Search the Community

great game, really enjoying my time here so far. not found any real bugs yet but i do have a big suggestion. is it possible to make a way to rename the game svae files? i have a single player game im playing and also a multiplayer game. when i go to load game it shows over 10 different save files ( because i have auto save turned on) and it is difficult to see which game file i need to select if i want to go to my last single player save or my last multi player save.

Could we please have either different list or a better display for saved games. Currently I host a WHOA multi along and I play single Mild. They are both in the same list and I want to play a WHOA single game but it looks like it will clash with my multi WHOA in the game list.

Just a couple Quality of Life suggestions, I know I've seen a master thread trying to do this, but all it devolved into was "i agree" not a clean thread at all. 1. When equipping armor, the armor takes up an inventory slot still, this should not be the case. 2. When transferring items from inventory to storage, a move stack option would be nice. Bugs/unintended exploits 1. When on top of the mysterious machine, you can stand in the middle and range attack larva and other ground based mobs and have no threat of being attacked by them. 2. Gotten stuck in grass blades and Clovers a few times. Seemed like a geography glitch more than anything.

Since the game and its prequel has been lacking multiplayer support from the beginning, but my friends and I still want to play them that way, for replayability. I've been using Remote Play Together on Steam for a while, and I would LOVE Deadfire to support that feature. It would allow us to play it 'hot-seat' online, and since the addition of turn-based gameplay it would be perfect for our purposes. I don't know how much it would cost to do this, but I had to try. Thanks for reading. Edit: it looks like an easy process! https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/features/remoteplay Please please please make it possible

I'm loving outer worlds.. Brilliant. Only two things I'd change at this point of my discovery... Multi quest tracking (already been suggested on forum) & Quicksave(ps4) , which could be placed just below 'resume' on the current options screen. Of course, the same save restrictions would apply

I wanted to do a playthrough where I would have the worst character (every trait as very bad and all skills one) but noticed that you can't create a character until you spend all trait/skill points. It would be great to be able to make a character without having to invest all the points. It would also be nice if the "skill and perks available" notice would go away after a while because it makes holding on to skill points very annoying.

As the title said the game needs a flashlight or some weapon mod functioning as a flashlight some darker parts of the ingame places kinda needs it imo

I would love to see more interesting, gameplay changing perks, or a flaw system where you do not get a perk point but some tradeoff, for example: Go Slow, Reach Farther: If time is money you are rich. You cannot sprint anymore, but you walking speed is increased by 25%. Nerves of Glass: Spacer's Choice developed a neuro optical implant allowing for fast reflexes, unfortunately the glass wires can break easily. TTD time increased by 100%, health decreased by 50%. Far Sighted: +50% damage at distances above 15 meters, -50% damage below 5 meters. Space Ninja: You get 40points in sneak, but only when your carry weight is below 50kg. Wisdom of Elderly: Thanks to your old age, you are more experienced (gain 3 levels immediately), but also frail (movement speed -25%, can wear light armor only). Fight Through the Pain : You do +50% damage against enemies, but 5% of that hurts you instead. etc. This combined flaw / perk solution would be more immersion friendly. Right now many perks seem to be by the numbers, and having a flaw right permanently crippled does not seem to worth the to accept with the current perks. Companion perks (with the exception of the highlighted ones, have nothing to do with the companion's skill or personality, and thus are not so interesting. Summary: Please make perks interesting. Thanks.

Regarding the quest Salt in the Wound, it's marked as Finished when the brawl is finished. The final entry in the Journal is simply "I could find a way to break up the scene, or at least get the fight over with." I would suggest that it would perhaps be more natural to have the Journal update upon completing the brawl with a note about the outcome, and then follow it with something along the lines of: "I should go back and talk to Nera [about reward/what happened/somesuch]" Then after speaking with Nera (and perhaps also Ezzali?) the task is marked as Complete. This way it A) proviudes a conclusion in the Journal, and B) you're guided back to collect the reward(s) and get the follow-up quests from Ezzali.

I am a new player. It take me long time to understand the "Disposition" concept of this game. As far as I know, it is just a social label. Its meaning is similar to the meaning of the "Public Persona" Public Persona - the aspect of someone's character that is presented to or perceived by others. What do you think about this?

I just threw together this example image from a screenshot. My suggestion is simply that it might help players if something like this exist in-game: NOTE: The spells that have no "defense icon" in their top-left corner, either is a buff/summon or always hits. The purpose of this chart is to helps me decide for instance: Get a better understanding of the limitations of the Wizard specialization choices. What are you opting out of when you pick a certain school? I found it was very difficult to determining which spells you loose at glance. After looking below I feel like I could live without Enchanting and Conjuration. That is great there is a school that gives up just those two, Illutionist. Oh, but wait. Illusion doesn't have a 7th or 9th level spell. So, that was what Josh was referring to in one of the update videos. Not all summoned weapons target deflection, perhaps my Battle Mage should pick up both staves. What spells should I pick at level up? Should I pick the 2nd level spell that causes blind when you already have the 1st level spell Chill Fog. Oh, one targets the opponent's Fortitude while the other targets Will. What do you all say, wouldn't you like to see similar tool in game, or are you all making your own spread sheets, or keep it all in your head? (In the future I might throw together something similar to all the Grimoires and what they cover in the tree, so you can make a Wizard multi-class that relies less on spells picked up during the level-up screen and thus leaves more room for abilities the other class.)

Maybe its just me, but having two different effects both called 'Spell Resistance' is a bit confusing. There are a few, which specify in the description, which affect Hostile spells only, and others which don't. I guess the idea is that you need to manually read through everything to figure out which it is, and if it doesn't state either way, it should be all spells? It could be simpler, if you called them 'Spell Immunity' which would make them immune to all spells, and 'Spell Resistance' which makes them resist hostile spells. Or something like that. Also, some clarification with the Spell Reflect stuff would be handy, stating all spells or Hostile ones... after all the confusion and awkwardness with Resistance I stayed clear of them, since it was unclear if I'd be reflecting my own spells or not.

Description: Playing as a Drug addicted monk, but noticed that my buffs didn't stack as expected. While using Quick Strikes you gain the quick buff which in turn suppress my Taru Taru Chew dexterity bonus. Is this really working as intended? If so please reconsider or make a compromise. Steps to Reproduce the Issue: 1. Use any drug that boost a stat. 2. Now use any buff related to step 1 stat increase. 3. This drug effect is now suppressed if buff is higher than the drug effect. Compromise: For example Half drug bonus applies while suppressed. Or give Nalpazca subclass a special trait that allows drugs to stack with buffs. What I'd like to see if this is working as intended (If this is not a bug) Change it so that drugs stack but with half bonus for all classes. For Nalpazca allow full stack alternatively make us spend one passive point on it.

So, this is just something i thought yesterday as i went thought some companions quests. I have no problem with the quests themselves, i'm fine with the short duration and the apparent "lack of conclusion" i think that what's life's like and (most) histories have no satisfactory conclusions. (On the same note, I enjoyed Edér's quest from the first game) That aside, i DO think that the RESULTS of the quests are kind of lackluster and i was wondering why. *I may address some spoilers in the way, so be warned!* My take on this is: the companions show no change after the quests AT ALL. Even when quests signal those changes they are only TOLD to the player, you never EXPERIENCE they afterwards. So, my suggestion is: Some little changes on the companion subjective stats (dispositions, relationships, etc) after the quest, taking into account what ending the companion achieved. Maybe the companion change some of their disposition values (stop being lighthearted, beginning pitying their situation, stop praising themselves, etc), make some OTHER party NPC more close (or more distant) from them or AT LEAST influence their relationship in some degree. That way you cold make those quests more Impactful to the player without the need to rewrite them at all. I do realize that some changes maybe go wrong with the banter between some NPC, but i guess this can be tuned in some ways so it doesn't get all strange. Either way i still think that this would benefit the accomplishment the player gets from these quests, since it would make you feel like you made some difference on their lives or AT LEAST you were part of an really important and decisive moment in their history. Sorry for my bad grammar, btw, English is not my first language Edit: Another thing pointed by @CENIC and @Wormerine is that the changes should be tied TO THE QUEST AND THE RESULTS from it, not some arbitrary changes made by the player to make the companions get along nice, like some brainwash bull**** haha

Greedings, i was thinking of some kind of active party (combat, 5 members) and non-active party (conversations, reactivity, banter, no size limit) system. Maybe attaching companion's content (dialogues, banters, etc) to invisible objects? if that makes sense I make just one complete play through, so the companions i dont bring are just lost forever, and i noticed recently that there are a fair amount of people who see this (i saw some similar suggestions somewhere) or other consequences of the party limitation as a problem, so i decided to try and suggest this. Some thoughs on this: -People who don't replay multiple times or are just interested on interactions and banter can experience the companions they want, all of them (companions, sidekicks, imaginarly developed hirelings). -People don't have to change party members giving one companion to get another, maybe the content missed of one companion if you want 6 is not a big deal (and note that the medium player will just not change party members) but there are 11 NPCs (in the base game) and hirelings. -Would help people give a chance to companiona that they dont like or just are not in their favorites at the start. -People can bring companions that they want to bring because of the story, but wouldn't for combat related reasons. -People can choose the active party members(companion, sidekick, hireling) they really want for combat. -Invisible companions can reduce inmersion, but i think its worth for the adventages, and if you dont think about it, it won't be a problem. -At first though may look like it reduce replayability, but most people play the game just ones, among the people who replay the game multiple times little will make multiple complete playthroughs, and among those, they will not make the same choices, leading to different reactivity from companions, so unless the only variant on different playtrhoughs on the actual system is the party composition (and the main reason to do this would be the companions), the implementation of non-active party members results just in more content and freedom on the way people want to play. -In any case, people can decide who are the members of the non-active party. I wanted to give me a voice on what is a huge problem for me and what better than the official forums. I know this wont be a very accepted idea on these forums, but i made a poll anyway. Live long and prosper, and my apologies for my bad english.

This will be a large entry so bear with me. I've done a lot of thinking about this because if I'm to send a letter to someone who may choose to run with this, it needs to be a solid concept. I've been a Fallout fan for years, and I recently did another playthrough of New Vegas. Still enjoyable, still stunned at how entertained I was, and still wanting more. A lot of times, especially with the Fallout games, the developers like to let the lore tell the story about what happened later; the fallout of your decisions, so to speak. You'll hear about the Chosen One or the Lone Wanderer in future games no matter how sparse the rumors. In this regard Obsidian was very clever in opting only for hints at what had been occurring on the east coast since Fallout 3. With the closing of New Vegas the story indeed felt complete... or at least so I thought. However, after some pondering and due consideration I have come to the conclusion that that is not a necessity. Both Obsidiean and Bethesda LOVE to experiment. Granted, Bethesda seems to have opted a bit more for universal acceptance of their work, with the advent of Skyrim and all the appeal to previously untapped markets of gamers who fancy other genres perhaps but not intentionally at the expense of their core consumers. Either way, the game was new, diverged a bit from it's origins, and it was still a wonderful experience. We all know and hope that Bethesda continues to bring Obsidian into the fold. There's been a lot of suggestions and hopes from both sides of the fence that Betheda continue developing their East Coast dystopia while allowing Obsidian to further develope the West Coast so well established by past Fallout titles. It is a good balance, especially if the teams consult one another and play the titles/take notes regarding what occurred in their counterpart's games so that they can properly interweave the two with perhaps a few slight references and nods; acknowledging the shared universe. With that said, perhaps Obsidean should consider a strange yet new direction that no Fallout has really taken before. Not something that establishes a pattern for future titles, but something that can really give themselves and their fans something new and intriguing to try: the "file transfer" or "contigent continuity" cencept. Mass Effect utilized the idea quite well. The idea that your character would become something more, and that your previous decisions carried weight in future games. Bioware, however, were not the first to dream up this ingenious aspect of gaming. The Suffering, a 2004 survival-horror game, did the same. Although theirs was a more straightforward way of handling the idea, Midway/Surreal did something interesting for gaming by making decisions matter. The Suffering read your save game data and loaded the outcomes from one of three possibilities based on decisions made within the games like saving someone or killing them. Long before that, Psycho Mantis of Metal Gear Solid would comment on the type of person you are based on the information the game extracted from your memory card regarding which games you played. This idea is time-tested as being extremely satisfying to gamers because unlike the "ulitmate end" they experience with most games, there is a feeling of genuine accomplishment regarding everything you did. And despite its media, is that not what many video games strive for? A closer and closer reflection of the person wielding the controller or keyboard? There are MANY ways to handle this, all of which would work with varying degrees of difficulty for the developer and any of which should be HIGHLY satisfying for consumers thus ensuring good sales figures for the game, though in all honesty, I can't think of a main-series Fallout that didn't sell well. I will lay out these ideas by number for organization. 1. The TRUE continuance. In this scenario, YOU ARE THE COURIER. You pick up where you left off, whether years later, or simply right after the battle at Hoover Dam. Methods of character extraction - Since unlike Mass Effect, Obsidian likely did not plan on such a direct sequel and has such would not have "flagged" outcomes in the file beyond what can be read by the game itself for the ending, there would be two easy ways to handle this. -First way: Release a patch for the original New Vegas that would both set markers for reputation outcomes and end came scenarios. Since the original gmae had you load a save prior to the completion of the battle at Hoover Dam after completing it, this way might be difficult but surely not impossible. I also know that the games use character-gen codes for appearence, so that would be an easy way to import the character design, though that's largely unimportant. -Second way: A storied menu at the start of the game where a narrator tells about the story of the Courier and you determine the outcome of the decisions and reputations in the first game. -Alternatively: Just request the outcome of New Vegas with regard to who holds control, excluding the various faction and town based outcomes. This way is a bit less substantial, but it would relieve a LOT of stress on Obsidean's part for developing a game given how many different outcomes there are for each settlement and faction especially when you include the outcomes of DLC like Old World Blues. With this first way, it would be interesting to continue on with your character. Features could be added that allow you to make economical and militaristic decisions given you chose an independant Vegas in the first game like choosing how to manage New Vegas with regard to security which could increase or decrease monthly earnings. Letting everyone in would increase earnings but run a higher risk of raiders and the like trying to take New Vegas and scaring people away. Alternatively, letting too few factrions into New Vegas would result in a low income which would not only provide the player with less benefits but remove features of New Vegas if enough time passes since there is not enough money flowing in to fund them. Same thing could go for the casinos, you could decide to lower your cut or squeeze them, affecting how well they do and whether or not the club stays open. This same feature could work with ANY of the four outcomes given Obsidian goes the route of letting your character take control. For example, Caesar or Colonel Moore could put the Courier in charge of managing Vegas. Same thing could go for House. In this way, the choice you made to align with a faction STILL allows Obsidian the leniency of pre-progamming the inevitability that your character runs New Vegas without comprimising the faction you chose. Gamers too often complain that they are not given a choice that results in diversity without realizing the enormity of programming a game that widely diverges based on decisions. To do this, it would likely take a developer far too many years to put the game out on the same console, let alone enough resources and funding that would likely outweigh the cost-benefit of even making the game in the first place. As much as I understand the disappointment of ME3's ending, there is a large following of people that understand that EA put them on a timeline and budget, which was not their choice. Working with Bethesda would allow Obsidean some room to manuever since Bethesda technically owns Zenimax, meaning the developer runs their own producer, which is a HIUGE advantage that allows them time and funding to complete games as they see fit. This is why we saw a 5 year gap between Oblivion and Skyrim, and why we are seeing such a huge gap between Fallout 3 and Fallout 4. The rumors for Fallout 4 are only just NOW circulating, so that should give you an idea. I feel this idea would be more fan-based than it would dev-based given how much time and effort it would take to complete such a game. 2. The comprimise. You are NOT the Courier. You exist in or around the Mojave Wasteland. You are a character relevant to the Courier's story. You now opertate in a Vegas controlled by the previous protagonist, and as such his/her decisions weigh on the setting and lifestyle you lead. There will be a lot less explanation on this one than the previous entry because I've covered a lot of possibilities with that one that can apply to this and the following one. In this scenario, perhaps you are a character that does the Courier's bidding, or are trying to take him/her down. Or perhaps the Courier is an entity beyond what you can hope to work with. Either way, the decisions you made in New Vegas can still affect the landscape, the atmosphere, and many elements in the Mojave. Within this scenario, less choices need to be made regarding what you did in the previous game, and perhaps we could even have a voiced Courier where you choose at the beginning whether your Courier was male or female, and what faction they allied with. 3. The reasonable. In this instance, New Vegas is DLC. This game takes place in a nearby land, or at least near enough for your character to visit New Vegas. At the beginning of this DLC, you choose a few details regarding your previous character like who you sided with, whether the characer was male or female, etc. Obsidean could build an interesting plot for a DLC that involves the previous Courier and allows you to explore a new more fully developed New Vegas shaped by the decisions made in the previous game. That ends the scenarios that I have been able to come up with. I'm sure there are more possibilites, but I believe I've given the most basic and probable ones. Thing is, places like Kickstarter have managed to revive games like Wasteland, and even produce consoles like OUYA. If a site where you can donate money can do something like that, then you can imagine what fans can do when they ALREADY love a series that has solid funding. A series where fans can promise their interest and their intent to purchase. I don't know whether or not Bethesda plans to give Obsidian further chances to expand the franchise, but I can tell you a lot of people loved New Vegas and I'm quite sure many of you would be more than willing to shell out a few sheckles for something like this. I will end with this, and am more than open to further propositions and comments. Just please, be eloquent. Gamers made Wasteland 2 happen, gamers made Bioware create the Extended Cut for Mass Effect 3. YOUR VOICES MATTER! All I can hope for is that Obsidean listens to its fans. All I can hope for is that Bethesda does the same. Even if it never happens, the fact that the desire was acknowledged matters. I assume that Obsidean isn't working on a future Fallout because I assume that they would alternate with Bethesda, and since Bethesda has only recently begun its work on Fallout 4, it's a fair assumption. What does this mean? It means TIME. It means Obsidian has the time to propose the idea to Bethesda. It means they have the time to work on it with the new Creative engine, which I assume Bethesda will use, it means they have time to listen to fans, to develop the game, to hear our battlecries! P.S. I can't go back to a Fallout that doesn't include gambling. I really can't. That's a simple fact. My friend and I were so engrossed in the atmosphere of it that we are ordering custom cards and poker chips that are factory distressed to look like cards and chips that appear in New Vegas. Both display the logo of The Tops Casino. We are even building a Blackjack table that matches ones seen in The Tops, and several of our friends have committed to weekly blackjack games. Nerdy? We don't think so. The environment in New Vegas was something else. The old world music combined with the decrepit casinos and the fun of gambling attracted us to something we'd otherwise not cared about beyond perhaps the occasional fantasy football league.

Hello, I recently got the online version of this game (both on PC & Phone) and I have been enjoying it. There is one thing that drives me a little crazy. There is this requirement that you discard down to 10 unused cards and then they give you this gold. I don't mind having to "clean up and prioritize" down to 10. I consider it a "carry capacity limit" and getting gold is both a good way to do that and re-enforces the way I think about it. What I don't like is having only the 500 gold piece chests to buy from. I end up having to get ride of potions and common equipment. However I find if I change my party sometimes I need common equipment. Sometimes I am forced to banish party equipment I need. As far as the chest go they give great equipment that might be useful depending on my party and what I already have. My humble suggestion for a solution is to create another option for selling common items and disposables. Maybe only of items I have discarded (like a buy back program) or unlimited numbers of items I have unlocked (so I have to find the first healing potion, but then I can buy them). Limiting all items to 1 and resetting them after completing a mission pass or fail is fine. But if I lose my basic thieves tools, I would like to be able to buy them back. Masterwork tools I might have to find every time but if I discarded one, maybe there is a chance it appears in the shop later as a random uncommon. I would at times be willing to pay 250 gold for a healing potion, set of thieves tools, or any number of temporary common gear for a specific mission. Even thought I recognize I get way beet cards with the 500 gold chests. Comparing the physical card game to the online game. If I was buying packs I would also buy singles from other players or from card shops. I used to buy "trash commons" for 50 cents, uncommon cards for $1, and rare+ on negotiated or price guide prices at a my local card shop (back when I used to play a lot of CCGs) even though packs were $2.50 - $4.50 each and I knew I would eventually get those common/uncommon cards. It was just a matter of needing 3 common cards now and only have 1 or 2. This made me willing to pay a higher price each for not having to farm so that I could just have fun. If such a thing exist on the online version let me know. Other wise I am just suggesting this because it would make the in game gold more valuable and the game less tedious and more fun in my opinion. Thanks for reading.

I had an idea while answering a discussion, but I liked it so much that I decided to make a post about it. Basically the community noticed that the injuries can be greatly debilitating, like a Gaping Wound, and are perceived as overly-punishing. So, I thought about a couple of ways to improve that aspect. I would overhaul the troublesome or harsh aspects of the injury system by sorting the gravity of the injuries according the number of wounds already obtained (in a progressive way). Another way to do it could be to determine gravity of wounds according the negative health value reached upon receiving a killing blow (overkill mechanic). An example: Progressive Injury System 1st Injury- Minor wound (low debilitation, can heal in time) 2nd Injury- Medium wound (medium debilitation, 50% chance to self heal in time OR heals in long time) 3rd Injury- Mortal wound (high debilitation, won't heal unless treated) 4th Injury- Death (definitive debilitation, won't heal unless reloading a prior save, haha) OR: Overkill Injury System Calculate "overkill value" (the damage below 0 health points) and set gravity of the injury received accordingly. The following numerical values are provided to give an example. PC at 50 HP, receives 50 damage, gain Minor wound (low debilitation, can heal in time) PC at 50 HP, receives 100 damage, gain Medium wound (medium debilitation, 50% chance to self heal in time OR heals in long time) PC at 50 HP, receives 150 damage, gain Mortal wound (high debilitation, won't heal unless treated) The reason I am suggesting such methods is simple: In the Progressive example, the aim is to forgive little mistakes and not push the player to rest after each battle "gone slightly wrong", while increasingly punish a careless player or a player that is facing many powerful enemies in succession, and therefore is probably in an area where he/ she shouldn't be at that given level. The Overkill example follows the same rules, since if an enemy manages to overkill a character with a big margin, and therefore causing a highly debilitating injury, it probably means that the player is in an area with higher level requirement than the one currently possessed by the party, or using Mages and Rogues as tanks without investing in resistances. Both are seemingly realistic, balanced and immersive.

What is this? A slug race? A sloth parade? Real time with pause means Real Time, what is this thing you did with the combat? You did it right in Pillars of Eternity Act I. Normal Speed should be in real time, and without trained warriors staring at an enemy bashing their skulls for 4-6 seconds! Slow Speed should be reintroduced, same as it was in POE 1. Fast Speed should be as it is now. On top of that, there is Pause. Just make sure to provide a simple and clear Tutorial and even the King of Dumblandia will get it. Wanna really help people with mental problems? Put 2 Slow Speed modes instead. Slow and Super Slow! (and call it console-speed, haha!) Thanks for reading! PS: A friend wanted to say hello, the only one that appreciate the new slowness! FINALLY HE CAN PLAY TOO!!!

Not sure if there is already one of these threads, but if you have any suggestions please drop them below. Hopefully the devs will take them into account. Suggestions: 1: A way to purchase a reduced price RoTR extra content bundle for when you already have all of the things purchasable with gold, since $25 feels like too much for whatever that extra deck comes with. 2: A higher chest tier which only gives items you don't have yet or which lets you pick the deck the items are drawn from. 3: Re-spec heroes for 500 gold. 4: Making teleport boots ignore movement restrictions. 5: Adding optional objectives for quests. 6: Adding more daily missions so we have options and more variety. 7: Having a confirmation screen when clicking not to close a location, or when it happens while encountering a boss let us use that character to close that location again, as it was a clear mistake. Thanks for reading

In PoE, unless you've read a Walkthrough or you have already played the game, you don't know what kind of enemies you will encounter in the next area you explore. So your characters carry around a chest filled with 107 weapons, 23 suits of armor, 2310 potions/scrolls/traps that you could use at any time. Which I feel misses an opportunity. As such, I'd like PoE 2 to offer the ability to ask locals, read notices or hire a scout that can give you information on an area well before you visit so you can pick the appropriate weapons, carry the necessary potions and load in the optimal spells. I'd love for equipment to allow for the bonuses to be changed at certain locations, that way you could choose to Enchant the equipment to allow you to cut through the mass enemies at that site, or be more effective against the few powerful leaders there. I've read the goal by the developers is to make the combat less of a filler and more interesting and I think arriving at a town, talking with the locals find out the area you are going to explore is filled with strong but dim witted Ogres, but lead by a clever Spirit. At the moment, I think most people use the same equipment most of the time. I like in the Witcher you could chat to people to get information about a Contract, Use a Bestiary to gain information on those creatures and then apply an oil to give an advantage before entering an area, same weapon, but correct oils give significant benefits. Instead of ripping off The Witcher, why not allow for replaceable Enchantments?

I recently tried to play as ranger, but I found what I consider to be a detrimental factor in its balancing, other than in the fun playing it. Or you develop Ranged abilities Or you take pet's ones. Mixing is unsatisfying in my experience. Now, my frustration comes from the fact that the pet IS a second character, I am forced to keep it but its death cripples my Ranger performance. Therefore to augment its functionality and survive-ability I must devolve the points gained from levelling up on said improvements. This result in a very boring Ranger. If instead I decide to strengthen my Ranger, then the pet becomes much of a burden and more frustrating than fun. I've been pondering a lot about it, and I honestly think that the "pet only" abilities (like DR reduction, knock-down, or damage boost) should be automatically unlocked upon levelling up much as the priest spells do. Another way to do it would be to allow me to level up my animal companion independently (separate pet XP). In this way I would still have some chance to learn some new abilities and to progress my Ranger ranged proper development. I feel this change should be implemented by Obsidian, but since probably it won't happen, I would like to know if anybody could Mod it according my suggestion, or teach me how to do it myself. Thanks for the reading.

Hi, I'm replaying PoE with both expansions (first time with the expansions - criminal really since I've had the game on release and finished it twice before the expansions hit) and really enjoying it but one thing I would love to see expanded upon in Deadfire is the concept of "wizard duels". It's a fairly small thing to implement but I'm thinking of Baldur's Gate 2 specifically when I think of this - there were a few times throughout that game where magic users talents were brought right to the fore. A few times in climactic battles but a few where your sorcerer/wizard basically has to go one on one with another magic user. The most blatant example of this was in the Underdark where you could take on a series of escalating duels for the entertainment of some tavern patrons. But only your wizard was allowed to fight, and the opponent was also a wizard. This would be awesome in PoE as there are a lot of spells designed to counter/absorb spells and effects but in the middle of the hectic combat of PoE you rarely get a chance to see them used effectively. I think weaving something like this into a questline would be pretty awesome. Again just my suggestion but please feel free to comment!

When I first started playing Pillars 1, I knew nothing of the plot, I only knew the gameplay. As such, I ended up rolling a Male Aedyran Wood Elf Wizard...just like I soon found out was the first real companion. Being extremely similar to Aloth (We even had mostly the same spells), I was quite disappointed in how little acknowledgement there was from him. Sure, he had one or two Aedyr interactions, and one or two Elf interactions, but nothing directly commenting on just how similar we were. And honestly, that broke my immersion quite a bit, even kind of ruined the fun of the coincidence ever happening, since it was never acknowledged. Even if it was just non-voiced text dialogue, I would love to see more interactions based on such strong similarities with companions in Deadfire. After all, if you and a companion have that much in common, it's really out of place for it to never be addressed.

This first point made by Silent Winter in another topic, inspired me to have a topic on something that I somehow missed in PoE 1, especially in combat, and which I now understand will continue in PoE2 (for instance the ghost animal companion mentioned), but I do wonder if it's the best and most engrossing way to do stuff like that, RPG-wise. It always annoyed me a little bit that the Druid shape shift was temporary, or even those items and spells summoning stuff. Instead of being summoned and then they fight until death, they just blinked out of existence (de-summoned?). Not fun, although I understand it perhaps makes sense balance-wise, it just makes me wonder if there aren't other ways to balance such summons, temporary companions and shape-shifted druids. It is the temporary bit that's bothering me. I'd much rather have these things go more permanently. If I enter combat as a feral wolf Druid, I don't really care for being forced out of my animal form 22.4s into the fight. What are you thoughts on this? Surely, this stuff could be made more permanent and then be balanced? I mean, Obsidian, went through all this trouble animating and solving other 3D graphics and FX for it, only to see it last for a few seconds. Some summons I rarely have the time to enjoy. It feels a bit like all that wonderful content goes to waste. I'd say, it would make a really fun game even more entertaining and cool as far as your CRPG-characters go.