Namutree

And this, in no way, affects your ability to level. Hyperbole much? A spiritual successor, not a carbon copy. I have already explained to you how it is aesthetically and mechanically the same as the IE games. You are still just defining the IE experience extremely narrowly. The primary benefit according to you. The point, Namutree, is that now you explore to explore. Now you fight to fight. There is absolutely no reason why you should be rewarded for going out of your way to kill a pack of wolves. The main point is that exploration helped you level; that is important in a game about leveling. I don't care about getting xp for killing wolves; I just want to get xp from exploring. If they give me xp for finding dungeons or what not (A product of exploration) that would be fine too. It is nonsense to suggest the fact that one could use exploring to gain levels isn't at least a major element of BG's exploration. BTW: Keeping the exploration from BG wouldn't make poe even close to a "carbon copy" as you fallaciously suggest.

He MAY just be referring to the beta. I hope... That is the currently implemented quest system. Doesn't mean it can't be changed though. Please, Obsidian; let me explore like in BG. That's all I want. To have that epic exploration again...

BG games used AD&D and this game doesn't use anything similar!! How could the experience be similar if we don't use a retro-clone???? And don't get me started on the lack of dual classing for humans. Or multiclassing for non-humans!!!! You can still go to explore without xp on kills. Fun factor is subjective though. Be it killing stuff, reading the world's flavor texts, dealing with the companions,... so to each his own. Never said we need kill-xp or nothing. We need kill-xp OR exploration-xp. Leveling is at the heart of any rpg; this is not some minor issue. I simply cannot level without doing quests. This fact is game breaking. ALL the IE games let you gain xp without doing quests. This game was pitched as a spiritual successor; not just some RPG Obsidian felt like making. We were promised the epic exploration of BG. Can any one please tell me how such a thing is even possible when the primary benefit of exploring is simply gone.

OBSIDIAN!!! Fix this and fix it soon! I need xp without doing quests!!! This is no way to do this. The IE fans deserve better.

He MAY just be referring to the beta. I hope...

Oh look, another kill-XP proponent who has an extremely narrow definition of the IE experience. Actually I'm a proponent of BG-style exploration and non-quest level progression. Whether they achieve this through kill-xp or objective xp doesn't really matter as long as the basic effect is achieved. There is nothing narrow about not being forced to do quest in order get xp for an IE game. Can you or anyone in the world give me even one example of a play through of an IE game they ONLY got xp from a quest? Xp is not some trivial detail; it is central to the game's system. Are you suggesting that the leveling system (Which is fueled by xp) isn't important in a game about leveling up?

If Obsidian forces us to do quests for xp; I want my money back. If this claim is true; anyone whom gave money to this project on the basis of the IE experience is entitled to a refund in full. Not a single IE game did something so awful and game breaking. OBSIDIAN! DONT GO DOWN THIS ROAD! GIVE US OBJECTIVE OR KILL XP! LET US EXPLORE AND HAVE FUN!!!

Glad to realize that you can magically know how everybody played the game. Perhaps you should use "I" instead of "you" since you are referring to your own experience. I get that you are kinda OCD and feel the need to squeeze every bit of xp out of the game, but that shouldn't be used as justification to remove a feature since that is kind of your issue and not anyone else's.

Are you seriously suggesting that quests are the ONLY way to get xp? I can't just go exploring and expect to get anything? Or is this just for the beta so far?

Nothing is broken. Even if the attributes didn't matter (Which they do) it wouldn't be broken; just silly and superficial.

There is choice. There is no way to make an effective mage-tank without putting points into CON, INT, and RES. There is no way to make an effective glass-canon without putting points into MIG, DEX, and either INT or PER. (For hyper glass cannon put points into both PER and INT by dumping CON and RES.) Spreading the attributes doesn't prove that attributes are meaningless.

Because we can comprehend the concepts behind them and how they affect certain builds. We don't need to wait to know that almost all conceivable builds have a major need for MIG. Which is why I have suggested giving the healing influence of might over to RES.

It all depends on what you want from the game. Right now attributes matter about half as much as they did in the IE games; while Obsidian added talents to pick up the strategic slack. Some people like this, and some people don't.

Yes. That's why if you choose a Ranger that neglects CON then you should get a companion with an ability instead of good stats.

Not completely as they help certain builds. If I'm making a mage-tank I'll be a lot better off with lots of CON for hp, RES so I don't get stunned, and INT to prolong my defense spells. How I distribute my attributes affects how effective my build is. If I went with MIG instead of RES I wouldn't be as good a tank for example

It won't be as effective for certain builds. I for example; don't like drawn out battles. As a result I tend to favor offensive attributes with most of my team. If I were to spread my attributes out evenly; my team wouldn't quite play the way I want it to.

It would definitely be much harder. I'm pretty sure it would be possible though. Just keep in mind that there are also talents in this game that help us develop our characters as well as attributes. Yes, but it is simply mind boggling to me that you could dump every attribute and still play the game without any problems. The game would just be somewhat harder and you would also have less dialogue options to choose from. This must be that balanced system that Sawyer was always going on about. ^^ It's because Obsidian has decided that talents should be important too. By adding in talents; they downplayed attributes.

That depends on the build. A very offensive mage might want to neglect CON or DEX in favor of PER. MIG is definitely too appealing for all builds though. It would definitely be much harder. I'm pretty sure it would be possible though. Just keep in mind that there are also talents in this game that help us develop our characters as well as attributes.

I've heard that there will be xp in the future for stuff like that. If not well; you already know what that will mean.

People want different attributes to be useful for different builds. Making a mage-tank? Better put lots of points into CON and RES. Making a super tank fighter? Better put points into CON, RES, and INT. Making a super offensive ranger? Better put points into MIG, DEX, and PER. What about a tank ranger? Put points into CON and RES. It's all about variety and using different builds to their strength.

I've posted this on other threads, but I'll post it here too: I've looked into this issue and I believe I have a simple solution to poe's attribute woes: A) Might should not affect healing rate. Damage and fortitude defense is enough. Right now might is op. This will fix it. B) Resolve should affect healing instead of might. Resolve is both under-powered and not useful enough for every class. This will fix it. C) Perception needs to be given a very minor chance to increase your crit rate. I'd say about +0.25%. This will fix perception. Give us 2 less attribute points Done. Poe will now have pretty balanced attributes. For the OP: Poe's attributes don't need to be revamped; just tweaked.

Back-row characters do have two stats they can relatively safely dump (RES and CON), but they have four they actually need. After playing with it for a while, I'm disliking the unintuitive aspects of the character system more than I'm liking the universally useful aspects. I don't think it'd be a big loss to drop the Healing bonus from Might as it doesn't really make sense and doing more damage is universally useful anyway. Maybe move that to CON so it'd be more useful for back-row priests at least, and let back-row wizards dump it if they want. As to RES, you could make it more useful for back-row types by having it affect special ability recovery time. That wouldn't be completely unintuitive. Eh, since everybody's doing this, here's my latest suggestion for revising the stats. MIG - damage DEX - accuracy CON - health and stamina INT - AoE and duration PER - interrupts and crit chance RES - healing and concentration This would mean that a "pure" support cleric for example could dump MIG and DEX since they wouldn't be interested in scoring hits or doing damage. I don't think that'd necessarily be a bad thing though; it could be an interesting role to play. THIS IS PERFECTION!!!

The title music starts off a little slow, but after a while it gets really epic. I think that Obsidian should make the title song start a little further in. Then it would sound epic upon starting the game.

Indeed. Resolve's base effect doesn't need to be improved. Resolve merely needs more appeal to more builds. By moving the power of healing from might which has too much appeal over to resolve; the attribute system would be better. Enhancing resolve's effect would only make perception worse.

Your premise is flawed. Intellect isn't a dump stat. Every class has a use for it.