Zap Gun For Hire

Here are a couple screenshots of one example (1280x720 due to playing on a REALLY old computer): https://i.imgur.com/2nq8EUZ.png https://i.imgur.com/INHPzED.png I panned the 'camera' around once I got the auto-pause message. If a save file would help, I can attach one. (FWIW, the game state has that duplicated animal companion bug that I've seen referenced and I haven't bothered to clear it on that run-through)

As an aside, if it was only getting knocked down in combat which led to a 25% loss in Endurance, I could see (if not agree with) some of the arguments for leaving it as-is. Especially the comparison to dying in other cRPGs. But that ISN'T the only source. AIUI, any and all injuries lead to this 25% per loss. Getting injuries from traps and scripted interactions throws a pretty big wild card into this discussion, I think. Especially if there are going to be as many scripted interactions as there was in the White March. Just something to keep in mind here as we discuss this topic.

If I may provide an alternate viewpoint. ANY mechanic where the solution is to constantly spam something probably is flawed on some level, whether it be an "I Win" button in combat or an "I sleep after every third fight" button. Saying "Get Gud" really isn't an answer. Nor is "Play on lower difficulty". Mostly because people aren't complaining about the philosophy behind the mechanic, but the implementation. It seems to me that people aren't saying there should be no punishment for failure; they're saying that there should be more degrees of punishment. Perhaps there could be a way to cure/lessen one or two injuries without resting. Field Triage in the first game was a way to get back Health points. Maybe bring that back and have it heal (some of) the Endurance loss but NOT the other effects of injuries. Injuries still matter in this case, but they're not as bad. And the choice comes in with player builds if they choose to take Field Triage over something just as good or better. Maybe have it be 1/6 or 1/8 loss of Health from each knockdown/trap/whatever. There are plenty of ways to tweak this mechanic without sacrificing the principle of it.

Good News, Everyone! From the thread I started on this subject: So here's hoping that they do end up adding this option.

Highlighted. This is my big problem with it. For players who want to see thieves punished, there is a clear solution and logical resolution. For players who agree that the person accused is a no good lazy bum who is hurting the village in the long run there is one clear solution and at least a couple of logical resolutions. But for folks who want to side with the thief for reasons which become clear as the quest unfolds, there is no resolution. Which is double irksome since the side-with-the-thief solution is tagged with a Benevolent marker when talking with them. I can see getting less XP or even a minor village reputation hit for doing the 'right' thing. It's a moral choice after all. Mostly I just want to see some resolution for siding with the thief. Okay, mostly I want it off my Quest List. More seriously, once I see what that resolution is, THEN I can complain or agree about it here.

That's where the reed is (it's called Stained Kaora Reeds). I have a picture of where it can be found here: https://i.imgur.com/veFnUH6.png I've given my thoughts on how it plays out in this thread in the bugs section: https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/94471-plucked-fruit-task-not-ending-in-specific-situation-maybe/ But to expand on it, I think it's a nice moral dilemma, but I think at least one obvious solution isn't implemented yet (which I commented on in the thread). I ALSO think it's going to be a controversial quest since there isn't currently a 'nice/just' way to make everyone happy. Mostly because the villagers are, shall we say, stuck in their ways. The optimal solution

There's a bundle of reeds lying on the ground near the north end of the map (right near the north east exit) that's fairly easy to miss. If you Inspect it (from right clicking on it in the inventory screen), you get a Journal update and you can talk to Mukumu about your findings, though this isn't necessary to complete the quest. What you MIGHT need to do is talk to first and talk to that character about what they think about the whole situation. For me, here are the steps I followed to find the fruit: In the middle of all of that I did talk to a few people in town about the fruit, including one instance of going back to Mukumu when I had suspicion that Tamru was innocent, but no proof as of yet (he told me to bugger off until I had proof). That MAY be the problem here. As far as I know, showing Mukumu the reeds from the northern area of town isn't necessary to complete the quest. If this doesn't work, let me know I and I can try to complete a fool-proof list of finishing the task for you.

Headed to spoilers here: Dunno. I would think it should be possible to at least say something to Mukumu like, "[Lie] Welp. Tried my best to find the fruit, do what you will with the prisoner."

(I'm keeping spoilers out of this post for the most part) So I found out who was behind the Plucked Fruit quest and confronted them. One of the choices given to the player is to let the person keep doing what they were doing with the fruit. Fair enuf. But after agreeing not to spill their secret, I can't find a way to finish the quest. When I go back to Mukumu, I don't have any further options to try to close out the quest UNLESS I have the fruit with me. Which rather defeats the whole purpose of agreeing with the person responsible if I agree with that person's actions. I don't know if this is a bug or not though. At the very least I would think it should be possible to close out this quest in such a way to let the person responsible do what they were doing and then deal with the consequences of keeping the secret of who was really responsible. Then again, maybe I'm missing something obvious here. Has anyone finished this quest WITHOUT having the fruit in their possession?

Maybe you need an Island Aumaua *from* the Deadfire Archipelago? Just did a quick check and it looks like if one is BOTH from the Deadfire AND an Island Aumaua, then at least some of those Deadfire options will indeed be available. Don't know if that's as intended or not.

Maybe you need an Island Aumaua *from* the Deadfire Archipelago? I'll check that out in a couple of hours when I get back to my wintel box. I did confirm while doing a quick speedrun last night that sometimes the Deadfire Archipelago background will process and sometimes it won't, as noted in this thread: https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/94396-stat-checks-ghost-heart-and-broodmother/?hl=deadfire That is, it wasn't random for a specific check (it'll either always fail or always succeed), but I was able to get a successful Deadfire check on occasion when talking to people. From what I recall, nearly every time the Deadfire background successfully proced it was in an automatic skill check situation as opposed to a dialogue choice option, but I didn't do a rigorous test since it was late at night, so I could be misremembering. Something screwy going on though. Tempted to look at the xmls to see if I can suss anything out.

I THINK this is all of the NPCs in the area turning on (some of?) their modals. Something to that effect at least. It was highly annoying as I couldn't move at the beginning of the game without constantly having to hit the space bar and caused me to turn off Auto-Pause for Spell Cast.

Yes, having a toggle for icon/text/both would be VERY helpful. Part of the reason is the sheer number of things covered: Class Disposition Background And who knows what else. I'm sure in time, I'd be able to remember them all, but it seems to be very newbie unfriendly. It's just slightly annoying to keep going back and hovering over an icon to see what it is. Don't get me wrong, I do like the icons, which is why a 'both' toggle would be very nice. But it's still a pain to try to remember the non-intuitive icons like the background ones.

Turns out I was wrong about the beta updating (I checked the version numbers). What IS happening is fairly interesting, though. For the two instances I mentioned in the OP, if the main character has the Deadfire background, a Requirement Not Met for Deadfire Archipelago occurs. If ANY OTHER background is chosen, however, the game says that an Island Aumaua background is needed, which is... Strange. And makes me wonder if it is related to the bug mentioned in this thread: https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/94397-island-aumaua-pc-conversation-options/ Curious, I did start an Island Aumaua character and I was not able to met the requirements in the conversations I mentioned above, so that's not it either.

Looks like there was a game update tonight. The two places where this said Deadfire Archipelago background now say Island Aumaua, which I presume works as intended (haven't checked it yet).

I created a new character with the beta and I found if I try to select a dialogue option that is supposed to be available to characters from the Deadfire Archipelago, I instead get the Requirement Not Met tag. I have the following screenshots showing the bug in action, along with a screenshot showing the character is from the Deadfire: https://i.imgur.com/KkMGM7m.png https://i.imgur.com/OwM1Uic.png https://i.imgur.com/7GAzxKC.png I have a save file attached set at the beginning of the beta. The easiest way to replicate this bug is to talk to Himuihi off to the northeast of the docks. After her introductory conversation, the very first set of dialogue options will have one for the Deadfire background that this character should be able to choose, but can't. EDIT: Saved game now attached as a zipped file. Ran (Tikawara) (a6accaf9-013e-4a65-a832-3df0932a8ee7) (754589060).zip