg2. were just an odd juxtaposition o' events that resulted in Gromnir being a tob character. dave did make the character an orc as a joke, but other than that, we were surprised by the lack o' brutality. the biowarians actual regretted almost all their board cameos and attempted character contests as such stuff invariably caused nerd rage for those not chosen. character contests and cameos inspired genuine ugly behavior from the truly worthy who were overlooked. HA! Good Fun! ps quote function is seriously borked for us. weird.

am personally considering shelving this until the first major patch... as is our ordinary custom with pc games. we never buy pc games til at least after the first patch, and recently we have been waiting for up to a year after release. unfortunately, torment, wl2 and poe is already purchased and paid for by Gromnir through kickstarter. *grumble* there is presently more than a few busted quests and features, and while the game is very stable on our pc, we have seen more than a few complaints o' endemic crashing. actually, the game is extreme stable on our rig, all things considered-- give credit where credit is due. HA! Good Fun!

What aspects are dubious? If some one is an adventurer he should be given xp for exploring/discovering areas since that is what adventurers do. If anything; it's non-discovery xp that is dubious. As far as I'm concerned, quest-xp is easily the most dubious & least important kind of xp there is. I suppose I have *my* reasons for finding it dubious, which is why I spoke for myself. ...But, from Elrond's explanation, I'm actually quite happy with it. The system I envision would be quite a bit more robust, but I've already described those ideas in the previous thread and there probably isn't much use in going over them at this point. Exploration XP is apparently in, which is good for you and I don't begrudge it to you in the least. It is still objective related, which is what I would prefer, so I hope you don't begrudge me being happy about that. Anyhow, I'm dubious of more than just Exploration XP, but that's a whole new can of worms and there's no point in muddying the waters any further. keep in mind that josh already told us that obsidian were considering adding a bestiary and exploration... which successfully kicked up another combat xp dust storm just as thing appeared to be dying down a bit. thanks josh. in any event, am not certain why some folks is gloating and others is acting surprised by c2b's quoted material... josh wouldn't have told us they were considering adding such stuff if they were impractical. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/68476-discussion-the-poe-beta-xp-system/?p=1513428 this is what we meant about overreacting. josh told us that they were thinking o' doing a thing. now we got a quote from josh saying he can do what he were thinking of doing. color us shocked. some folks who were irritated by josh's bestiary plan is now acting as if it is a win 'cause he says he can do it? huh? people is crazy. HA! Good Fun!

Preetty sure frap was being sarcastic against the OE stalwarts who shoot down any post questioning their designs. yes, but is better to respond as if he is serious. in any event, we find the bestiary... amusing. we don't play mmo games much, am recalling when we first hit coruscant playing swtor. there were a quest that automatically were added to our log upon entering a new area. we were to kill 30 freaking gang members. *groan* fine. so we kill 30 and we get a prompt: kill 25 more gang members. *chuckle* worst quests evar. HA! Good Fun! ps as for your no doubt well-intentioned advice that you delivered in such a polite and endearing manner, we will take it under advisement. *shakes head sadly* oh well, our motto has always been, "kid, the first shot is free."

"Then, the devs should just follow their vision and grit their teeth during these three remaining months, instead of caving in and compromising on bestiaries and such. " agreed. point? nevertheless, am s'posing some obsidian folks is at least considering the options o' implementing a largely cosmetic change to appease folks. we cannot be too hypocritical in our rejection o' such a notion as we suggested changing the name o' the fighter and the rogue 'cause having identical names to d&d classes appeared to be causing confusion amongst the rabble. if a largely cosmetic change satisfies folks and obsidian believe they can do without too much effort, then so be it, but it nevertheless strikes us as unnecessary. however, PoE is a commercial product, so sometimes you need sacrifice principles on the altar of pragmatism. HA! Good Fun!

"This is the real root of all otherwise baffling decisions, including the absolute need to avoid the Spectre of Quest Staggering. "Although a backer (I'm not) might say "balancing Baldur's Gate 2 wasn't easy either. So?"Furthermore, kill xp and ad hoc xp awards is not easy to implement and balance." ... is that a serious question? because it is late september of 2014 and PoE will be released in 2014. am not certain where the confusion is. if you are asking why didn't obsidian in 2012 do as the bioware developers did, then you need simply read all of elerond's links... again. is going in circles. the obsidian developers believed that balance and encouraging diversity of character builds were worthy goals. quest xp is an elegant and simple solution, which allowed the developers to spend their limited resources on other features. kill xp and ad hoc xp coulda been added to PoE, but the developers necessarily woulda' had to spend their limited resources on seemingly mindless balancing that could be achieved much more elegantly via a quest xp model. "I don't think balancing it is all that hard considering there's a level cap." the developers, and even some kill xp proponents, disagree with you. you can dig around and find quotes if you wish. nevertheless, the developers disagree with you. compare to the bestiary and exploration suggestions, which is essentially just mechanical reward quests. you got a fixed number o' explore points that is small to middling. the bestiary, which is a silly bone thrown to the dogs snarling in the corner, also is functional mechanical quest with a fixed reward based on achieving X number of kills of critter A, B and or C. "in any event, folks is fighting over when they get their pie. the developers does reward you in PoE. they got a very good notion that X amount o' hours o' gameplay will yield Y numbers of leveling opportunities. the developers has stated that they wanted to slow leveling down compared to recent d&d crpgs, but regardless, they gots a very good notion o' how quickly people will level in theircrpg, and leveling and getting loot is the typical rewards in these games. is not that absence o' combat is failing at rewarding players, is simple that players in PoE, as it is currently designed, is getting larger and more predictable xp rewards. end result is gonna be the same whether combat were implemented or not. however, you is necessarily demanding an extra (and unnecessary) step from developers as they would need try and figure out how to provide xp totals for gameplay that would result in their current rate o' leveling." as we noted, the kill/combat xp stuff were just plain silly. you is gonna level at roughly the same rate and get approximate the same xp, but now some folks will Feel like they got the combat xp that were being withheld previously 'cause... *chuckle* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8Wvgs9q3js is more than a few folks with cider in their ear that is gonna be happier for the liquid dribbling down their cheek, but if you is genuine happier, so much the better. HA! Good Fun! ps our quote disappeared during the process o' posting. we were quoting 80.

"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. " the above were emailed to us on 9/22/12 as part o' update #7. the only way to miss such information is if folks didn't read the emails or updates. blame obsidian 'cause folks didn't read updates posted on these boards and emailed to us? we got something of a reputation as being a harsh critic o' developers. is puzzling. even so, there don't appear to be a basis for blaming obsidian for failing to inform backers that they were panning on making kill xp verboten in PoE... and the time to have been debating were back in september and october of 2012, back when obsidian informed folks what they were doing with xp. HA! Good Fun!

But as I said and tried to show that they didn't had decide that point when they launched their kickstarter campaign, and not even that point of time when campaign ended and as we have seen experience system is still not carved in stone. But they gave us their design goals which they aim to achieve with system that they will design with money they got, and as I already said I think that they have achieved quite well. I'm just saying, a link on their front page reading "How our vision differs (and hopefully improves upon) the Infinity Engine games", or similar would have been great. There it could have read "currently, killing enemies does not reward experience as it did in the IE games. We feel that blah blah blah." I'm certainly not saying the game (or their achievement of design goals) is a failure. am having some sympathy for those who are discovering that PoE does not match what they imagined. nevertheless, the developers has been soul-numbing clear on many issues, and the fact that they did not want kill xp in PoE was one such issue. xp mechanics has been covered in many board posts and updates. furthermore, kill xp and ad hoc xp awards is not easy to implement and balance. the discussion needed to happen two years ago. we sympathize, but looking at elerond links, and recognizing that they ain't the totality o' developer responses on this issue, Gromnir is at a loss regarding your... complaint? what more could you possibly expect from the developers? HA! Good Fun!

Was it your idea? I really think they should have given you credit, or at least acknowledged that it had been suggested before. I wasn't there for that conversation, and I'm sorry people trolled you. I can only say you are not alone in that experience. If I had my druthers, we'd have good ol' combat XP like in the IE games. But (surprisingly to me) a lot of people don't want it in the game. (I don't get it, either, but if that's what they want, then it's OK for OE to provide a compromise that gives each group of supporters some concessions.) If the fanbase were overwhelmingly in favor of combat XP, I'd be right with you in saying "not good enough". this is an argument that has lasted in fits and starts for two years. we have seen nothing posted in the past three months that is genuine new... which is part of our concern. the obsidian were actual clear 'bout what they meant... two years ago. folks fully debated two years ago. folks had polls two years ago... polls that had far more total responses than the recent versions. folks has offered many perfect options over the course of two years. folks who believe they came up with a clever angle is likely repeating something that were discussed to death a long time ago. in spite of developer clarity, there is even folks who is still getting twisted up over semantics: objective v. quest v. task or other names confuse some people. in spite of developer efforts, people is at least pretending like this is the first time they has seen such nomenclature. is amusing and sad. oh, and these same developers were seeing and hearing and responding to these same complaints Years ago when they were developing bg3 and fo3. but yeah. there is folks who is reflexive defending any developer response. is actual likely confusing to developers. check some o' the developer updates and how people responded compared to complaints the developers is getting these days. nothing has changed from two years ago or from any number o' developer updates, and typical the developers were painful clear regarding mechanics and rules issues, but is actually funny to see some folks complaining today that were acting like women at a 1960s tom jones concert. how many rage monkeys were throwing their digital panties on stage just a short time ago? a developer responds and there is a tendency to overreact. it is unfortunate for the developers, but the ecstasy some experience from basking in a developer's presence (*snort*) is short lived. HA! Good Fun!

earlier in this thread we noted that a single respec could be a boon to lazy developers. case in point: either the leadership skill description is busted or the skill itself is busted. at the moment, we have a goodly number of points invested in a skill that is half as effective as indicated, which makes it full of suck. is going to be extreme disappointing if leadership is working as intended but description is incorrect. then again, for old tyme fans o' crpgs, is a bit like fallout outdoorsman, no? the "spin the wheel" approach to game development is so 1997. HA! Good Fun!

this would be an opportune time to go on a wiki rant, but we won't do it. regardless, we will note that a quote from a wiki source means nothing. is not wiki quoting obsidian or even wiki quoting an interview. you lifted a wiki quote that were referencing PoE and cited an article by some guy named matt peckham. mr. peckham, btw, never said "spiritual" anything in his article. random and nameless wiki guy is your source. and? sadly, because so many *insert term of vile condescension here* read wiki and believe it counts as a primary source, the vile effluvium that builds and festers at wiki entries tends to spread... like an infection. we would not be surprised if your wretched wiki quote were the actual source of this horrible "spiritual successor" nonsense of which we are now constantly being reminded. and once again, the term is vague to the point o' meaninglessness. those qualities we liked in the ie games is gonna be the ones we would want replicated in a *sigh* spiritual successor. the same can be said o' you and any other fan o' the ie games. those features we disliked in the ie games would not be integral to any attempt to make a game that is an homage to the ie games with 2014 tech. Gromnir prefers turn-based and would have been quite happy to see it used in PoE. nevertheless, one o' the few specific features mentioned by obsidian in the kickstarter were that PoE would have rtwp. rtwp were not integral for Gromnir. am betting there is a dozen things we woulda' wanted in a PoE game that you and others would hate in PoE. heck, the obsidan folks mentioned that PoE would have bg style exploration, whatever the hell that really means. Gromnir were on the BG2 development boards when bg exploration were discussed and such exploration were near universal cursed by the fan base. the Co6 boards hated bg wilderness maps and wanted more level design similar to durlag's tower. your ie spiritual successor is gonna be different than many other folks' notion... and that is a good thing. nevertheless, the term is meaningless. btw, "homage" is actual a term used on the kickstarter page. HA! Good Fun!