Cantousent

I especially like Eders comment at some point that at least he'll die with his friends... and Durance.

Hey, Amegani, that elf chick reminds me of Phoebe from Friends. Not in a bad sort of way. It's not close enough to look like you just pasted her pic in there, but enough that I thought I'd mention it. It's good to tip the hat to folks who take the time to share with the community. I like Cramola's warrior girl also, even if she's a tad bit too modern for the PoE feel as I see it. I like the guys also, but I tend to prefer my avatars to be clean shaven, although I have on rare occasion sported a beard. Keep up the good work!

The only problem with being forced to use someone like the dwarf in BG2 is that you have to wonder why your mage, steeped in lore and knowledge can't guide your brawny blacksmith fighter through the process of enchanting a weapon. However, I think fleshing out the crafting system and maybe including a dwarf NPC who can do things maybe I cannot or who provides an opportunity through quests, tasks, or some other interaction that eventually increase my skills. Last I played, crafting was just a little too much like taking a list to the grocery, only with monster slaying included.

I tell you what, the worry over calculating damage output is a legitimate beef, but I think it's one of those things that's inflated in the minds of some members. okay okay, before folks grab pitch forks and fiery brands, I've been there myself. I know how easy it is to get invested and it *is,* as I've said, legitmate. On the other hand, I think its an issue many folks don't even realize exists. To be perfectly candid, I think a lot of folks, especially newbs, plug in weapons and look at the damage on the character sheet. Might not be the wisest way, but I'd bet anything that's what happens. Of course, that's separate from the beef about the lack of epic feeling weapons which is quite different. I don't want the weapons to be more powerful per se. It's just hard to see the epicness for all the pasta salad that is the stats and whatnot. I think, while tidying up the mess of dealing with so many stats and mechanical interactions (without dumbing down a really cool system) would be nice, you'd probably get better press (and a lot less griping) if you added either combat XP or romances to the game. Since I detest one and loathe the other, that's not what I want, but probably a much bigger source of grief from players. As for Pale Justice, it's probably the best weapon in any IE game. The lore is perfect. The fact that so many folks could pick it up and not realize its fearsome prowess is both funny and sad at the same time. It's the ultimate inside joke and about as perfect of a weapon as exists in any game. "Justice always pales in comparison to vanity and ostentatious displays of power. I expected Tyr to manifest his divine will in this blade with lightning and fire. I should have remembered how the blade was given to me... with simple charity and humility."

I don't think I can add anything new and I don't think it would be worthwhile to flesh out my views. This is especially true since I see other folks using the same arguments I would use and usually better. I just want to get point out from a 'Cant the moderator' standpoint that this has been a remarkably affable discussion considering how clearly frustrating some of the positions are for various members. Keep fighting the good fight folks and remember not to poke anyone in the eye and no blows below the belt. As an aside, I played a mage in Skyrim. Did every mage quest I could find and eschewed all manner of other stuff. Except... probably speech? Maybe a tad bit of weapon skills? ...But even Dungeons and Dragons allows wizards at least a rudimentary skill set with weapons, eh? :Cant's tongue in cheek grin icon: EDIT: Usual silly mistakes.

Yeah, probably a bunch of us should see a psychiatrist. Computer gaming makes us that way. Anyhow, Q, I think you're problem is with the lore, not with classes specifically. Although I do get that you personally prefer a class based system. To me, it comes down to single character versus party based games. In a game with a party, you're encouraged to specialize. Classes are built-in specialties. In a single character game like Fallout or Skyrim, you might get NPCs, but you're pretty much expected to address most if not all contingencies with your one character. Specialize too much and you're cutting yourself out of content or sometimes even creating real difficulty for yourself. Depends on what you want out of the game. Of course, I completely disagree with your idea of 'role-playing,' but I think that's just how we see the term. Anyhow, a little venting and kvetching never hurts, so rail away! :Cant's understanding smile icon:

Frankly, I thought Wasteland 2 was a blast. I'm still in the middle of a run that I intend to finish eventually. I don't see any of these contests as either/or or even competitions with 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place. If the KS campaign garners enough money to continue with the games I like, the only question will be whether I have the time to play them all. Now, since I haven't played D:OS, I guess that's a valid point because I wouldn't want the market share to go to those devs instead of Obsidian or inxile, but if I hadn't heard of D:OS and they stole some of the market share it still wouldn't matter nearly as much as whether Obsidian or inxile get enough to keep going. Frankly, other than petty preference, it wouldn't matter at all if another company does well. That doesn't mean folks shouldn't argue and debate these things. Have at it! ...And, I never heard of hairbrained schemes until I tried Shadowrun returns. I thought it was a great game. I'm glad that their kickstarter did well. For that reason, even though I haven't played it and I don't intend to go out to look for it, I'm glad that D:OS did well. After all, I might want to take a gander some day and, with online purchase platforms, I no longer have to worry that it'll be gone even from the bargain bin.

I'm kind of following this from the lurkers' gallery, but I *am* surprised at the lack of marketing. I'm sure it's been sort of second fiddle to the PoE franchise, but come on you glorious Obsidz bastards! Throw us die hard fans a bone! :Cant's receding back to the shadows icon:

Yeah, some of the other Obsidz community members were irritated, but apparently most folks were okay with it. I guess it's just one of those things that just needs a little time. Still pops out at me, though.

It's for the Lords of the Eastern Reach, a game based on Pillars of Eternity. You can access its forums right here: https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/82631-the-portal-opens/ I've pledged for the game, which is coming out soon, but go take a look and see if it interests you, Anaeme!

Not to bright pun aimed ad personam. There are clear standards to decide objectively if the game was successful. Taking budget in to consideration 500.000 units sold is not a success for PoE. How do you know that? I don't have much stake in the *argument.* Of course, I *want* PoE to have done well in terms of sales and sustainability, but the argument of whether it has or not isn't particularly important to me. I figure if it has, we'll know by what Obsidian *does.* However, from the point of view of folks saying 500k is a success or a failure in light of budgeting, how do people know? I expect I'll get typical short, terse, and usually flippant answers, but it seems to me that people are stating things as fact that are backed only by conjecture. Hey, this is the internet, so that's fair enough. Plus, Vol is our beloved resident curmudgeon, so I don't want to insult or belittle him (or really anyone else). EDIT: hehehe "put down him" Classic Cant silly language.

I can understand wanting to make all stats relevant, but I have to admit I've said from the very beginning that 'might' struck me as a stupid name because common usage implies physical prowess even though it's really not solely or even primarily a physical attribute. Might in this case is an abstraction of all sorts of prowess, from physical to mental to mystical to divine. Yeah, I get that the word can have those meanings, but it's not how the word is typically used. As an ol' mage wrangler myself, I can say that I find the name offputting, but if you just understand that it's simply a way of gauging anything from muscles to magical prowess and you'll be okay. I was one of the members who complained bitterly about it. :Cant's rueful grin icon:

Hey, brindle, I moved the topic here. You'll find a variety of views on this topic here, I assure you! :Cant's crooked grin icon:

I think it was in this thread that Gairnulf mentioned something that I think hits the nail on the head in terms of the items. Those different stats are quite important, and as the player sets the difficulty higher, the way the different stats inter-relate becomes more apparent and more interesting, but because there's more granularity in the effects, nothing really strikes a lot of players. The stats really *do* mean something, and even moreso at higher difficulty settings, but strictly speaking, the game does *not* force the players to explore them very much. ...But it's set up to be an extremely difficult game where all of the tinkering would make a huge difference. Converting a number of grazes to hits, for example, can be quite exciting in terms of its effect, but players can win battles with base proficiency with the system, even though the system would be far more rewarding if it required more attention to the stats. In a lot of ways, it reminds me of a game system... Rolemaster? Whatever. I'm talking about the one with all the charts and huge stat breakdowns for crits and fumbles and whatnot. I think that this game is Sawyer's dream of having a highly technical combat system but with compromised difficulty to make it more accessible. I find combat can be fun, but not as much fun as some of the other games I've played. Getting back to items, I think going out on a limb and creating more unique effects would help create a few more memorable items, but there's no way to fix the fact that the game uses a lot of variable effects and those are pretty well represented by the current set of weapon and armor modifications. What the game *doesn't* need are a bunch of items that actually lower the base difficulty. Now, I have to admit, I've only finished once on nomral and I'm only somewhat through the hard setting. I don't have time to play as much as I should like, but once you get to PotD setting, I think you've already gone into quite rarefied territory. In terms of improving the base game for the most players, normal and hard is probably more important. ...And it might even be more like easy and normal for most players. Edit: Forgot a not. Second EDIT: ...And you've got a pretty good friendly but heated debate going here, brindle. Aren't you glad I didn't remove this thread? A lot of threads can be frustrating but we've got a good community here and things typically shake out pretty well. Sadly, that means I probably won't follow the thread as much now that it's going so smoothly, but quite interesting arguments in here.

I'd like to see a few more idiosyncratic effects also. Just not stacked so high on early access weapons. ...But there is something to be said for unique effects.

Conversely, is everything perfect with the game? There was nothing that could have been done better then and nothing that could be done better now? If we're enslaved to BG2 (which I also quite enjoyed), then what do we do? Have a game with a sword identical to Carsomyr in every way except for name? Designers *must* push the envelope. They have the right and obligation to pursue their own vision. Otherwise, we're going to have nothing but increasingly cheap and unfulfilling counterfeits of a dwindling number of original games. I actually respect that you don't like what you consider bad balancing in the game. Moreover, I can sympathize with you to a certain degree. However, I don't agree with the idea that BG2 was a great game solely, primarily, or perhaps at all because there was a sword so manifestly superior any rational player with prior knowledge to its existence would automatically plan gameplay around accessing it early. You can love BG2. I can love BG2. It's a really great game, but I don't believe for a moment it was good because the devs put in such a specific weapon. Having a weapon that truly has a special feel and for which you have struggled long and hard, one that will serve for a good amount of time from the point of acquisition (certainly not one that renders all other choices foolish from early in the game forward), and has some special history and lore? That's all good. I think PoE could have done better in giving that feeling to me, I suppose. I've seen some games that feature such a weapon that grants the player choices upon acquisition in order to make sure it's in a usable form by the party. That makes some sense to me.

Never say never.

I went to look, my Key Rockin' friend. I have to admit that this one just didn't sell me. I can see where the combat could be fun. PoE combat can be fun, but it's too much of a technician's playground and... Gairn? One of the regulars recently pointed out something that made sense. The PoE combat is too easy to make really getting into the nitty gritty of the stats necessary, but the joy of the system comes from what seems to me to be really finely conceived interrelated combat mechanics. I think I would probably agree with the folks who think the combat could be fun in Sword Coast, but the game itself appears to be lackluster in terms of story and setting. I bought AoD recently and I've spent a total of ten minutes on it, so it's not like I'm jonesin' for a new game. I think I'll skip this one or maybe pick it up when it inevitably ends up in the bargain bin... probably on the all hated STEAM. Thanks for the feedback. I've been following this thread pretty well for the past several pages and it helps when other folks do some of the scouting for us prospective buyers.

People have finished the game solo. If you don't want inter-party dialogue and interaction, go for an all mercenary party. :Cant's smile with one raised eyebrow icon:

There's nothing wrong at all with reviving an old thread. In fact, it's actually quite good that you did a search and used a thread that was already started. Some people have *no kidding* reported posts for 'thread necromancy,' which I find frustrating since more people should use the search function, so good job! As for the idea of different fields of view and scouting, it sounds nifty, but it also sounds, as you say, expensive. Wouldn't that require a lot of work to redo? Is it something better considered for the sequel rather than this game? ...And that's an honest question since I don't really know. I do think playing with things like the FoW could enhance the game. For my part, I don't mind the FoW in PoE, but just because I'm okay with something as is doesn't mean it can't be improved.

Aw well, Gromnir, ya wretch, I always get the impression that you're actually 'heroic' in real life, which makes me jealous. I completely agree with what you're saying. ...But, from a guy who wants to be heroic and falls short, I like the idea that there is at least some consequence. Okay, the reality is that giving 'realistic' consequences for being the good guy is probably not 'realistic' in terms of computer games, but can't they find a way to reward people in the way that most folks get rewarded for being the 'good guy' in 'real life?' Namely, the fact that you feel good about what you've done because *you* knew it was good, not because someone gave you twenty gold and a magic weapon? ...And the fact is that all game designers will be forced to conceive these moral or ethical dilemmas. To me, it's like corporations always being bad in a game whereas the quasi- or pseudo-'freedom' fighters tend to the 'good' guy. In real life, even though the vast majority of western civilization has benefited from large commercial endeavors, popular culture has diminished them relentlessly. A game that recognizes this reality, that reality that some win at the expense of others and society as a whole advances as a result, would be great, but at least a game that doesn't pretend that life gets better just because we manage to diminish commerce would at least be a step in the right direction. I don't think I'm actually arguing against you, my 'half-orc' friend :Cant's goading grin icon:, but only that I want to find the sweet spot in the design that accommodates my own views while still being palatable to other players. Nevertheless, I have to admit that the only reason I even saw this thread is because you posted in it and I took a gander, Grom, ya bastard. EDIT: funny, I had the wife read this because I was afraid that my current state of mind might be compromised and she said that she didn't want games to present real moral dilemmas to her. lol comedy. I guess that scores one in il Khan's column.

I think society both rewards and punishes people for being too 'good' or too 'bad.' There are rewards, of course. In real life, if you always take the high road, you will sometimes miss out on the job, the girl friend, material goods, or whatnot. There is a significant disadvantage to rigorously following a moral or ethical code. However, you do get a good reputation, generally speaking, and opportunities in other areas, which translates into sometimes having access to a job, a girlfriend, or even material advancement. Of course life isn't cut and dried. If you're greedy and amoral, you'll get some advantages but also some disadvantages in much the same way. However, most people in society do, in fact, balance desire for things with a moral code. That code is usually derived from a variety of places, such as family, religion, national, regional, and local customs, as well as personal ideas and ideals coming from other areas. Generally speaking, humans in any society have balanced these concepts, even if the pivotal point of the balance fell in different places from culture to culture. In an RPG where you must decide whether to jump in front of every innocent victim in order to take the flaming arrow in the chest, you should count on bringing a lot of bandages and you shouldn't be able to count on getting every magical sword as a reward. In real life, truly heroic people sometimes fare quite poorly. In such a game, if you screw over everyone you meet, you should count on people hunting you down so that your life is spent going from place to place always looking over your shoulder. Anyhow, I'm determined to play AoD when I get the chance. That way, I can speak about it from an informed position. EDIT: ...And I'm installing the game right now. Frankly, probably can't do any more than run the intro at the moment, but I have high hopes to get to play it soon.

I personally think playing a 'goodie two shoes' should be harder than hell in an RPG. It should be braggably hard. However, playing truly evil and murderously should be just as hard. Any successful society should require a happy medium from it members and in fact, broadly speaking, societies in reality do that.

I haven't bought it yet, but I've actually found that my Shady friend and I have pretty similar tastes and that's the one fine grain of sand that tips the scale in favor of purchase.

I went through the report on this and I can't find where anyone said anything inappropriate. Elerond isn't 'stalking' someone by engaging in a discussion. It didn't look like a vendetta. It wasn't personal in nature. It wasn't even pointed. Sure, it looks a lot like "you're wrong!" "No, you're wrong!" but frankly, that's not even true. Elerond merely asserted that he's right. Now, I want to be clear, I don't know who is actually correct about damage output. I don't care. I will, however, say this: I'm not closing a thread because anyone, including the originator, doesn't like the responses as long as those responses are in keeping with the forum guidelines. If you don't want folks to respond to you, don't post things. It's that simple. I'm not taking sides on the issue, and I want everyone to participate and get along, but debate, sometimes even fierce debate, is one of the best aspects of this forum. You have to be able face opposing views without taking them personally. I'm going to give my advice, and it's truly friendly advice. I give it because it really helps you come to grips with the nature of a message board such as this. 1 Don't take things personally. Attack arguments, not people, and don't take attacks on your arguments as attacks on your person. 2 The person on the opposite side of an issue today might be your ally tomorrow. 3 When you get angry, take a step back and a deep breath. 4 Once you've had your say, and you're just arguing in a circle with someone, let him get the last word. If your arguments are correct, others can see that even if the other last words you. 5 After all is said and done, enjoy the discussion. The debate is one of the reasons you're here, right? It should be at least. If you're angry and unhappy, why keep participating. Now, having said that, I haven't yet read the whole thread. I only read the reported exchange which was itself rather long, but I did read through it three times. I'll reread the whole thread also, just in case, but I haven't seen any reason that you guys can't get along on anything else just because you don't agree about the exact damage output of the classes. That's just being too invested in the argument to be healthy.