Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Eurhetemec

  1. I'm seeing four things:


    1. Engagement seems to set up when you use an ability. For example with Swashbuckler Eder, if I Escape into the middle of the enemies (ghetto charge!) Engagement triggers correctly and boom a bunch of enemies are Engaged. But if I walk up to the same position and attack, it only Engages the one I attacked automatically. I can then add Engagements but clicking on nearby enemies. Weird.


    2. You can Engage enemies outside your turn but you have to actively click. Ie if Eder is next to someone but hasn't Engaged them, despite still having more Engagements available, then even though it is his turn, I can click him and have him Engage them.


    3. You can usually Engage people even if you already used your action. For example my Chanter main can shout, then walk up to someone and Engage them.


    4. 2 and 3 don't work reliably for some characters for no apparent reason. With Pallegina for example, it seems a direct melee weapon attack is the only way to get Engagement. As I am typing this I am wondering if 2 and 3 only work right if you can Engage at least two targets, as Pallegina is 2h in my playthrough and cab only Engage one.

  2. Once a turn minor action would be decent and balance some abilities better without making the game vastly more complex, though I don't think it is needed, strictly speaking.


    As some who has played pen and paper RPGs for thirty years, I would say tabletop rules generally are a bad point of comparison. TT RPGs typically have one player per character, and a very small number of combats, which means more complex action system can work.


    As for AP, if I wanted to play RtwP on the slowest speed and/whilst pausing constantly, I already could, and every AP suggestion so far has amounted to that.

  3. The reason is money. It's a lot cheaper to write something down instead of animating it. And let's face it: a crowdfunding of 4 million (or whatever) isn't a lot if you want tons of animated sequences on top of a game with a lot of content.

    Quite. I'm not sure why this notion is so difficult for some people. Obsidian aren't using description because they are obtuse or unwilling.

  4. And they pitched an RPG in stype of Infinity Engine games. He is also pitching a Medieval RPG with turn based combat, and so far it hasn't been greenlit.


    Yeah it's mystifying that people are having difficulty with this concept.


    Pillars 1 was successfully because it was pitched as essentially "Baldur's Gate for the modern age", and that very specifically included certain elements like a high fantasy setting, RtwP combat, 6 attributes, classes, races, and so on. Had they done something else, and say, gone with the above but with turn-based combat, there would have been a huge amount of grousing and complaining, and the KS would probably have made significantly less money - quite possibly half as much or less.


    At the time, in 2012, the idea of a modern-style turn-based CRPG doing really well was also completely foreign and un-evidenced. It wasn't until 2014 when D:OS came out that that began to change, and even then, it was a slow burn - it wasn't really until around the Enhanced Edition that D:OS started being seen as this huge success. But even then question marks remained over whether it was a flash-in-the-pan, or part of an ongoing revival of turn-based, which hadn't really been much of a thing since the early '90s - real-time CRPGs, with or without pause had been almost completely dominant since Ultima 7 in 1992. Sure, there was Fallout 1/2, but despite being imho vastly better games than BG1 (not so much BG2), they sold a relatively much smaller number of copies, and had a much smaller place in the collective gamer imagination (at least in the West), and had since become real-time first-person. Shadowrun Returns hadn't even come out (2013).


    Pillars 2 was a sequel to Pillars 1, intended to be a BG2 to it's BG1 (which it kind of is), and thus they didn't make major changes - again this could have harmed the Fig campaign. It could, by then, also have helped, but we don't know. Only when D:OS2 came out did we really see a clear demonstration that modern turn-based CRPGs could be repeatably extremely successful, which again, was after Pillars 2 was in development. It's very easy to apply hindsight and say they always should have had the mode, but it's completely ignoring the actual context.

  5. Also, I've seen a fair bit of talk elsewhere speculating that this might be some sort of Bioshock game, which...I hope not (I'm also pretty sure it won't be, since they've stated several times that it's a new IP).


    When Obsidian started working with 2K, I did think it'd be really cool if they made an RPG that let me explore Rapture when it was still a living city (I also thought a Borderlands RPG could be great), but I'm much more excited about a whole new retrofuturistic space opera.  Right now I'm extrapolating a sort of spiritual successor to Fallout, with the raygun gothic aesthetic applied to space rather than post-apocalypse.


    It's hard to guess what aesthetic exactly they're going with other than retro, but it doesn't look like conventional raygun gothic to me (whereas part of the original FO aesthetic was pretty on-the-nose raygun gothic). The stuff after the Auntie Cleo ad looks slightly too retro for raygun gothic (though not way too retro), but more to the point, the gun after the Spacer's Choice ad looks like something from the 1980s or early 1990s visual-design-wise, though the ad it is in retains the strange faux-1870-to-1920 advertising style.


    EDIT - Aha it's basically La Belle Epoque (with influences from other styles), which does indeed run 1871 to 1914.


    Re: the MS purchase, it's worth noting that MS does "Xbox exclusives", but their definition of "Xbox" includes the PC, because it's their gaming brand rather than limited to the console.



    You'll end up using them when you're overwhelmed in combat as a limited (but highly powerful) resource 






    That's how I play with them already anyway. The real change will be that now I'll fret a lot about "wasting" charges etc.


    It's similar to the way some people hoarded per-rest resources in the first game. It's a psychological thing. I don't use figurines that often but when I do use them I don't want to fret about maybe needing them worse later in the game.


    Yep, I struggle intensely with using anything consumable in RPGs, and always end up with an endgame stash flooded with items I was saving for "a harder fight."



    I just want to say to you guys: YOU CAN BEAT THIS!

    You don't have to live your life this way!  :grin:


    I managed to beat this problem myself. The only way forward is through. Use those items. Use 'em. Keep using 'em. For an entire playthrough, SPAM CONSUMABLES. It'll hurt, but you'll survive, and you'll be like "Wow, this is actually okay!" and it won't bother you in future.

    • Like 1

    It was done to make wizards more specialised in POE you can learn every spell by copying it into your grimoire making all other grimoires useless once you had copied any spells you didn't already have. You still get to pick 2-3 spells per power level. Learn the ones you are going to use the most and if you need a specific spell or spells only for a specific situation use a grimoire with that spell/those spells. Wizards are still very powerful.



    Oh we understand the approach perfectly.


    The problem with this is... it gets old ?


    You're constantly using the same 5-6 spells :(




    In the BG series you actually had the *choice* to specialize your caster or not :

    - wizards


    - specialized wizards for bonus casts


    - very specialized sorcerers



    The problem with the current incarnation of the mage/priest system in POE2 is that you do not get to make that choice.

    Sure, Grimoires are around to help offset this specialization a bit and allow you to swap some spells in combat, but this is... I don't know, tedious ?

    I, for one, have mixed feelings about this.



    The BG example is pretty bad. Wizards were flatly inferior to Specialists, because the extra spell per day per level was gigantic, and many specializations were not a meaningful restrictions (esp. with scrolls and/or another caster to deal with any vital spells).


    Sorcerors were also not "very specialized", they had an entirely different approach to using magic, one more similar to PoE2. They had a limited selection but you could ensure it had all the very best spells you needed most in it.


    If you're using the same 5-6 spells in PoE2, that speaks more to the design of the spells than the system. Clearly those 5-6 spells are overpowered and need to be nerfed, or other spells need to be buffed to bring them up to spec. We saw much the same thing in PoE1, anyway. You might have a very large selection of spells, but given how few you could cast per-rest, on harder settings, if you weren't just cheesing resting (as many did), you had to be careful about what you used, which generally limited to you to a small selection of highly effective spells, with the odd situation-specific spell being used.


    I think one other part of the issue is PoE2 being too easy. If it were harder, we would see more grimoire-swapping at least, to pick spells people were vulnerable to.

    • Like 1

    Your complaints about the impact of the changes are more interesting, some of them being valid, and some being kind of nonsensical. "I just want options" is an utter canard though. What you are asking for would require a top-to-bottom redesign of the entire game and encounter-flow. That's not "just wanting options".

    PoE 1 did manage to do this quite well though...


    I can see the benefit of certain design changes, but the current system restricts my playstyle in a way PoE 1 never did.



    I'm sorry, not actually sure what the "this" in your reply is referring to. Certainly it didn't really offer a choice of playstyles, if that's what you're suggesting.

  9. It took me a bit to realize "traditional" meant pretty much anything having to do with cultural behaviors, so me asking Tekehu to teach me a folk song (while joking around) made Aloth immediately lecture me about being too traditional. Don't ever endorse classes, roles, rules, historical practices, or anything of that nature if you don't want to trigger him.


    Yeah and I mean trigger is often misused but if there was ever anyone it was appropriate for, it's Aloth, man. I love that dude but holy **** does he object to an awful lot of things, like so many things. And this whole deal where he hates tradition and loves duty makes sense given his background but sure is hard to navigate around, given how often the two tend to be tied together.

    • Like 1

    I’m not that far yet, since work keeps getting in the way, but I wanted some clarification: is the issue that Aloth doesn’t react at all to your choices/dialogue, or that the dialogue box says that he likes something you did but his character page stays firmly at zero? Cause I could have sworn that he approved of something in the first conversation I had with him. He’s still a zero, but again, I’m like eight hours into the game. I just wanted to know what to look out for


    In my game, he approves / disapproves in conversations occasionally but his approval rating is stuck at zero (after playing for about 20 hours). It might be possible that his approval is just building up extremely slowly but others who somehow managed to get it to 1 or 2 have reported sudden drops to zero. So sth seems to be off one way or the other. Unfortunately, there's no official info or acknowledgement about this issue yet.



    I suspect this might actually be that Aloth gets both positive and negative stuff a lot and thus hovers around zero. For me at 14 or so hours in he was still dead neutral, but then I cracked a ton of jokes with a couple of NPCs, and suddenly by about 18 hours Aloth went to -1 and had to have a talk with me about not taking things seriously enough (!!!). My feeling is that this is a lot of what people are seeing. Many players will be drawn to a lot of the (often very funny) joke-y options, which are often quite reasonable responses to ludicrous situations, and Aloth may be being impressed by how nice you are, then mad with you for making a joke, and seem completely stuck.


    The sudden drops to zero would also make sense here. Like when you meet a certain other party member for the first time, it is kind of hard for your entire conversation to not be that guy boasting, preening and joking, and the PC joking a lot, and MAN does Aloth not like that. He pulled so many pained faces in that convo. I felt like he should have been sent to sit on the naughty step.


    Also the Watcher's "duty" is something that most PCs will not be terribly happy about, and may oppose, so you are unlikely to pick up point for him there, where he gives them very freely to other NPCs.

    • Like 1

    ​Traditionally, dynamic selection was a core aspect of casting classes, going clear back to P&P and for decades of CRPGs since, but was balanced against real rest restrictions.  However, this started to break down when CRPGs began to pursue a more mass market / casual audience, many of who would play by spamming everything they had even in small fights to feel powerful, and then be left in a lurch.  Players complained, and CRPG makers responded by relaxing hard rest restrictions more and more, making them into soft restrictions, or sometimes no restrictions at all. 


    You're being incredibly misleading here, to the point where I wonder if you're like 20-something and just talking about a time you never knew, based on fragments of articles you read about games.


    The sequence of events you outline is flatly untrue. I say that as someone who has been playing CRPGs and P&P RPGs since the 1980s (and still plays both). Yes that makes me terribly old.


    The "mass market"/"casual audience" stuff absolutely never happened. That is a complete fantasy, and basically from MMORPG culture, where MMORPG fans like to claim any change is "dumbing down".


    In the real history of CRPGs, they've always been extremely diverse in how you got mana, and how much of a true "per rest" resource it was, all the way back into the 1980s. And I say mana because virtually all games used that mechanic, unless they were D&D-derived. Indeed that's been by far the biggest change, far bigger than anything you're talking about - resources other than mana. And a bigger change still than that, and one I note you are not complaining about was making HP-style systems not be "you are damaged until you get a magic heal or sleep at an inn".


    Again, though, back to the 1980s we had CRPGs where:


    A) You had a Vancian/D&D-style deal, where you didn't dynamically select spells, but picked a fixed bunch before/after sleeping (D&D rules suggested it was after but games often made it be before). Obviously actual D&D/AD&D games worked on this basis.


    B) You had games where casters had a mana resource which could only be replenished by actual sleep, hard rests as you put it, and sometimes only in limited places, and perhaps if you were lucky by potions which randomly, rarely dropped.


    C) You had games like B, but where potions were pretty common, or possible to buy and/or manufacture, and often the real balancing point was the opportunity cost of using potions.

    D) You had games where mana regenerated continuously at some rate (often very slow), but where the hard-rest requirement was already gone.


    E) You had games where mana regenerated continuously, and perhaps quite quickly, but where reagents where a huge deal, and spells were more like consumables than anything else.


    And more!


    And this was all in the 1980s and very very early 1990s, long before any kind of "casual audience" existed, long before "marketing" and "audience feedback" (beyond angry hand-written letters!) were a thing. We're talking about another era here. Yet you're misrepresenting it as if it were some MMORPG-style player-developer feedback loop. That's ridiculous nonsense.


    This whole "lel casuals spam spellz like morons" thing is just gibberish, too, and again it reeks of MMORPGs, not actual CRPGs. "Casual" players have no specific way of playing. Some are cautious and barely even cast spells. Others are aggressive and rest frequently, and so on. The generalization you make is actively misleading. Further, on pen and paper games, what you're claiming is completely untrue, and we can walk through pen and paper game history if you like, but that's going to be a long walk. Fortunately I was playing P&P games from 1988 onwards and playing a wide variety of them so I am happy and able to discuss it if required.


    Your complaints about the impact of the changes are more interesting, some of them being valid, and some being kind of nonsensical. "I just want options" is an utter canard though. What you are asking for would require a top-to-bottom redesign of the entire game and encounter-flow. That's not "just wanting options".

    • Like 5
  12. I only just heard about this change because apparently I'd been missing my updates! But I just want to say YES! YES to this system. This is perfect and I kind of feel like coming to after so much hard work really kind of vindicates my long-held and probably misguided belief that AD&D2E's multiclassing system (which was basically similar to this, only with more limits and eccentricities but also triple-classing) was the greatest multiclassing system of all time (GMCSOAT).

  13. Please consider carrying over the split health/stamina mechanic from POE.


    Just because "some people" had a hard time understanding how it works is no reason to scrap it altogether. There surely should be enough time to come up with an absolutely idiot-proof way of communicating what that green bar represents or why characters aren't dying despite their portraits filling up with red.


    If I heard that right during yesterdays Q&A even Josh is more in favour of the split health/stamina mechanic, so why not stick with it?


    The original system was great in a lot of ways, but I think people do need to accept that it wasn't flawless, and main problem was not comprehension, at least as far as I can tell - I mean, I'm sure some people had that problem, but I think the problems run a bit deeper.

    Specifically, the other problems with Health/Endurance are:


    1) One character being on low health means you have to consider resting, even if everyone else is fine. This is somewhat out of your hands, unlike spell usage. It's not really an exciting or interesting choice, either, it just encourages a bit more use of resting (but even on Hard you typically find enough supplies to rest whenever you want - only on PotD does it get more extreme - but even then you can usually just go back and get more supplies, a bit tediously).


    2) Perverse incentive - It often makes more sense to let someone go down than to try and keep them up with the Health system, because they're getting pummeled, and whilst you can keep them up, often fairly easily, they're going to be ground down to very low health - and the long-term problems with that are much worse than just having 5 out of 6 people in the fight.


    They put in the extra health loss on down and injuries to try and make this a bad choice, but it's still more often the right choice than it feels like it should be.


    It also penalizes lower-DPS, higher-survivability builds, but whether that's a good thing or a bad thing is very subjective.


    What they seem to be doing is dumping Health and making Injuries the main stick - this will eliminate the perverse incentive entirely, and also lessen the "one character is low on health" issue - making it instead "one character as a lot of injuries" - but that will be more your fault. It also eliminates the penalty to low-DPS, high-survivability builds, but that could be seen as good, bad, or neither.

  14. I just hope there will be more voice presets. Or ability to slightly change pitch and speed.

    For example if I like 2 female VO presets out of total, and have 4 female characters (MC+hirelings) in may party; some will end sounding the same...


    I agree but with double the amount of voice, they will presumably be increasing the number of presets, so hopefully it'll be fine.

  15. There is no doubt that there was simply superior design and execution of art/backgrounds in many older infinity engine games however.


    To be fair I think there is SOME doubt. :)


    The main issue that makes Pillars not always look as good as the IE games is the greying fog-of-war, which wasn't present after you'd explored an area in IE games. I am really hoping they get rid of it, at least optionally, in Pillars 2 - I'm genuinely fine not knowing exactly how far I can see if the upside is that the environments look more beautiful.

    • Like 1



    The change makes affliction immunity a lot less important because you now have tools to remove them. It wouldn't even be surprised me if the Prayer Against X now granted inspiration instead of immunity too.



    I wouldn't be surprised as well but i'd be disappointed.


    The big problem of affliction removal is that they can be reapplied 0.5s later equally easy.


    Got poisoned by a spider? No problem, you drink an antidote and you're fine! Half a second later spider hits and poisons you again. You've just wasted your round and and antidote, congratulations.


    Liberating Exhortation sounded great but didn't work as well because it wasn't suspending afflictions gained after it was cast.


    Enemies with afflictions on hit could ruin this mechanic, i hope Obsidian will not let that happen.



    These are legitimate concerns, but even if they haven't thought of them - and I think they will have - they should be obvious in playtesting.


    I will be very surprised if they take away immunity spells but keep enemies who spam-apply conditions. I suspect they'll actually keep both.

  17. Ever tried to beat Raedric or the Skaen temple in Dyrford with a underleveled party? Even worse than WM I'd say. Same with Caed Nua when you first enter it with a party which level is too low.


    One or two levels may totally change your perception of the WM encounters. Who knows?


    This seems like very sound advice (unsurprising given your awesome builds btw!  ;))


    I have tried both those things and it was SO HORRIFYING good god. First time I went to do Raedric, I don't remember my level, but like, he literally killed my entire party in the first ten seconds of battle. And I wasn't bad at the game, I was just not, as a certain person from WoW might say, "prepared". I still have like Vietnam-esque flashbacks to the Skaen temple too, good god. It was a bloodbath.


    Yet the same thing a level or two later? Pfffft. With Raedric I'd eventually managed to do it at low levels by lying to him and "leaving", then hiding in room near the throne room and "pulling" him and his guards MMO-style to the door way (using every speed boost I could come up with), and fighting them in the doorway (I also blew more or less every consumable I had). Yet on my next playthrough I was two levels higher, and actually less-geared and optimized, and he attacked me at his throne and it was a bloodbath in the opposite direction. I'd been fully prepared for elaborate running away strategies and so on, but they were not needed!


    I also agree: non-mobile tanks being too easy to rely on outside WM. The WM encounters can be a bit cheesy but if you re-jig your party and strategy, and are the right level, they're not that horrific.

  18. From playing Pillars 1, one option I'd really like to see that should be pretty easy to implement in the AI scripting options that were getting is:


    1) Allow characters to be set to intelligently switch between melee and ranged weapons.


    I mean, I don't want them to default to this, but I want the AI to allow for conditionals like "If you have a loaded gun, fire it THEN switch to your melee weapon and go in" and "If you are not in combat and have an empty gun, switch to it and reload it", and most importantly "If you cannot reach your target (or any target) because people/things are in the way, pull your ranged weapon and start attacking".

    This could remove a whole lot of micro whilst making the game more fun and cool, and also would be optional because it would be done via the AI scripting stuff.

    • Like 1
  19. First off, fakk Trump and his policies.


    Second, the way I see it, the faction finale will go as this:

    1) Rautai wins

    2) Vailians win

    3) Huana queen wins

    4) Huana queen's brother wins

    5) Pirates win

    6) You win

    7) (maybe?) Eothas wins

    8 ) (maybe?) noone wins!


    Lots of outcomes if this is really how factions/endgame gonna play.


    I can see that as my main character is a priest of Eothas, this game is going to be particularly challenging in terms of deciding what happens. Can't Eothas and me buddy up and take over the world or something? I'm sure the big dude has some good reason for that whole Waidwen trip and y'know stealing my soul and all that, right?


    Re: diversity, well, this game is focusing on an area that's subject to colonization. I'm sure the main colonizing power will be Vailia, but just look at our world's history - wherever there's a main power, be it Spain, France, England, Germany or wherever, there are other powers trying to stick their oar in - and sometimes they end up being the main power, a hundred or two hundred years later. So I'm sure there will be some Aedyran oar-stickers out there. Perhaps super-official, because the Aedyrans may want to keep it on the downlow, but I'm sure they'll be there. You see the same in Pillars 1. Aedyr was the main colonial power, but now Vailia is getting its grubby fingers in there.


    This is such a classic official forums response to a perfectly reasonable feature.


    No, it's not. It would be perfectly reasonable to give these options to all players right from the start. Just give people some "expert settings" for an individual experience, if they want so. Most people want their first playthrough to be the best (and many people don't have more time than for one) so why not giving everybdoy more options? There is absolutely no need to make these things dependent on superficial "achievements" and to only make this stuff available for a second or third or whatever playthrough.


    If anything this update punishes people who don't go for achievements and who don't want to be forced to do certain stuff in their games. And it punishes people for playing the game not long and good enough because that's what this strange NG+ mode is actually all about. It's a "reward" system for the best among us who want to play this games for hundreds or thousands of hours, but not for everybody and certainly not for the majority.


    If there ever was a stretch goal that was only made for a small fraction of "elite" players and that could be classified as pure fan service it's this one.


    So I don't have anything against these options and it's not an "offical forum response". I just have a big issue with hiding theses options behind superficial achievements.



    I don't you don't get it, but you are totally proving my point here with language like "punishes" and completely wild and bananas assumptions about "a reward system for people who play for hundreds of hours". It's just not a rational or reasonable approach to the issue. Most likely many/most of the achievements will be very, very easy to get. Many you will probably get just finishing the game the first time.


    And not having access to a bonus is not the same as "being punished", I mean good god. As for "people who do don't want to be forced to do certain stuff", not only is that an assumption, but by that logic I should be complaining about every magic item or stat boost that is locked behind content I don't want to do - I mean, I always end up gunning down the Doemenels, those prats, so by your logic, my not getting access to their shop/quests etc. is me being "punished" because I don't want to be forced to do certain stuff (i.e. be friends with those wankers).


    It's all part of the rich tapestry of gaming, frankly, and I'm fine with whatever I don't get being locked away unless it's completely stupid, but this being Obsidian, not, say, Bethesda, I trust them not to be stupid.


    As for why not have it all unlocked the first time, there are actually good reasons - you are unlikely to have a good idea of what you would want on, and what will be fun to use and what not, especially as some of it may be spoilers, and you lose the bonus incentive to achieve stuff. I am really surprised, from some of your other posts, that you think everyone should be able to start their first game skipping content, with bonus magic items, bonus stats, and so on.

    • Like 3
  21. Pretty sure it means someone like Eder, Aloth, etc. as they don't tend to mess up terminology like that.


    Normally you'd have to go round them up, and some of them might be quite "deep" in the game, so this would let you just have them with you. It would require extra dialogue, but not a whole lot - they'd just be kind of un-reactive until you got nearer where they would appear and you might lose a "get the companion" quest (which wouldn't matter as much on a second play-through).



    Paladin - (they will be the choice of an Order, but we don't have details)




    Priest - (they will be the choice of a deity, but we don't have details)




    Is this explicitly confirmed? It seems like if only two Paladin orders, and only two gods, both out of several available, got subclasses, that'd be a little messed-up.


    Wouldn't it make more sense for the subclasses to be role-based, rather than order/diety-specific? I mean, that's how AD&D did it with kits.


    Josh has said on SomethingAwful, I believe,(Ropekid is his handle) that the Orders and Deity's will be Subclasses.  Whether they are consolidating a few Gods under 1 subclass and the rest into the other, or like PoE1 they are retaining a handful of choices... I am unsure.  That is why I haven't put more than I have.  


    Since the Subclass goal said 2 subclasses per Core Class I tend to lean that the Deity/Order system will change.  YMMV, on that assumption.



    Yeah I've since found the quote. As he said the diety/order will "effectively" be the subclass I tend to think it's more likely that they'll simply have more subclasses, just each one probably a bit less in-depth. I don't really see a reasonable way to put either the gods or the orders into two groups.

  • Create New...