JerekKruger

The definitions of sacred I see all reference God or religions.

Yeah I suspect my party will eat nothing but hardtack with the exception of just before boss fights (probably not there either).

What about Sacred Immolation? For non-religious characters it's a strange name. Not a big deal, but I tend to agree with the OP.

As far as I understood, injuries won't go away unless you rest. Which is what DexGames is saying. Resting requires food, Hardtack is food (and its cheap), you can carry tonnes of the stuff and rest after every battle if you want.

This is basically what I wanted Obsidian to do with Deadfire, although instead of Thaos I wanted the player character to simply be the reincarnation of the previous Watcher's soul. This seemed like a much neater way to explain why we're level 1 again that Eothas stealing your soul power and ties in well with the Wheel aspect of Eora. As for Thaos, the only reason I don't think it would work with him is the variety of endings he had, some of which make it pretty clear his soul is gone for good. I agree that he's a cool character concept.

Pretty much sums up my position too. I loved the health/endurance split so I'm sad to see it go, and as a non-rest spammer I liked the challenge of deciding when and when not to use spells* that per rest brought. I'm trying to remain open minded to per encounter spells, though the best I can hope for the new health/injury system is that it's not too bad: health/endurance is better in my opinion. Actually, when it comes to spell casting the thing I miss most from Pillars is the ability to learn spells from grimoires. That feature always gave me the feeling of my Wizard being a scholarly type, and whilst it has nothing to do with game mechanics this loss bothers me a lot. *As a side note I feel the problem of rest spamming could have been largely solved by simply removing all camping supplies from all locations apart from shops. That way to truly rest spam you'd have to trek back town every two or three rests, and whilst some people were willing to do that I doubt most were (especially with Pillars load times).

Honestly I'd say dwarfs are better thought out in Pillars because they are generic. I've always hated non-human races having some stereotype they all fit, with only humans being able to be completely rounded and varied individuals.

Quoted for truth as we cool kids used to say

Agreed. Whilst I don't want to completely out level all content it is a lot of fun to fight enemies that you once found challenging and beat them easily because you're more powerful. I think DA:O did this well with ogres: you fight an ogre early on and it's basically a tough boss fight, then later on ogres become just another enemy type. Pillars actually did this pretty well I think, at least in the early and mid game. On PotD the two forest lurkers near the shrine of Galawain are very tough if you fight them as early as possible (so of course I always do), but later on you'll regularly fight forest lurkers as part of bigger encounters along with delemgans etc. and they're very manageable. Where Pillars went wrong was towards the end where completionists would often completely out level the game.

Even if he makes a secret newsletter Josh will sign up to it under a pseudonym

That someone, by the way, is the writer Paul Dean. Josh interacts with him a lot on twitter-- this could very easily be an "in joke" between the two of them. It's very reminiscent of Paul's sense of humour in his SU&SD reviews so it might not even be an in joke, just a joke.

This would be my vote too (and I imagine most people's preference) but failing that I'll do what I did on my latter PoE runs and avoid leveling until I need to. I really don't like scaling of any sort.

I dunno, many ancient Britons lived in what is now called England, but they weren't English because England was the name given to the lands of the (later) Anglo-Saxons. It's possible Eir Glanfath refers to the lands (now) inhabited by Glanfathans

DSA? Also I thought characters said things like "my weapon does nothing" when your weapon is sufficiently ineffective. It didn't seem to only happen for immunities.

You guys mean Engwithins Regarding specialised arrows, I'd prefer then to be abilities or modals. Ammo management is not something that appeals to me these days.

My day job is doing maths research, it's hard not to In general I also like thinking about game mechanics and I like them to be elegant. This isn't a good reason for Obsidian to change the system, but it's a good enough reason for me not to like it.

Good point. I guess you could solve it either by (a) making damage bonuses flat bonuses or (b) making armour give % damage reduction instead. I guess one of my main problems with the new penetration system is it feels clunky. Compare "subtract DR from damage roll to obtain damage done" to "if your penetration is below the enemy's armour you do X% damage, if it's equal or greater you do full damage and if it's twice or more you do Y% damage". It feels like a fix that's been thrown at the problem and it leads to weird break points where a single extra point of penetration can increase damage dramatically.

People criticised it. As far as I can tell those criticisms took two forms: (i) that it was difficult to understand and (ii) that along with the graze system it resulted in lots of hits doing tiny amounts of damage (apparently a lot of people prefer to miss than to hit for a tiny amount). I don't understand (i) at all. The basic system is simple: DR is subtracted from your damage roll to determine the actual damage done. It's made slightly more complicated by the fact that there's a cap on how much damage can be reduced and enemies have different DRs against different damage types, but the basic concept is not hard to understand. As for (ii) there's certainly some truth to this, but I don't think it couldn't be overcome with tweaks to the existing system. As it is I don't think the new system is any better in this regard.

When it comes to AC D&D is, if not broken, stupid. Wearing full plate doesn't make you harder to hit (if anything it might make you easier to hit): what it does is make it so that many of the blows that do hit you don't do any harm. I can't understand why D&D might want to combine the two in order to reduce the number of dice rolls and mental maths needed to play (although plenty of, in my opinion, better RPGs manage not to) but once you've got a computer doing all that for you, you really shouldn't have to.

Sorry what I meant was people used to D&D armour expect better armour to make them harder to hit, so the fact that Pillars armour didn't do that was confusing (code for "I don't like change"). I can't say for certain, but I suspect a lot of the complaints about the DR system being confusing stem from exactly this. I wasn't suggesting one system was actually more complicated or simpler than the other. Unless there's a meaningful trade off this is the case yes. I'm not sure this is the case. With a bit of tweaking to DR values I think the Pillars system would also be perfectly fine. The issues came at the extremes I think.

Agreed. I've heard at least once that they changed the system because people found the old system hard to understand. I'm really not sure how this system is easier to understand, and honestly I suspect most people who found it hard to understand were struggling with the fact it's not a D&D AC system. Did the old system have some problems? Sure. But this new one seems to have at least as many.

Interesting that for Edér it states "no subclasses" under Fighter but not under Rogue. Has it been confirmed that he isn't able to take Rogue subclasses as well?

Okay thanks.

Excellent suggestions. Regarding 3, I think they're going somewhat in this direction by limiting which gear slots given attribute bonuses can appear on. For example, Might might only appear on gloves and hence there won't be suppression since there'd be no way to suppress it. Not sure how it'll end up being implemented, and I don't think suppression is being removed, but hopefully you'll like it more than Pillars.

Another question. If we grant for a moment that this delay entitles backers and preorderers to some sort of recompense*, what exactly do those of us who paid for the beta get? We're just as inconvenienced by the delay and we backed Deadfire $20 more but we get nothing? *I don't believe this, but this is the argument being made.