Yenkaz

The only peaceful resolution I could see would be conceding to Thaos' point of view and joining the leaden key. Even then, he'd be likely to demand your death, since he's unlikely to trust you (or the party you likely brought along). I wouldn't mind a non-standard game over, but that is what it would be.

Nah, much more Neutral Evil, opportunistic and cruel when necessary. I never really could relate to Tanar'ri. Opportunistic sounds like a very Tanar'ri thing. I can relate to some extent with the Tanar'ri myself, more than Baatezu, or at least did in previous D&D editions (before they made all Tanar'ri be feral incarnations of violence and so on). My personal take on them was that they often appealed to the passionate, emotional and instinctive desires in mortals, and tried to have these commit atrocities by essentially breaking down and giving in to the worse side of their base nature, whereas the Baatezu were a lot more about the systemic evil, oppression through the structures of power and law and so on, where mortals would be forced into evil through authority, the classic "I was only following orders" sort, and where the trick was especially to bind mortals into a system (by means of a contract for example) that would force them into doing something unforgivable. Both are very interesting though, and I hate how future D&D editions really ruined this dichotomy. But anyhow, I digress, carry on. I would consider myself as lawful neutral. As scientist I like rules and order. So I never play chaotic evil chars. Killing and plundering just for the sake of it does not make any sense to me ( OK, the sense is that it does not make sense. That is another reason why I dislike Wael in PoE ). I think that if you want to achieve something you have do some planning and act systematically. I can imagine playing a lawful evil char. Somebody who thinks mostly about his own benefit, but who is very good in the use of contracts and laws and uses such things to gain an advantage over others. Extreme example: The king has given a reward for finding somebody, but the text does not tell clearly if he wants him dead or alive. My group has found and sourrounded the wanted person. I say: " If you surrender, I promise that I will not kill you." The person puts down his weapons. I say to my companion: "You kill him because I have promised not to do it. Let us keep his belongings and bring his head to the king. A head is easier to transport than a full body and a dead prisoner does not try to escape. This saves us the trouble of guarding and feeding him." Edit: For a good ending, the prisoner should have insisted that I promise: " If you surrender, I promise that my group will bring you to the king alive and well and you may also keep your belongings." The person is an idiot if he stands before several armed man and think he can stay alive when only one of them promises that this one will not kill him. If we're going to use the good/evil law/chaos axis, that is *not* a lawful action. Intentionally deceiving someone is not fundamentally removed from lying, and you did harm him by directing others who would trust your judgement to do so. It's more of a typical at of someone neutral or chaotic on the law axis.

1:13 - "You know what? **** this puzzle ****. We'll just reattach any lost limbs afterwards."

Wouldn't word get out when you sell the stolen goods? Yes. Your ship would also have been the last seen in the proximity of multiple attacked ships.

https://jesawyer.tumblr.com/post/171289309831/various-deadfire-changes?is_related_post=1 > * There are certainly some goofball combinations floating around, notably monk/wizard when console hacked to higher levels* (Sorry if someone already did this)

Half-truths all: For wizards, it is true, right now you can pick two spells per spell level to "memorize" when you level up (always in your repertoire). This number will increase to 3, as singleclass characters will be able to pick 2 abilities when reaching new power level, just like multiclass characters can right now. So: wizards get 3 "memorized" spells + extra 2 per spell level depending on Grimoire equipped (up to 5 per spell level). This time around Grimoires can't be edited, so how many extra spells such Grimoire provides depends on if its spells overlap with your memorized ones or if they contain ones a wizard can't cast when a subclass is chosen). There is nothing as of yet indicating that it will be possible to craft customized grimoires. Druids and Priests get one "free" spell per spell level based on their subclass + currently up to 2 (with future change 3) per spell level. So grimoires function more like staffs or other items imbued with a small selection of spells in D&D? I don't see how that is dumbing things down, I never bothered switching grimoires anyway, though I did edit it from time to time. You can still somehow change the spells you've memorized, right?

The second sentence is what happens when you try to do the first. Perhaps it's just the system of picking spells for wizards that made me care less about them. There were only 3-4 spells per level I really wanted, so handpicking those didn't bother me too much. Any less and I would argue that variety suffers. I must admit I haven't touched the beta, but I keep hearing about two spells per spell level which seems... disappointing. Can anyone confirm?

We're on the same page now. I can't really name any good examples of a classless system in video games. Maybe Darksouls? New Vegas, almost. I like the concept much more than the execution, which is sort how I feel about RPGs in general. But hey, gotta keep the faith alive somewhow. I don't really feel like F:NV opened that many different ways to progress compared to a normal class system, in fact my games have mostly been different due to making different decisions in the game. It's not that I disagree with everything Alexis is saying, I do like the original POE spell/rest system and I think the best solution to many of POEs spells being quite weak is to improve the list, not limit the selection... to an extent. For instance, the priest spell list in POE was simply filled with too much clutter of useless spells that just made the initial playing with clerics a chore to figure out what was useful. That said, the negativity and insults which is aimed at those who disagree with everything or part of what he is saying has been tiring to read for a long time now. Free speech pertains to government actions, not private forums, stop being a jerkass to people and maybe actual discussion will follow.

Look... Sometimes people just don't agree with you about video games and it's not because they're brainwashed or wilfully performing impressive feats of self-delusion.

Life is struggle. Vela might as well learn to deal with the BS from an early age. I'm sure the inanimate steward, Korgrak and the mercenary mindstriker would raise her perfectly well in my absence...

I do. What precisely is the problem with there being *more* variety of dialogue checks though? As is, Resolve kinda works like Persuade in that it is frequently a "get out of jail free/magically get the best option by sheer will" card. Why can't *all* stats do that *sometimes* and no single stat have an overwhelming advantage there? Why can't there be various valid ways to build a viable conversationalist as well as a combatant? Sorry for double-posting, can't work the quote properly into my other post. You can, it'd just mean that you would have to spread your stats out a little. You could get by with 10 resolve and bonuses to pass 18-20 checks, but more manageable 13-ish would make most available with equipment. You were only really limited if you made resolve a dump stat... which I can't do for any stat. I just can't make myself make any attribute lower than 8-9.

True. I said "party optimization" but I more meant party micromanagement as I wasn't even really thinking of designing your own party. I tend to forget this is even an option because I have 0 interest in doing so in an RPG that has party members with characters and dialogue and quests and whatnot. Though you do still get to build said party members however you like aside from their class and attributes. And given the amount of attribute boosting items, resting bonuses, and whatnot, you can kinda get most of their combat stats to whatever you need/want them to be with the right approach to micromanagement. Some examples of what precisely I mean by "arbitrary cheapness": The over the top (by both limiting camping supplies *and* making it impossible to cast spells before combat) and yet still ineffectual way they went about trying to prevent rest spamming, which had a really simple solution that worked even back in Ye Olde Infinity Engine Days: player discipline. If you think rest spamming makes the game feel cheap and non-challenging then *gasp* just don't rest spam. Considering none of the fights in PoE or the old Infinity Engine games were balanced around the assumption that the player *must* rest after every single encounter, the only thing compelling players to rest incessantly is lack of self control. And even if they do opt for this constraint there is 0 need to employ both of them. If you limit resting, there is 0 need to constrain buffing spells to combat because if I can't rest spam, I'm not going to spam haste and defensive harmony and such before every single fight with trash mobs. I'm going to save them for the mini boss when they matter. It also means that it removes any practical benefit of scouting ahead. What precisely is the point of scouting ahead to learn the next room is full of vampires if I can't cast negative energy protection and chaotic commands on my front line guys to prep for the fight but am forced to wait until we run in like a bunch of idiots and half of them get dominated or level drained waiting for my slowass caster as they get spammed by instantaneous innate abilities? Or attempts to prevent fog of war abuse by constraining rest spamming *and* marking AoE for most offensive sells pitifully small even with high intellect *and* making it impossible to cast them outside combat when any one of those 3 would have done the trick. (Not to mention that this ceased being a problem even in the later Infinity Engine games because they just fixed the previously dumb AI to come attack you even if you were dealing them damage in fog of war with cloudkill or whatever). Or multiple others. I could give a big list of precisely what I meant by "arbitrary cheapness" in POE but it seems counterproductive for multiple reasons including the general trollish, baity nature of this thread and the fact that most of those issues are apparently being addressed in PoED so it would just be kicking a dead horse. I'd disagree about the tents in the sense that any games imposes limitations upon the player. Some players enjoy the sense of planning ahead and resource management (say, playing F:NV in survival mode as well), others don't. When I first played POE it was just after release. When I replayed it for Deadfire, it was 3.whatever. They really did a good job in the meantime with the party member AI settings. I feel ambivalent about the pre-buffing, with the combat-only limitation it makes the use of your buffer more critical to decide when to buff and when to do something else instead of doing it all beforehand. I agree it ruins the point of scouting ahead - I never bothered in POE.... but nor did I honestly in BG2.

There are two imperial powers trying to make the entire area a colony by any means necessary, there are pirates I assume are of the "murder, rape and pillage" and not the funny Pirates of the Caribbean kind and a fragmented local power that can't figure out to do what must be done to repel them. Meanwhile there's a resurrected god who's, as I understand it, walking around sucking up people's souls to regenerate. I don't really think we're going to get pretty beaches and good times all around. It's not Obsidian's style.

Really? Rescuing her from those backward savages is probably the least evil thing you can do in the quest! Really? With the evil dude dead she could have been a chieftain of those backward savages without any worries. Instead she got kidnapped by some crazy adventurer with no permanent home and probably no skills in baby raising whatsoever. It's all looking very shady to me, but now I guess even every paladin and "Goody Two-shoes" will go and kidnap that poor baby just to have extra content in the sequel. It was entirely selfish on my MC's part. It was one of the two arguably evil things he did in his otherwise fairly spotless benevolent/rational/honest career. He saw a chance to secure an heir and he took it. I don't think arguments that her adoptive brother deserved to die would fly, the man wanted to kill his father because he was a freaking would-be crib murder. The best moral argument I could find is that you wanted to remove the baby from the entire fight and just didn't expect a fight to the death resulting from it.

I feel like the overall negativity of this thread could repel most user's internet from properly accessing it, as their precious electrons would be repelled. That's probably a good thing for them. Anyway, I don't really feel like you had to had a super optimized party to get by in POE, standard companions would do just fine and in a few situations an average player would face party annihilation and have to switch strategy or do something else first - not dissimilar to BG2. I got my ass handed to me more than a few times both on normal and a following hard playthrough and still wouldn't trade the custom companions for any optimized ones. POE taught you well with the hover-overs, but admittedly there were only really 3-4 spells of each spell level I ever bothered with. ... With all of this middle-of-the-road nonsense out of the way: I feel like this is all extremely hyperbolic. I'll miss the feeling of resource spending with tents and special spells as well, but it's not the end of the world.

Oh man, i've not seen this portrait. Was kinda hoping to not have it spoiled. Eh, she's too adorable for me to get mad at. She also has a watercolor portrait, meaning she'll have some banter. It's cute and all, but I wonder exactly just how much banter she'll have. Will she have her own quest? And just how much content will those players who left some random baby alone in POE1 will lose? If it will be significant then it feels kinda unfair. Haha, I did it in my second run when it was clear she might be included. I'm not really sure how many took her from her brother though, seemed a little much beyond just dealing with her would-be child murdering father. I guess she might just join as a crew member with a couple of dialogues here and there and an ending slide, but not more than that. That or they kill her early on, in which case I shall make plans for Godhammer V2.0.

Ommigosh that portrait - https://pillarsofeternity.gamepedia.com/Vela The heir to Caed Nua has the biggest ears!

Imagine how the christian churches would react if found evidence that yes, God was a real material being (keeping in mind that in Eora they do meddle in kith affairs all the freaking time but I digress), but also that he was created about 6000 years ago by 10.000 people committing collective suicide to bind their souls together. Then the god-construct messed around with humanity to convince them this god-construct had some sort of power over life after death, was the basis for all morality and predated everyone and everything. Even if we don't know there if there is a creation myth, the deities are assumed to have been beyond human history and knowledge, when they are in fact a creation of human knowledge.

This. I did what I could to support Kana's confidence, curiosity and positive view of the Engwithans, and still ended up with the 'affable eccentric' ending for whatever reason. I really don't feel like having another 100-hour playthrough just to fix that, but it bothers me like a tiny, black stain on an otherwise perfectly clean window. Shame we won't be able to edit that kind of stuff on import. I got that ending too, but i don't see it as a bad ending for him. Heck, to me, it seems like the ending most true to himself. I don't think it's a bad ending, but neither is it all that good imo. As for it being most true to Kana, that depends on how you see him. When you meet him, he's idealistic, curious, and determined to start off an era of peace and prosperity in Rauatai. With the eccentric ending, it just felt to me like he lost some of that. I think in order to get the ending where he doesn't become an eccentric, but some inspiring voice, you basically have to have him in your party for a lot of the quests, like in the Sanitarium and whatnot, in order to get the dialogue prompts with him. If you don't bring him along to those specific quests, you basically get locked into either the Eccentric or Traditionalist endings (depending on what you say to him after finding the tablet) But then there's the whole "sails away in search of knowledge ending", so who the hell knows how it all actually works. It's really strange just how much more complicated Kana's arc is with so many different endings, when according to most polls i've seen, he's probably the least liked companion Eh, I liked him well enough and had him in my 6th wheel slot for about half the game. I like having one or two sanguine guys around to balance the more serious companions. Problem with his arc is that somewhat ambivalent or critical answers leaves him a depressed mess somehow with no real way for the player to know.

I agree with insofar as restricting way-off main classes (Imagine being able to make Durance a non-priest, Aloth a non-wizard etc). However I don't see how it necessarily extends to subclasses since it wouldn't create the same lore problems if, say, Pallegina is a Paladin (two choices obv.) / vanilla Chanter or Paladin / Beckoner.

I'll likely multiclass warriors (Swashbuckler Edér, Scout Maia Rua, Herald Pallegina) but not casters (Priest Xoti, wizard MC). The idea of making poor Pallegina sing is just amusing to me, also I love passive buffs.

I don't know about 'best', but the idea of making Pallegina run around *singing* given her disdain for Hylea amuses me, while Heralds seems like they have a really good support skillset. On the other hand I really want to see some high level paladin abilities. Keeping Xoti a pure priest to get access to high level spells. Edér a swashbuckler (he was a dual wielding pain outlet in my second POE game, much better than semi immortal tank), Maia... Probably scout, not a fan of single class rangers and I doing a vanilla Wizard. Don't know about the others.

To be fair, reality in Tyranny seems to be powered by "clap your hands if you believe" logic.

There would be if my characters didn't sneak in through the back window to avoid that confrontation.

I still they could - keeping in mind that this is early renaissance days - at least make a map of known continents with the large areas (Aedyr, Old Vailia, the Eastern Reach, Rauatai, Deadfire archipelago, The Living Lands and the White that Wends) placed corresponding to perhaps half a globe and then point out that people haven't circumvented the globe yet so there are large unexplored areas. We know that both the north and south pole are explored, but perhaps there are great seas to the west and east nobody has been able to cross, leaving room for exploration of new territory. I guess the Paradox game part of me just really would like a more complete map of the world to gain a better feeling with the story. As it stands it seems like the 'old empires' control their entire continents, but that might be a simplification too.