gkathellar

Well, apparently vocalization is the difference between a word sounding okay, and a word sounding like a a stupid attempt to be different for the sake of being different.

Eh, I've seen better.

Right. I'm just throwing it out there - my preference is a paladin tank and a monk off-tank, and I've never had problems with mobs moving past them as long as they're a good distance forward. The difference may just be number of tanks. /le shrug

Because there was only room for eight slots on the GU...wait, no, that's not true. I got nothing.

I think a lot of this review is just bulls*** grousing, and honestly, it's pretty clear that it's going to be from the start. The whining about character options being too "archetypal" and not original enough, the stuff about level-ups not having enough interaction ... it's clear that the reviewer is aware of some of the real problems with the game, but the fact that he's fixated on things that were always functions of the IE games makes it difficult for me to respect his opinion. Then he says things like, "so in other words not-saving-throws," I really get the impression that he is committed to finding things to be irritated about, and I lose any ability to take anything he says seriously. Ultimately, I give this reviewer a 3/10 - good observational skills, but no awareness of what observations mean or the context that they occur in.

No, but I feel totally within my rights for calling out a name that sounds stupid. And fampyr sounds stupid.

Yeah, it's so pathetic that we ask for actual rigor before presenting test results as meaningful.

That may be why. Enemies tend to target whoever has the lowest deflection within a certain radius, so if you only have 1 tank, it's going to be hard for you to catch mobs of 5+ without a doorway or something. 2 tanks makes your life a lot easier.

No.

seems unlikely since nature and death are more or less ass. fire is cool but usually in a pretty specific build sorta way since it can't beat out orlan for tanking in a party(imo). Nature and Death aren't supposed to be ass, it's just that they're complete and utter failures of design.

Because it would be irritating and basically define your character by their class?

Those are all long enough already. They don't need the boost. If you're desperate to have all three conversation stats, I cede the point. But really, two maxed out is more than enough.

Drop Int to 10 or so. The Paladin aura is too small to start with for the Int multiplier to be useful. And do not, do not, do not take Hold the Line. Engagement does not assist you with tanking in any meaningful way. The AI doesn't give a damn about it (and it shouldn't, considering this build's disengagement attacks are worthless). I don't know why people hold on to this myth - frankly, you can turn off engagement altogether, and enemies will still mob your tank. Yes, you are. Guardian is garbage.

The fact that none of you have mentioned bald blubbering bugbears yet is just really disappointing to me. For shame, forum. For shame.

I want a sequel set in the Mystical Land of Frolicking Naked Nymphs Ixamitl.

Good luck finding Thanos. Even if you do, how will you deal with the infinity gauntlet? Even if you do that, no doubt it will have been part of his plan all along.

What's weird is that it's not even consistent. There are dialogues where you can say, "nope, I don't see this as a problem." And you stop seeing random execution images after the first couple of maps, so ... yeah, it's weird.

If the loot table doesn't screw you over, the x1.2 damage items are fantastic.

This.

That would require Aloth adventuring with the Watcher and not being sacrificed to the Blood Pool of Skaen to be canon.

I could complain about how that would just result in people playing chicken for 3/4 of a fight, or about how it would just result in armored casters and naked frontliners. You can always switch to Easy. I feel like you're trying to support your own point by saying that anyone who doesn't isn't sufficiently HARDCORE PC GAMER, but my objection really has nothing to do with that. What you are proposing would make the game aesthetically displeasing, on account of things like the playing chicken and the naked frontliners and the armored squishies. If your response to that is "turn down the difficulty, nub," then that mostly sounds like an admission that those things are exactly what would happen. And the game where those things are exactly what would happen is not a game I want to play - or, frankly, a game that would bear much resemblance to the IE games that PoE is supposed to resemble. Game AI really should not be in the business of dictating playstyle, and that's what the thing you're describing would do. But hey, at least we wouldn't have dedicated tanks anymore, right?

Oh god that firearms mod is ludicrous, is that the one that lets you dual weild the blunderbuss? At that point it seems like you're not even playing the same game. Instead, you're playing a game where elf!Clint Eastwood murders everything. EVERYTHING.

Hey, that man looks pretty good in that cape.

I tend to agree, but the larger point is this - there is no "easy" fix. Systems are complex. They intertwine in unpredictable ways, and produce unpredictable results. Any systemic change that doesn't extend out of that system's core mechanics is likely to cause as many problems as it solves. I could complain about how that would just result in people playing chicken for 3/4 of a fight, or about how it would just result in armored casters and naked frontliners.

That is a very compelling point, and seems well-supported. Diplomatic/Rational gets my vote, then.