Shevek

Ranger, Paladin, Fighter, Chanter, Priest, Wizard

The skill list seems a bit small for a 6 man party. I would suggest doubling the amount of skills so that there is no way to have one character maximize each skill on a given play through. Some possible additions: Appraise (vendoring) Acrobatics (tumble + balance) Scavenging (getting more loot) Weird suggestion: People are saying Perception and Resolve are dump stats... make them skills.

Where is the option to leave it as is?

Great feedback

They could also add a die roll icon and just have the fixed stat pool be randomly allocated when its pressed. People who dont want to think too hard about stat allocation or want to be a bit more old school can roll for stats and build their characters around the assigned stats.

So, spending a few rounds to get rid of a bunch of stoneskins, immunities, ad spell mantles is somehow better?

Mage battles were crap because they were nothing but a bunch of breaches, dispels and time stops. It was tracer-buster-buster crap. It was a ****ty system of "protections" that made everyone else in the party a bunch of chumps with thumbs squarely up their asses. Edit: Also, to be clear, just because I dislike aspects of the ie games does not mean I dislike the ie games. I just thought that they could be improved on. I am pretty happy that the Obsidian team decided to move the genre forward and make **** better. Again, they promised the FEELING of the old games NOT a carbon copy. Frankly, I am pleased. If you are not, I might suggest individual threads of specific CONSTRUCTIVE feedback. This convoluted thread ("More like BG2"... lol, nice, both overly vague and overly general) is little more than a huge pile of steaming flame bait.

They have repeatedly stated that you could make "passive" melee characters if you so choose. This is not possible yet (probably) because the talent tree is incomplete. Do not worry, you guys will be able to select your melee characters, click on an enemy to attack and go grab a soda when all is said and done. This great and noble IE gameplay, will, I am sure, be once again possible.

Nice casual insult... "mmo-ish." I'm done with this whiney flame thread. Go download enhanced edition and leave this board then.

Thus we reach the real issue. It's not that this game feels like an IE game; because it doesn't. It's that you just don't like what the IE games were. If something different is what you want; fine and dandy, everyone has different wants. We were not promised something radically different though. Obsidian seems to have deliberately tricked fans of the IE games in order to get donations they never would have gotten if they had been honest about they were making. Poe as it is does not deserve to be associated with the IE games. They tapped into an audience hungry for an IE game; only to give us something totally different. It's not just that they change a few things; THEY CHANGED EVERYTHING! Nothing works like an IE game: The combat is not like an IE game. The classes are not like the IE games. The exploration is not like any of the IE games. The inventory is not like the IE games. The xp system is not like the IE games. I could go on, but that would make this post WAAAY too long. I REALLY hate people putting words into my mouth. I think the combat FEELS very similar to the ie games. Its just that I dont have to wait till ToB to have my melee characters have active skills and I am not just micro managing my arcane characters. In other words its SIMILAR but not the SAME. Also, the differences feel BETTER to me. I am sorry if thats a bit too nuanced for some on this board but all this overly partisan ranting is just plain dumb. It seems like its all or nothing with some folks around here. You claiming that OE is tricking IE fans is ludicrous. Absolutely, ludicrous. They said up front that they were making changes to the system and they OUTLINED MOST OF THEM DURING THE MONTH LONG KICKSTARTER AND IMMEDIATELY AFTERWARD. Why did you not cry foul then? They promised an isometric, rtwp, crpg in the same STYLE as the IE games. They clearly stated that it would be THIER OWN IP, THEIR OWN RPG SYSTEM and it would have significant gameplay changes. All they promised is the feel of late 90s crpg gaming. THEY DELIVERED.

I'm gonna have to disagree with this. I'm having serious trouble getting myself immersed in PoE's combat. I'm trying my hardest, but it's just not doing it for me. It's too fast, it's too chaotic, it's too action-y. It's too unrewarding (and no, not just talking about the lack of XP and any meaningful loot drops) The animations are mostly dull and overly repetitive. And again, it feels like they sucked all the magic out of magic. 1. The combat my be fast but you can pause it and slow it down. Also, I am sure that with enough player input they can come up with solutions to make targetting and combat feedback better. 2. IE animations were not terribly dynamic either. The characters random either stabbed, slashed or bashed depending a % anim chance in some 2da file (by weapon type). I agree this could be better in PoE but it seems a bit nitpicky to point that out as if its a dealbreaker. Hey I want sketched item images in item descriptions but that sorta thing is pretty minor. 3. If you think the magic is underwhelming, make a detailed feedback post and if enough people agree then they can rebalance it. Thats the kind of stuff betas are for.

They provided us a town off the main quest. That means that we are not presented with either of the large cities where the majority of dialogue heavy stuff (factions, etc) is likely to take place. This beta town reminds me alot of Trademeet, Beregost or Nashkel with regards to the amount of fighting in the related areas. I for one am glad that the combat feels different. Prebuffing, steamrolling through enemies and then rest spamming was not terribly satisfying in the IE games. The mage battles in the ie games were dumb (either it was spell protection/breach/spell sequencer "battles" or the web/stinking cloud/other aoe cheapness on everything else). The combat in this game may not be perfect but it is leaps and bounds better than the snooze fest in the IE games.

I think its silly to assume that a game made in 2014 with its own custom made rpg rule set (tailored made to work for a pc game) should have to be a carbon copy of a series of games made 15 years ago using a pen and paper ruleset adapted for computer play. They promised to give us, as Sawyer has said, "the feels." They delivered. Those asking for a carbon copy do not speak for the vast majority of backers who knew full well what the devs were promising. Hell, most of the departures from the standard IE design were outlined DURING THE KICKSTARTER CAMPAIGN. I mean, come on. EDIT: I want to echo the words of the folks at RockPaperShotgun:

Well, forgive me if I am wrong, but all stats may be useful for all CLASSES but that doesn't mean they need to be useful for all CLASS BUILDS. If someone wants to may a melee ranger or wizard or whatever, they may opt for those stats. If they do not, then they will stay away from them. I am sure they stated more talents would be going in and that a variety of build types will be viable for all classes. Surely, all stats shouldnt be equally useful for all build types. That would make stats, basically, meaningless.

Frankly, I like most of the changes made away from the BG2 standard. Stuff I have seen that I like: All characters have to be actively played (not just casters). There are more stat array options to support a variety of builds. Talents. Added difficulty. Adventure hall. Stealth circles, nice. WAY better dialog system. LOVE the hp/stamina system. Of the stuff I like that I have read about but have not seen in beta twitch streams: More in depth stronghold. Crafting implementation. Yay for no romances. Rep system sounds solid on paper. Way better than simplistic BG2 system. There are basically two things that (I think) suck: lack of XP for combat (its a dungeon hack; gimme murder xp) and the skill system (which I think should remain but be tweaked somewhat). *Edit: One other thing that sucks are rangers. Shared health pool with pet is a terrible idea. I love the idea of a pet class (which the IE games didnt really have) but this implementation is horrid. On balance, I think the changes are good. People just need to get some perspective. Do most of these changes make the game better? I think yes. Do most of these changes make the game COMPLETELY unlike the IE games? I think no. Its close enough to get my IE senses tingling. Still, opinions will always differ, I suppose...

The solution is simple. Slightly increase the effect of these stats and slightly decrease the effect of their sister stats. These should be a pretty quick fixes that do not necessitate messing with much.

Wilderness in BG1 = Overland Dungeons Your point? You wander around killing monsters and instead of being surrounded by stalactites you are surrounded by trees. YOU BASICALLY WANDER AROUND AND KILL THINGS IN THE IE GAMES. Stop trying to make those games something they were not. Also, stop trying to insult posters you disagree with by trying to place words in their mouths. Deal with the ideas by using actual quotes not fake quotes you use to try to prove a point. The IE games were fun but they were, at their core, games centered around dungeon crawling. The dungeons drove the story forward. They are how you gained companions, met story objectives, found loot and gained xp. Trying to deny this is ludicrous.

BG2: You start in a dungeon. You get out. You go into a tent and there is another dungeon. You go to a bar. There is dwarf. He joins you if you go to a dungeon with him. You go back to the bar. There is a dragon, disguised as a man, he leads you to a dungeon. You go back to the bar, there is a whiny rich girl. She asks you to kill trolls in what is effectively a dungeon. You go back to the city and go the where the temples are. A priest asks you to kill beholders in a dungeon. You do to see a play in another bar, they ask you to find a bard and when you come back, you end up going to another dungeon... It goes on and on... The IE games were combat focused dungeon crawlers based on a system known as dungeons and dragons (created by a guy who loved dungeons called Gary Gygax). Throwing in a bunch of dialogue doesn't change this. The IE games were EXTREMELY combat heavy dungeon crawlers and, correctly, rewarded the player for succeeding at combat by giving the player experience.

Do you know what the hell a dungeon crawler means? Dungeon crawlers are games with stuff like this in them... I could go on... Dungeon crawlers should reward combat with xp.

The approach isn't "just be you" at all. If I want to explore for it's own sake, even if I kill enemies and find dungeons; I get no xp. If I do a quest; I get xp. There is railroading going on here. Want to progress in the game? Do a bunch of quest. No other play style allowed. Exactly. This is the worst kind of GMing. "Oh, I don't think the combat you just went through is meaningful even though you risked a party wipe and used rest resources, so you get ZERO xp." Bad design for a dungeon crawler.

But, the dev's approach isnt "just be you." That would mean rewarding the player for just meandering about and doing whatever they like. The dev's actual approach is "we will reward you for doing what we think is important (our scripted objectives)." While I concur that this is not a "sandbox title," it is a dungeon crawler. It was certainly inspired by (mostly) dungeon crawlers (I would not consider BG1/2 or, especially, IWD 1/2 anything else). Dungeon crawlers should reward players with combat xp. If this were a sequel to Thief, I would not argue but this is not meant to be a stealth sim. Also the issue here is not simply the ability to grind xp. It is the ability to get exp for immersing your self in the world and wandering about. I got quite a bit of xp in BG1 just roaming from map to map checking crap out. There were no objectives tied to many of those maps. It was just wilderness. But the player was spurred to clear that fog of war to discover content and for combat xp. As I have mentioned, I can live with the current system but it does not sit well with me and seems too much of a departure for the classic games of the 90s. Some change is good (like making combat more active or making strongholds more interesting) but this change seems both unneccessary and unpopular.

One final thought on this: One would assume they should already have sketches handy. Don't concept artists have to draw out the items before a 3d artist models it?

I would not be so sure. There will be many items in the game. To draw all the different sketches propably would take Kaz and Polina a month. I agree it would be an impactful touch and i realy hope they delay the game a few weeks in order to do it, but it's not trival. Well they just have to have one generic sketch for each item time (scimitar, longsword, dagger, mace, chain mail, plate mail, robe, hood, helm, goggles, etc etc..). If there is time, then they can add sketches for unique items (robe of the magi, etc etc). If there isn't enough time for unique item sketches, at least some generic sketches would be nice.

In the early vids, trees rustled and grass swayed a bit in the wind. I think grass swayed a tad too much in the early vids but as I watch the streams, it seems not to sway at all anymore. Was this cut? Now I just notice things like animated smoke from chimneys and animated water.

People act like this is self-evidently a bad thing, but I'm actually not sure why. Why is gaining 0 XP a bad thing? What exactly are you being deprived of here? Personally, I think it's cool when you can't count on the inevitable level-up to rescue you from a tough encounter. You have to make due with what you have. No level-up for you until the quest is over. In an rpg (crpg, pen and paper, whatever...), you want to reward the player for adventuring not simply for "completing objectives" determined by some uptight GM. If a player goes out, explores, has a bunch of close calls, and successfully delves into a dungeon, then that player has had quite an "experience" and should be rewarded with "experience points." In a combat heavy game like this, the most efficient way to do this is clear. The notion of only awarding xp if some nebulous objective has been met just does not sit well with me. If the player plays and conquers obstacles/challenges, he is experiencing content and his character should advance with experience points. To give ZERO experience points is to assign ZERO value to the player's actions. This is ludicrous.