Judicator

No, I'm not a degenerate.

I might pump it up a bit. Those points in CON feel like a bit of a waste anyway.

Meh, I find that even with 3 INT knockdown lasts long enough to land a couple of hits even with slow weapons. I don't need constant recovery since I rarely get hit either.

I'm going through PoE right now with a Fighter from the Deadfire region with the Raider background and I figure multiclassing him with a rogue makes perfect sense from a character and story perspective, but I used INT as his dump stat. Do rogues in PoE2 need intelligence or can I get away with it? Haven't played the beta.

I think OP only wants the subclasses. Still probably won't work with the way abilities and power sources work tho.

Seriously? The Balance Man strikes again. Tanks were already terribly boring in PoE due to this.

Beats me. I'll never understand why someone gets mad when someone else mods their game.

This doesn't apply to a world with literal healing magic. Also, if you're getting hit *that* often, then you'll probably be dead soon anyway.

No, the Crones' true forms are freaking disgusting. Like, revolting. I am not a native english speaker, so my intuition might be off, but calling someone "ugly" is quite rough, isn't it? Someone who is really unpleasant to look at. They don't sell intended character - thats what I am bother by (and by bothered by I mean: roll my eyes. I really don't care enough to have any strong emotional reaction). PoE is not a gym or a mall simulator. I find it just as absurd as I would an attempt to sexy up Durance. Just... why? Why can we have Humphrey Boghart or Jack Nicholson but every female character gets reduced to: "is she bangable or not". I think she looks spot on. Her skin seems a bit darker in the new portraits but thats about it. Same hard and proud expression. EDIT: I am sorry for messing up the thread. If I knew consequences of my snark I would keep it to myself. I honestly don't understand what the problem is. Why are "dolled up" characters less likely to be adventurers than less attractive ones? No way. PoE1 Pallegina looked like Rihanna with feathers. The Deadfire version looks like a man.

Well, that depends on the character's backstory, doesn't it? It wouldn't make sense for a fresh-faced, 20-year-old Bhaalspawn raised in Candlekeep to look tired and grizzled in BG1, would it? Now I don't know these new characters' stories (I've been keeping myself out of the loop on purpose), but I assume they're not all war veterans or slaves or whatever.

It's just a coping mechanism. Fat, ugly people don't have to accept they're unattractive if they convince themselves the attractive people in video games are "unrealistic". And what kind of argument is that anyway? Dragons aren't realistic either. Might as well ban dragons from video games. Shhh, shhh, not so loud, least it gets spread to BioWare - they've already banned beautiful women from their games, let's not let them take out dragons from Dragon Age. It really killed me when I saw what they did to Cassandra. She was cute in DA2. Being ugly somehow makes a character more unique? Interesting. Anyway, it's escapism. Not sure what's wrong with wanting attractive characters in your fantasy game. "Ugly" is quite an extreme discription. Crones in Witcher 3 are ugly. Those original portraits simply look more like real people, instead of a glam photos for a cover of Vogue. I really can't say anything about Yidwin or Xoti as I now nothing about them, but that is not Pallegina. I just find desire to edit female character portraits to be more sexually appealing... curious. "Really?" That said: quality work. They do look very good. No, the Crones' true forms are freaking disgusting. Like, revolting. I really hate the "real people" argument. I guess all those attractive women I see outside, or in the mall, or the gym are figments of my imagination. Which reminds me, I should inform my gf she isn't real. That'll teach her for being a model in her college years. Seriously though, there's nothing about being ugly or average that makes you more likely to be an adventurer than an attractive person. If anyone wants to use the original portraits then go ahead, there's nothing wrong with that, but saying the edited ones don't look "real" is silly. Bird women, shark women, and elves are not real to begin with. By the way, I feel that the edited Pallegina portrait looks a lot closer to the PoE portrait. The unedited PoE2 variant looks very different to me.

It's just a coping mechanism. Fat, ugly people don't have to accept they're unattractive if they convince themselves the attractive people in video games are "unrealistic". And what kind of argument is that anyway? Dragons aren't realistic either. Might as well ban dragons from video games.

Being ugly somehow makes a character more unique? Interesting. Anyway, it's escapism. Not sure what's wrong with wanting attractive characters in your fantasy game.

If you're into that, sure.

*this kills the new Obsidian artist* Seriously though, that's so much better. This Xoti looks like wife material.

But you're not employed by anyone, you're doing the main quest for personal reasons. You could justify doing side-quests as a way of amassing resources, gold, allies, etc.

Gotcha.

Why the high INT as opposed to Resolve for better AC or Perception for higher Acc?

God dammit. Wrong board.

I've been itching to re-do the classic BG2 Inquisitor, a holy warrior with a big-ass greatsword to punish sinners in PoE, but I'm not sure how to build him. Ideally he'd be an off-tank and support character with strong alpha strikes and decent normal damage. I'm thinking of using Tidefall with Shatterstar and a shield as backup weapons when I need more tanking ability. Thoughts?

Well, I made a fighter and he's doing pretty good. I guess the updates did change some things.

Well, considering that Barbarians were mechanically a Fighter kit, it makes sense that they're so similar. I disagree. They're not generic, they're the most pure warriors in the setting, other warriors like Paladins and Rangers are basically Fighters with gimmicks. you can make korgan effective ignored by demons with a low-level priest spell or scrolls. you can negate most insta-kills with his kit abilities or scrolls. as for the rare time stops, that is why you got your own wizards in a party, but chances are you wouldn't need 'cause your likely super-speed korgan with weapons o' doom has likely killed any but a handful o' bg2 foes in a matter o' seconds. is not much need to argue this further. if you are honest not seeing grandmaster korgan, dual-wielding hammer o' thunderbolts and the axe of yielding as an example o' bg2 op, then poe is clear not the game for you. such munchkiny nonsense is exact the kinda ie bagage the obsidian developers were ridding themselves o' when they built poe. still got got all kinda poe features which is familiar to the ie fan w/o the busted arse korgan example, so claims o' spiritual successor failure is dubious at best. as for complaining justified ignorance, am unmoved. nobody in their right mind is gonna assume everything 'bout poe would be identical to the ie games, particular as the ie games were so varied. would be impossible to make poe like all the ie games. even so, if you contributed to the kickstarter, then you would get emailed developer updates. read or not is on you. if you were late to the party and simple bought on a whim, then feign ignorance 'cause thac0 were abandoned or dual-classing were missing or the aforementioned insta-kills were removed would be a prime example o' recognizing ye olde warning to the foolish: caveat emptor. again, the reasonable person is gonna assume changes would be made. you not care enough to check what is different is on you. 'course is moot as you is now informed. so congrats. problem solved, eh? every class in the game is having combat use, so all classes fight. if is simple the naming nomenclature which continues to baffle you, then am amused, but am doubtful there is much help coming your way. get a name-change from fighter to defender seems unlikely at this point, yes? 'course to simple demand poe fighters who can fight ignores reality and the developer response to your complaint. perhaps you did not notice, but poe is a squad-based, tactical combat game with rpg elements. to play poe w/o one or two tanks makes it more difficult for your party to fight effective. heck, we rare do a potd run without a tank and an off-tank. nevertheless, chanters fight. priests fight. ciphers fight. fighters do indeed fight. *shrug* also, if you are gonna refuse to read or respond to the actual developer reasons for making the poe fighter, "low-maintenance, reliable, and long-lived even in marathon battles," as 'posed to being able to chunk everything and withstand trebuchet strikes as were the case with 2nd edition fighters, then am not gonna be able to make much headway. we linked. don't wanna read? don't understand? am not seeing how to help you. am repeating self. until we get word from obsidian, am not seeing a reason to prolong the agony. am actual a bit curious 'bout obsidian plans for a number o' poe classes which mutated with every build... and for the rogue which largely kept its original role and thus became marginalized. 'course is gonna be nothing but conjecture 'til we hear from the developers or get our hands on the beta. HA! Good Fun! It's clear we're not going to agree, so I'll just say two things. You can easily make OP characters in PoE as well, so Obsidian failed if their goal was to avoid that, and those powerful builds and crazy spells/weapons in BG2 made the game more memorable and fun IMO. Epic level/high level campaigns always end up with cheesy munchkin builds, it's the logical conclusion after dozens of hours of killing progressively more powerful monsters. Even "hardcore" games like Dark Souls are affected by this.

fact sorcerers could be broken did not prevent korgan, dual-wielding artifacts, from also being busted. 'tween his berserker abilities and a handful o' potions or spells, you could make korgan immune to just 'bout anything, and dual-wielding with a hammer which raised his strength 25 and an insta-kill axe were silly busted. oh, and we agree 'bout the naming issue as you would recognize if you read our responses. shoulda' named the poe fighter different. defender or something similar. nevertheless, not only did obsidian explain how a poe fighter would not be functioning the same as a ie game fighter, but they gave reasons as to why the poe fighter would not be able to do exact what you is asking from the developers. all such explanations were made considerable in advance o' the game release, so no surprises or misleadings can be argued. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/68384-josh-says-poes-fighters-and-rogues-arent-boring/?p=1507492 is there a flaw in josh's reasoning, or is you simple arguing nostalgia? you ain't demanding a return to the flawed ie game approach is required simple 'cause o' nostalgia, eh? spiritual successor is meaningless, but even if you see as some kinda gestalt, it sure as heck don't require obsidian to enshrine every ie game/d&d mistake. making fighters equal capable at absorbing and delivering damage in ie games were a mistake as discussed by josh in the link. use dual-wielding korgan hurts your argument as it is an example o' the overpowered nonsense possible in bg2. folks in this thread were pointing out just how fantabulous the poe fighters were at doing damage. such a reality, sadly, were the result o' the obsidian developers letting the poe fighter getting out-o-hand. the poe fighter as it existed in the 3.0 builds were not the fighter described by josh way back in june o' 2014. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/66380-update-81-the-front-line-fighters-and-barbarians/?p=1460938 poe 2 developers should take the chance to correct the class role slippage which occurred during the beta and post release o' poe. numerous classes were given superpowers which blurred their class identities. mistake. HA! Good Fun! I wouldn't really consider him overpowered when half the enemies can just flat out stop time itself, summon demons, and insta kill all your squishy party members within a turn. The problem with your reasoning is that you expect everyone to have read up on all the dev posts before even playing the game. If you're some dude who just saw PoE and figured "Hey, this looks kinda like Baldur's Gate and I loved that game. Lets give it a try." you'd be pretty surprised by how different some classes were. You shouldn't have to do homework before buying a game. I can't agree that making fighters that can, you know, fight is a mistake either. It makes no sense that the only class that can master weapons will be outperformed by a half-mad savage or some forest hippie.

Aren't these two objectives mutually exclusive? not at all, particular for folks who is recalling how poe combat were first appreciated at the start o' the beta. one o' the most frequent complaints o' poe combat is related to pace-- is too frenetic. for those o' us who has played the game to death, such speed issues is forgotten or unnoticeable, but many players, particular new players, see poe combat as fast and unforgiving. having a dependable tank which needs less micromanagement (while still providing options if a player so desires to use 'em) is gonna be a boon for many. regardless, the objectives is not mutual exclusive. a low-maintenance class will not demand a player's constant attention, but labeling as such does not preclude the possibility o the developers having provided many combat (and non-combat) options for the player who desires more control o' the particular class. late edit: am aware 'o the tendency o' low-maintenace to seem boring. even with all the actual fighter options, if one simple uses as a low-maintenance meat shield, then the fighter very well could seem boring. however, with 11 classes, one need not like every class, yes? you wanna play more active tank which produces greater dps? is monks and barbarians and paladins and chanters which work excellent as tanks. Gromnir, for example, dislikes chanters. the chanter class is powerful and works as intended, but we prefer priests and paladins for support as we find the chants and invocations mechanics to be less than ideal to our playing style. 11 classes means roles should be more limited. more limited roles means a greater likelihood somebody won't like a particular class. however, eleven classes also means there is likely to be an alternative class available which should meet a player's expectations. This is my main issue. In the IE games, which PoE is supposed to be a spiritual successor of, fighter-types were not only capable of holding back melee enemies, but they were capable of dishing out damage as well. Korgan dual-wielding the Axe of the Unyielding and Crom Frayer was a terrifying sight indeed. lord, save us from the "spiritual successor" stuff. it means nothing. while obsidian never promised such, whatever you mean by such a label is gonna be different than what Gromnir or maxquest or gifted might mean. whatever is the essential qualities and aspects o' spiritual successor is so elastic as to deprive the shibboleth o' any actual meaning. poe has classes and familiar races and an isometric top-down view o' a multi-character party. is many ways in which poe and the ie games were similar. why ain't the poe gestalt o' familiar ie features enough to be making it a spiritual successor? 'cause the poe fighter ain't enough like the bg2 fighter? is different for you than for many others. pointless to claim spiritual successor failure for a specific feature. (insert eye-roll here) poe fighters were identified, from the earliest days o' the poe development, as being different from the ie class o' the same name... which, ridiculously, is what folks is getting hung up 'pon. if the poe fighter were having been called a defender, and the rogue had been identified as a skirmisher, am suspecting most complaints wherein ghost o' ie were raised would never have happened. why should name be the problem when the developers made very clear the ie and poe versions would be different? nobody were snookered or tricked and nobody save for karakov complained... which ain't throwing him under the bus, but is rather an acknowledgement that he alone o' the folks complaining during the beta who had also posted in the fighter intro thread had some justification for doing so. you point to a horribly broken bg2 example o' a well nigh unstoppable korgan dual-wielding overpowered weapons as to what is wrong, what is missing, from poe. no. just no. HA! Good Fun! Now hold on there. It was Obsidian that marketed PoE as a return to IE-style games like BG and IWD. If they wanted to seperate the IE Fighter from the PoE variant then they should have called it something else. And I hardly consider Korgan broken when Sorcerers are in the game. Not to mention a whole bunch of different multi-class/item combos that were pretty OP. But then, that's part of the fun of BG, which is something PoE is missing, IMO.

This is my main issue. In the IE games, which PoE is supposed to be a spiritual successor of, fighter-types were not only capable of holding back melee enemies, but they were capable of dishing out damage as well. Korgan dual-wielding the Axe of the Unyielding and Crom Frayer was a terrifying sight indeed.