Cantousent

I did a quick search to see if I could find anything for you. Hmmm It looks like there might be some issues with the Durgan's Battery map: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/82925-missing-maps-175/?hl=%2Bmissing+%2Bmap http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/82769-cannot-load-saved-game-after-re-entering-durgans-battery/ http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/82668-game-breaking-bug-in-durgans-battery/ I would follow the suggestion Aarik D gave to a previous poster in one of the threads I linked above:

Darklands would be great. Wait, we're talking the one set in Germany, right? Only, I'd want it set in England.

I can see that point, Gairn, but I would think that having a pistol in your off hand wouldn't significantly detract from your balance. After all, you're not doing anything with it. You could even use it to parry, although you'd have to be pretty desperate to want to risk what would probably be a fairly rare commodity in such a manner. I don't really know much about real life match/wheel/flintlock pistols other than what I've read in popular fiction, which ain't much. ...But at least I can see *your* point in terms of current in game mechanics. Still, since switching weapon sets is straight forward in the game, you'd just be better off to get your one shot and switch to your melee set (assuming you don't have someone interceding to block the enemy. However, the silliest thing is to dual wield a pistol and a shield. Perhaps, *perhaps,* and this is being charitable, you use the shield against missile weapons. ...But that entails taking a shot and then blocking a missile after which you would theoretically reload as best you can with the shield in your offhand? In that situation, you're better off using your offhand to steady your pistol for better accuracy. Fact is, using two hands on a modern day pistol, either hand over hand or hand over wrist, tends to have advantages in terms of shooting your target. Assuming you're not using the shield to block missiles, then you're using it in melee range? That means you're pistol whipping your opponent and blocking his sword/axe/spear/whatever with a shield? Insane. ...And you wouldn't get more than one shot because the idea you'd get off a shot and reload in time with a shield in your off-hand to get off even a second shot against someone closing against you quickly is a little absurd. ...But I've thought even the original poster was kind of posting tongue in cheek about dual wielding pistols in the game. I could be wrong of course, but I had that feeling. Nevertheless, like a lot of threads, it does make serious points. I mean, I would clearly think that Infinitron and others (sorry, I forgot who first mentioned it) are right about cloaks and amulets. I figure it has to be either a balance thing or a technical thing. If it's balance, I think that's wrong minded. If it's technical, I hope they fix it. To make my position clear, it's not because I'm jonesin' to stack more gear on my ubermensch character. If more comes available, I'll stack away, but the main point is that it's non-sensical that we *can't* wear both. My goofy post about shoes is theoretically a valid point, but I think most folks recognize the silliness of trying to mix and match magical gloves and whatnot. ...And what if they do something that would really suck, like try to be realistic about boots, gloves, and armor fitting everyone who finds it?

I want to dual wield mismatched shoes. Imagine one boot of speed and another boot of butt stomping or something. You could quickly close and apply boot to butt. EDIT: okay okay, I guess I should be more responsible. The short answer is that from everything I've seen, read, or heard, Sawyer looks askance at kewl kid dual wield pistols akimbo. That doesn't mean it can't change or that you will never see it. For my part, I think it's a bit silly in theory. A friend of mine would always want to dual wield hand cross-bows, which always begged the question, how do you reload them? If the answer is, you want to get off two shots quickly, that sounds cool and all, but you're almost certain to get off two shots much better one at a time and two shots aimed simultaneously... with hand crossbows.

I'm not asking for no combat, or even tiny amounts. I'm asking for smartly paced combat that supports a great story rather than a weak story to support tons if combat. To be fair, I don't want to mischaracterize anyone else as calling for a weak story, but the line in the setting is and should be different than say.. Dungeons and Dragons or Gamma World.

Yeah, and the fact that they're inaccurate means that you're probably using them at fairly close range and, especially if you're a front line fighter, getting off maybe one or two shots at most before you're forced to drop the weapon and close (or be closed) into melee. For that reason, dual wielding them isn't insane, but with most folks accuracy, I imagine you'd be better off firing one with as best aim as possible, dropping the pistol, grabbing the other, and getting off a second shot. That can be done a hell of a lot faster than reloading and would be much more accurate than going all akimbo with a flintlock. If I had a lot of guns, forewarning, and some distance, I'd arm a bunch of such era specific weapons lay out an ambush. Plus, if you have several party members, folks could take aim and fire and grab a weapon. ...But then again, I'm not really all that familiar with the flintlock era of history. :Cant's sheepish smile icon:

Hmmm, Warner Bros offering full refund for the latest Batman PC game on STEAM? interesting: http://www.engadget.com/2015/11/01/warner-bros-offers-refunds-for-batman-arkham-knight-on-pc/ Guess the console versions worked just fine.

I meant to move this to support and forgot. I think I'll just leave it here at this point but someone posted about a deflection issue recently and O wonder if it's related.

Hello morla. Thanks for posting. I'm moving this thread to support where it's more likely to get a response from Obsidz support folks.

Merged the threads. Thanks for sharing, plneuber. Welcome to the boards and I hope you stick around to discuss.

I greatly enjoyed Pillars of Eternity. There are some improvements I'd like to see and one particular story item from the first one that is simply wrong minded that I haven't bothered to bitch about that I would like to have tweaked (not removed or completely changed, just tweaked). Otherwise, all good. I would, of course, back another project at this point. I couldn't say that in honesty until I'd played PoE. ...But I'm sure we'll get another PoE either kickstarted or through a publisher.

I'm more familiar with Cthulu, but my experience with the pen and paper game is that it's not about vamping on folks nearly so much as things like investigation and mystery and not quite as much about combat. Sure, have combat in the game, but it shouldn't be the primary purpose and, if there were ever a game to do this, make non-combat options available for every encounter. Yeah, Blod, you might not like that idea, but it fits in with the game setting. Going up against werewolves and mages is a particularly bad idea in the vast majority of cases for vampires in this setting if I recall right. ...And, if you don't like the non-combat slant of the setting, why license it? Why not just create a vampire game where combat is the central theme? With all that said, I would actually like a Cthulu game even more because combat is almost always something to avoid in that setting. Combat isn't bad. I like a good hack and slash as much or more than the next guy, but I also like games that allow for some actual role-playing in a setting and this setting is an excellent opportunity for such a game. No, I don't want a vampire sim. I want a game where the mystery and the investigation are more important than the combat. That's wildly different than saying I want to babysit my vampire avatar while he uses the toilet, cooks vamp food, showers, and dates other vamps with the occasional mortal appetizer on the side. It's easy to trivialize one another's positions, but at least understand the position. Just sayin'. :Cant's crooked grin icon:

Welcome to the forum, cosmogama! Thanks for taking the time to post about things you've encountered. I've moved your thread to the tech support forum where Obsidz support folks are more likely to see it.

You misunderstand. I *do* prefer combat to be turn based. I prefer my combat centered RPGs to be isometric, especially if they're party based. However, those aren't as important for a game that focuses more on non-combat RPG aspects than combat aspects. So, for such a game, I'm pretty much on board with a first person perspective. I put the blame on myself for not conveying my thoughts properly.

I'm moving this to the bug reporting forum because you just never know what's been reported already. Well... you could do a search, but I'm still sending this to the support forum. Thanks for signing up as a member, lowest0ne. Stick around and have some fun!

Buffalo Bill's Brewery pumpkin ale for Halloween. Not exactly exciting, but it does the job. After that, a cheap Shiraz because... well... I'm cheap.

I actually much prefer turn based combat (although I didn't like it in the recent Fallout titles with VATS). I *much* prefer an isometric view. However, I'd like to see them take advantage of some of the settings where combat is more incidental, and I wonder if they can get their minds around that. I'm an unabashed and unashamed Sawyer fan for various reasons, and I'll disclaim that straight away. However, he'll have to go around his love of combat mechanics and go more for story. He seems to love the sandbox more than the story, although I loved New Vegas and I think Pillars of Eternity had some great story ideas. So, I *really* want a game in this universe. Hell, I really want a game in the Cthulu universe, but I want one where combat is something you avoid most of the time lest you end up drooling on yourself in some asylum somewhere. I want something where your non-combat skills are just as important and come into play even more often than your combat skills. Something where the mechanics of non-combat skills is at least on par with the diversity and nuance of balancing CC spells, direct damage spells, Area Effect spells, maces, swords, axes, spears, bows, crossbows, blunderbusses, throwing axes, divine buffs, arcane buffs, etc etc etc.

Yeah, at this point, I probably won't even pick this title up in a bargain bin sale. I wouldn't use the tool set even if it were good. I *might* use someone's campaign, but it's unlikely. I could possibly sign into one of the communities hosted places just to take a look, but I never have time for that. So, all that's left is the developers' campaign and our honorable ol' curmudgeon et al have convinced me to forgo that. It's too bad, though, because I actually signed up on their boards when our Guard Dog friend here was excited about the game and now he's one of the folks really disappointed with it.

Yeah, what Karkarov said! Seriously, while I'm a little dense, the question as regards the game is whether we prefer to separate our combat and utility related stats from our interpersonal stats. Of course, we could separate stats into all manner of categories and have the points distributed separately. We could use the Age of Decadence model where there's a general pool that can be used for any stats and specialized pools that can only be distributed to combat or conversation. We could separate combat from utility/conversation (such as lockpicking and fast talkin'). ...But, when all is said and done, the design team will decide on a system and then we have to play it. So, I sympathize with Vic wanting a different system, but we have the system we have and I think it would be insane for the devs to switch it at this point, even if they did it in a sequel. All joking aside, I agree with Karkarov about the Art of War. The art of war might teach a simple fellow like me how to win in either an aggregate skill/stat setting or a setting in which the stats and distribution pools are separated. The critical thinking taught by the art of war can benefit someone who has never even picked up a sword in real life. On the other hand, I disclaim that I think the art of war is often over hyped, but its influence historically is beyond question. ...And just saying that means I'd better hunker down in an asbestos bunker because I know some members in these parts who hold the art of war as holy gospel.

It's been a long time since I played a ccg. I love 'em, but finding folks to play is just as tough as finding table top rpg groups. ...Or, to be more accurate, working around *schedules* is tough. Plenty of people want to play. Never any time we can all meet. I have high hopes for LotER. I'm pretty sure the wife is willing to give it a fair shot. I look forward to getting my package.

Yeah, but I think it's a perfectly legitimate desire for a game. It's just not what PoE did. It would be a much different game, but I think maybe Tides might use a similar system to what Vic suggests. I wouldn't mind trying out such a system. I'm happy with the route they went with PoE, but that doesn't mean it had to be the way it is, just that it works out just fine for me the way they did it.

Here's what I would say, if you're one of the players who really likes to tinker with builds for a bit before you get into a serious run, I'd just start over again. You're so close to the beginning, it won't take long to get to where you were. If you're one of those players who just wants to dive in and have fun, don't worry about starting over again. You're so close to the beginning that your character will have plenty of time to catch up on talents and the game is forgiving enough that there's no decision at level 4 that's really hamstringing you. There will be patches and the design team, for good or ill, is constantly balancing things. In that regard, while the xpac makes a larger differences, you've still got patches coming and whatnot. For my part, I think tinkering is good for the devs. They're clearly listening to the community and trying to improve the game. It's a new engine, so they have room to make some great overhauls and that will serve PoE2 well if they decide to make it. So, if they're constantly tinkering, you can wonder whether you should have done things differently after each patch. Don't let yourself get sucked into that. As long as your character is viable, keep playing, advancing the story, and having fun. Just my personal opinion, of course. Welcome to the board, Greg! EDIT: Yeah yeah, it's not a new engine, but the system is new and I think they're trying to straighten out some of the mechanics a bit better. That and Sawyer said they're trying to make the way the mechanics work a little more transparent to people with impaired mental acumen, such as myself.

I don't think you have a good gripe on this one, Vicarious, especially since part of the point of having specific dialogue for races, classes, personal history between the interlocutors, as well as skills and stats, is that there're consequences for player decisions. I also don't think that there should be 'balance' or any real attempt at parity is terms of spreading out these checks. Intelligence and Perception *should* provide the best options, kind of like PS:T where Wisdom, Intelligence, and Charisma had the most weight in terms of additional responses. On the other hand, having all stats have an impact where it can be logically explained appeals to me and that exists in the game. But I am sympathetic. I felt like I had to do everything in PS:T. I finished the game a few times just playing through and scouring everything. Then, I edited my stats which I had to do with a hex editor on a saved game if I remember it right. It's been a while. Even then, I was curious, so I eventually, a long time after I'd first played and finished it, I got a dialogue editor and simply read all the options for every exchange. ...But I would have felt robbed of the experience if I could have just made the 'perfect' character straight out of the box. This is kind of like those situations where folks like consequences but many become irritated or even irate if there's a quest-choice whereby finishing one quest prevents completing of the other, or where previous actions make optimal completion of a future quest impossible. I like those kinds of choices and consequences, although, as an aside, I beleive the devs need to make sure the player understands them early so it isn't a nasty surprise later. EDIT: meant to say gripe, not grip. Grip just came off rude to me.

I loathed that particular NPC. I was so put off one game that I stripped the NPC of all armor, weapons, and other items and then tried out bear wrasslin'. After that I kind of got into the habit of doing it regularly. One of the battles was pretty close if I recall. ...But I think the NPCs in PoE are one of the shining spots. Maybe not up to PS:T, but then again, that's my golden standard.

Hey guys, nice scoop! Nathler was just a *wee* bit faster on the draw, so I merged to his thread.