Josh Sawyer Something Awful PoE2 Posts

[MaxQuest]

Expanding on one of the above ^ q&a:

 

 

In PoE1 if you had an optimal 6-man party, you were resting mostly due to Health, not because of KO wounds.

With unlimited health in PoE2, and assuming we would have access to a similar amount of healing, there is indeed a high chance that we'll just ignore this 'core system'; unless enemies will be able to one-shot our squishes via ranged abilities (which is also... not that great).

 

Hmm, we need to know more about empower, since it is a second mean that motivates resting.

Edited February 23, 2017 by MaxQuest

[Katarack21]

"Spells can no longer be scribed. Whatever spells are in a grimoire are the spells that it has."

Wait...a wizard can only cast spells that are in their grimoire, no matter if they know them. So does this mean that I have to wait to find a bloody grimoire with it before I can cast a spell? Does this *mandate* switching grimoires out?

I went through all of PoE without ever switching grimoire, because that's some annoying micromanagement that I chose to ignore.

[Lamppost in Winter]

"Spells can no longer be scribed. Whatever spells are in a grimoire are the spells that it has."

 

Wait...a wizard can only cast spells that are in their grimoire, no matter if they know them. So does this mean that I have to wait to find a bloody grimoire with it before I can cast a spell? Does this *mandate* switching grimoires out?

 

I went through all of PoE without ever switching grimoire, because that's some annoying micromanagement that I chose to ignore.

 

Wizards always know all their spells now. When you equip a grimoire, you can cast the spells in that grimoire in addition to the ones you already know, but only while you have it equipped, so no learning spells from grimoires anymore.

Edited February 23, 2017 by Lamppost in Winter

[Infinitron]

In PoE1 if you had an optimal 6-man party, you were resting mostly due to Health, not because of KO wounds.

With unlimited health in PoE2, and assuming we would have access to a similar amount of healing, there is indeed a high chance that we'll just ignore this 'core system'; unless enemies will be able to one-shot our squishes via ranged abilities (which is also... not that great).

 

Hmm, we need to know more about empower, since it is a second mean that motivates resting.

 

What if healing spells are much slower?

[Katarack21]

 

"Spells can no longer be scribed. Whatever spells are in a grimoire are the spells that it has."

 

Wait...a wizard can only cast spells that are in their grimoire, no matter if they know them. So does this mean that I have to wait to find a bloody grimoire with it before I can cast a spell? Does this *mandate* switching grimoires out?

 

I went through all of PoE without ever switching grimoire, because that's some annoying micromanagement that I chose to ignore.

 

Wizards always know all their spells now. When you equip a grimoire, you can cast the spells in that grimoire in addition to the ones you already know, but only while you have it equipped, so no learning spells from grimoires anymore.

 

Ah, I see. So I can still choose to never change my grimoire, but doing so provides an actual advantage now. I see.

[stiven]

> ability to adapt

Meh, on PoDT it's more like - their give you box of parts and you build you party from them. But there just one catch - you need to took you party apart and rebuild it from the same parts into something new every new location. Most enemies has high fortitude so fortitude attacks is usually pretty useless since you need to spend much more casts to soften enemy up. So usually you use Will/Reflex-affecting spells, but then out of blue there come out enemies with specific immunity to debuffs from Will/Reflex, like +20 defense against prone, or immune to confused/charmed. So you start read all your debuffs (there like 20+ unique names for debuffs) trying to find ones that targeting lowest enemies defenses but also can effectively debuff them. You need to do it for each class. Then you figure out that your stun+hobble+blind rogue is no use there so you need go back to inn, respect him/switch to something else....aggggrrrrr.....there is, genuinely, very nice combat system in PoE, hidden somewhere under a ton of tedious bussy work.

 

I hope that for start they will reduce quantity of debuffs from 20+ to at most 10, or just give them more distinct names(Fear effect lvl1/lvl2 etc.with near-to-linear progression of debuff strength, would be nice), so player wouldn't needed to keep long notes near his monitor about what difference between Dazzled and Stuck, or Stun.

 

Also by the Conan erected nipples, linear and simple weapons progressions would be really nice. Instead of tons different uniques with weak sous +10% to chance to 20% chance to make attack against deflection (+10), on every good sword. But the +9999 damage (figuratively speaking) to damage on some one specific unique weapon for one specific build.

[L4wlight]

http://jesawyer.tumblr.com/

[Orillion]

 

 

"Spells can no longer be scribed. Whatever spells are in a grimoire are the spells that it has."

 

Wait...a wizard can only cast spells that are in their grimoire, no matter if they know them. So does this mean that I have to wait to find a bloody grimoire with it before I can cast a spell? Does this *mandate* switching grimoires out?

 

I went through all of PoE without ever switching grimoire, because that's some annoying micromanagement that I chose to ignore.

 

Wizards always know all their spells now. When you equip a grimoire, you can cast the spells in that grimoire in addition to the ones you already know, but only while you have it equipped, so no learning spells from grimoires anymore.

 

Ah, I see. So I can still choose to never change my grimoire, but doing so provides an actual advantage now. I see.

 

And it seems pretty likely it won't be hot-swappable in the middle of combat now, unless they find a way to justify ALL trinkets being hot-swappable.

[Volourn]

So, he claims that people who love D&D would hate classless system. Must explain why FO is one of my favorite series (not going the Betehsda garbage) even though I'm a D&D fanatic. LMAO Imagine that. People can like different things at once. Not me personally, but I know people who like both CFL and NFL at the same time. (liking CFL is dumb but to each their own).

Edited February 23, 2017 by Volourn

[Sedrefilos]

Classless = good for single character, action based rpg.

Class-based = good for party based, tactical rpg.

imho, always.

[Katarack21]

So, he claims that people who love D&D would hate classless system. Must explain why FO is one of my favorite series (not going the Betehsda garbage) even though I'm a D&D fanatic. LMAO Imagine that. People can like different things at once. Not me personally, but I know people who like both CFL and NFL at the same time. (liking CFL is dumb but to each their own).

Sawyer is a little bit of an RPG snob/elitist. Over the years I've noticed a real tendency for him to look down on and subtly (or not so subtly) insult people who are real dedicated D&D enthusiasts. He seems to act as if being into obsure RPG systems means he's more knowledgable and a superior gamer.

 

He's basically a pen&paper hipster.

[Fiaryn]

 

So, he claims that people who love D&D would hate classless system. Must explain why FO is one of my favorite series (not going the Betehsda garbage) even though I'm a D&D fanatic. LMAO Imagine that. People can like different things at once. Not me personally, but I know people who like both CFL and NFL at the same time. (liking CFL is dumb but to each their own).

Sawyer is a little bit of an RPG snob/elitist. Over the years I've noticed a real tendency for him to look down on and subtly (or not so subtly) insult people who are real dedicated D&D enthusiasts. He seems to act as if being into obsure RPG systems means he's more knowledgable and a superior gamer.

 

He's basically a pen&paper hipster.

 

 

If you're referring to this post

 

 

I think you're misreading it. He directly states that he has played, and enjoyed, pretty much every single edition of A/D&D. He is stating the people who are invested in the edition wars of D&D, specifically, are a group of people who tend not to play any table top RPGs other than variants of D&D. Which is generally true.

 

It is possible to enjoy a thing, in his case D&D, while still preferring another thing. This is especially true of table top RPGs which are largely a social experience, and that social experience can easily trump the (enormous) design flaws of whatever game system is being utilized.

Edited February 23, 2017 by Fiaryn

[injurai]

 

So, he claims that people who love D&D would hate classless system. Must explain why FO is one of my favorite series (not going the Betehsda garbage) even though I'm a D&D fanatic. LMAO Imagine that. People can like different things at once. Not me personally, but I know people who like both CFL and NFL at the same time. (liking CFL is dumb but to each their own).

Sawyer is a little bit of an RPG snob/elitist. Over the years I've noticed a real tendency for him to look down on and subtly (or not so subtly) insult people who are real dedicated D&D enthusiasts. He seems to act as if being into obsure RPG systems means he's more knowledgable and a superior gamer.

 

He's basically a pen&paper hipster.

 

 

Some of us like that though.

[Fiaryn]

Also there's a certain brand of "D&D enthusiast" who probably should be subtly looked down upon. A game system is a tool at the end of the day. Nothing more, nothing less. It does not deserve tribalistic loyalty or devotion.

[Varana]

Classless = good for single character, action based rpg.

Class-based = good for party based, tactical rpg.

imho, always.

 

Classless is usually superior for all cases, though.

Classes are a crutch. A limiting genre convention that should be ditched as soon as possible.

So there.

Edited February 23, 2017 by Varana

[Katarack21]

 

 

So, he claims that people who love D&D would hate classless system. Must explain why FO is one of my favorite series (not going the Betehsda garbage) even though I'm a D&D fanatic. LMAO Imagine that. People can like different things at once. Not me personally, but I know people who like both CFL and NFL at the same time. (liking CFL is dumb but to each their own).

Sawyer is a little bit of an RPG snob/elitist. Over the years I've noticed a real tendency for him to look down on and subtly (or not so subtly) insult people who are real dedicated D&D enthusiasts. He seems to act as if being into obsure RPG systems means he's more knowledgable and a superior gamer.

 

He's basically a pen&paper hipster.

 

 

If you're referring to this post

 

 

I think you're misreading it. He directly states that he has played, and enjoyed, pretty much every single edition of A/D&D. He is stating the people who are invested in the edition wars of D&D, specifically, are a group of people who tend not to play any table top RPGs other than variants of D&D. Which is generally true.

Or, you know, it's a stereotype of a large and diverse group of people whose only commonality is being nerdy enough to argue about a particularl game system that is particularly important to them.

 

It doesn't actually say anything at all about what other games they play. Not a thing. Just that this particular game system is important to them. I argue like ****-all about Star Trek, but you can't judge *anything* about what other fiction I enjoy based on that. Same here. It's Josh Sawyers personal opinion, based on his assumptions about people who play D&D.

 

Note that while Josh says he's played every edition of D&D, he also says he's enjoyed other games far more. He's a fan of D&D, but he's not a *FAN* of D&D. He's played it as part of his general interest of playing RPG's, and enjoyed it. It's not his favorite, and he'd rather play others. He specifically points out flaws in D&D as reasons for doing things certain ways in PoE, as well.

 

Look. I don't know Josh. Neither do you. We're both making assumptions here based on what little we know based in interviews, forum posts, etc. All I know is that Josh Sawyers body language, mannerisms, statements, and complaints in the past have led me to the conclusion that he is the kind of RPG player I've met in the past who vaguely looks down on people who play D&D regularly and tries to get everybody interested in this new obscure system that nobodies heard of instead.

 

You can see some of that in the interaction between him and Null in the video today. Clearly the two get along, but there's a little bit of real ****-eating in Josh's smile when he turns to Null and says "And what about your favorite system?" and there's a little real hesitation in Null--a little stammering, a glance at Josh's eyes, etc.--before he starts to discuss (reluctantly) his love for 3.5. You can tell this isn't a new conversation and it's not a topic Null is eager to pursue again. That kind of thing, little hints like that.

 

Can I prove any of it? Nope. Not a thing. Just my thoughts. Doesn't even matter, anyway.

[Katarack21]

 

 

So, he claims that people who love D&D would hate classless system. Must explain why FO is one of my favorite series (not going the Betehsda garbage) even though I'm a D&D fanatic. LMAO Imagine that. People can like different things at once. Not me personally, but I know people who like both CFL and NFL at the same time. (liking CFL is dumb but to each their own).

Sawyer is a little bit of an RPG snob/elitist. Over the years I've noticed a real tendency for him to look down on and subtly (or not so subtly) insult people who are real dedicated D&D enthusiasts. He seems to act as if being into obsure RPG systems means he's more knowledgable and a superior gamer.

 

He's basically a pen&paper hipster.

 

 

Some of us like that though.

 

Oh, a little bit of that isn't a bad thing in a DM and probably isn't a bad quality in a narrative designer, either. I didn't make a value judgment, dudes!

[Fiaryn]

 

 

 

So, he claims that people who love D&D would hate classless system. Must explain why FO is one of my favorite series (not going the Betehsda garbage) even though I'm a D&D fanatic. LMAO Imagine that. People can like different things at once. Not me personally, but I know people who like both CFL and NFL at the same time. (liking CFL is dumb but to each their own).

Sawyer is a little bit of an RPG snob/elitist. Over the years I've noticed a real tendency for him to look down on and subtly (or not so subtly) insult people who are real dedicated D&D enthusiasts. He seems to act as if being into obsure RPG systems means he's more knowledgable and a superior gamer.

 

He's basically a pen&paper hipster.

 

 

If you're referring to this post

 

 

I think you're misreading it. He directly states that he has played, and enjoyed, pretty much every single edition of A/D&D. He is stating the people who are invested in the edition wars of D&D, specifically, are a group of people who tend not to play any table top RPGs other than variants of D&D. Which is generally true.

Or, you know, it's a stereotype of a large and diverse group of people whose only commonality is being nerdy enough to argue about a particularl game system that is particularly important to them.

 

It doesn't actually say anything at all about what other games they play. Not a thing. Just that this particular game system is important to them. I argue like ****-all about Star Trek, but you can't judge *anything* about what other fiction I enjoy based on that. Same here. It's Josh Sawyers personal opinion, based on his assumptions about people who play D&D.

 

Note that while Josh says he's played every edition of D&D, he also says he's enjoyed other games far more. He's a fan of D&D, but he's not a *FAN* of D&D. He's played it as part of his general interest of playing RPG's, and enjoyed it. It's not his favorite, and he'd rather play others. He specifically points out flaws in D&D as reasons for doing things certain ways in PoE, as well.

 

Look. I don't know Josh. Neither do you. We're both making assumptions here based on what little we know based in interviews, forum posts, etc. All I know is that Josh Sawyers body language, mannerisms, statements, and complaints in the past have led me to the conclusion that he is the kind of RPG player I've met in the past who vaguely looks down on people who play D&D regularly and tries to get everybody interested in this new obscure system that nobodies heard of instead.

 

You can see some of that in the interaction between him and Null in the video today. Clearly the two get along, but there's a little bit of real ****-eating in Josh's smile when he turns to Null and says "And what about your favorite system?" and there's a little real hesitation in Null--a little stammering, a glance at Josh's eyes, etc.--before he starts to discuss (reluctantly) his love for 3.5. You can tell this isn't a new conversation and it's not a topic Null is eager to pursue again. That kind of thing, little hints like that.

 

Can I prove any of it? Nope. Not a thing. Just my thoughts. Doesn't even matter, anyway.

 

 

You seem really upset about Sawyer citing a general trend that, as the term implies, while being generally true also by definition does not describe the entire playerbase. There is a reason why people use qualifying statements like "probably" (the one he specifically cited) and "generally" and so forth. Large populations do have attributes that can be summarized, on average, while allowing for the fact that individual variation does exist.

 

Concluding that he looks down on people who enjoy D&D is unfounded given that the guy puts up Instagrams of him BSing with coworkers over a game of 3.5 D&D.

 

In a word: Chillax.

Edited February 23, 2017 by Fiaryn

[Katarack21]

 

 

 

 

So, he claims that people who love D&D would hate classless system. Must explain why FO is one of my favorite series (not going the Betehsda garbage) even though I'm a D&D fanatic. LMAO Imagine that. People can like different things at once. Not me personally, but I know people who like both CFL and NFL at the same time. (liking CFL is dumb but to each their own).

Sawyer is a little bit of an RPG snob/elitist. Over the years I've noticed a real tendency for him to look down on and subtly (or not so subtly) insult people who are real dedicated D&D enthusiasts. He seems to act as if being into obsure RPG systems means he's more knowledgable and a superior gamer.

 

He's basically a pen&paper hipster.

 

 

If you're referring to this post

 

 

I think you're misreading it. He directly states that he has played, and enjoyed, pretty much every single edition of A/D&D. He is stating the people who are invested in the edition wars of D&D, specifically, are a group of people who tend not to play any table top RPGs other than variants of D&D. Which is generally true.

Or, you know, it's a stereotype of a large and diverse group of people whose only commonality is being nerdy enough to argue about a particularl game system that is particularly important to them.

 

It doesn't actually say anything at all about what other games they play. Not a thing. Just that this particular game system is important to them. I argue like ****-all about Star Trek, but you can't judge *anything* about what other fiction I enjoy based on that. Same here. It's Josh Sawyers personal opinion, based on his assumptions about people who play D&D.

 

Note that while Josh says he's played every edition of D&D, he also says he's enjoyed other games far more. He's a fan of D&D, but he's not a *FAN* of D&D. He's played it as part of his general interest of playing RPG's, and enjoyed it. It's not his favorite, and he'd rather play others. He specifically points out flaws in D&D as reasons for doing things certain ways in PoE, as well.

 

Look. I don't know Josh. Neither do you. We're both making assumptions here based on what little we know based in interviews, forum posts, etc. All I know is that Josh Sawyers body language, mannerisms, statements, and complaints in the past have led me to the conclusion that he is the kind of RPG player I've met in the past who vaguely looks down on people who play D&D regularly and tries to get everybody interested in this new obscure system that nobodies heard of instead.

 

You can see some of that in the interaction between him and Null in the video today. Clearly the two get along, but there's a little bit of real ****-eating in Josh's smile when he turns to Null and says "And what about your favorite system?" and there's a little real hesitation in Null--a little stammering, a glance at Josh's eyes, etc.--before he starts to discuss (reluctantly) his love for 3.5. You can tell this isn't a new conversation and it's not a topic Null is eager to pursue again. That kind of thing, little hints like that.

 

Can I prove any of it? Nope. Not a thing. Just my thoughts. Doesn't even matter, anyway.

 

 

You seem really upset about Sawyer citing a general trend that, as the term implies, while being generally true also by definition does not describe the entire playerbase. There is a reason why people use qualifying statements like "probably" (the one he specifically cited) and "generally" and so forth. Large populations do have attributes that can be summarized, on average, while allowing for the fact that individual variation does exist.

 

Concluding that he looks down on people who enjoy D&D is unlikely given that the guy puts up Instagram's of him BSing with coworkers over a game of 3.5 D&D.

 

In a word: Chillax.

 

No, I'm not really upset about anything. I'm having a discussion about something with somebody.

 

You see, this is why I don't talk to people.

 

Also: Weasel words do not a free pass make.

Edited February 23, 2017 by Katarack21

[Volourn]

"You seem really upset about Sawyer citing a general trend that, as the term implies, while being generally true also by definition does not describe the entire playerbase. There is a reason why people use qualifying statements like "probably" (the one he specifically cited) and "generally" and so forth. Large populations do have attributes that can be summarized, on average, while allowing for the fact that individual variation does exist."

 

There's no trend? It isn't based on fact. The 'trend' is  no different than one claiming all young black men are criminals because a c ertain percentage of them are when we all know the vast majority of thema rne't like that.

 

Again, I'm a HUGE D&D fan. It is by far my favorite RPG system but I also LOVE classless system ala FO. Baiscally, he is spouting nonsense not based on actual facts but feelz. But, it is good to know fake stereotyping and bigotry and  fake news is allowed to slander an entire group. LMAO

 

 

*goes play BG and FO*. Two CRPGs - one with a class system one with a classless system - love them both. OMGZ! Itz a MIRACLEZ!

[Katarack21]

It is basically just hating on fanboys. There's nothing more to it. Is it a big important deal? No. No, it is not. But neither is it anything more legitimate then that.

[Fiaryn]

 

 

 

 

 

So, he claims that people who love D&D would hate classless system. Must explain why FO is one of my favorite series (not going the Betehsda garbage) even though I'm a D&D fanatic. LMAO Imagine that. People can like different things at once. Not me personally, but I know people who like both CFL and NFL at the same time. (liking CFL is dumb but to each their own).

Sawyer is a little bit of an RPG snob/elitist. Over the years I've noticed a real tendency for him to look down on and subtly (or not so subtly) insult people who are real dedicated D&D enthusiasts. He seems to act as if being into obsure RPG systems means he's more knowledgable and a superior gamer.

 

He's basically a pen&paper hipster.

 

 

If you're referring to this post

 

 

I think you're misreading it. He directly states that he has played, and enjoyed, pretty much every single edition of A/D&D. He is stating the people who are invested in the edition wars of D&D, specifically, are a group of people who tend not to play any table top RPGs other than variants of D&D. Which is generally true.

Or, you know, it's a stereotype of a large and diverse group of people whose only commonality is being nerdy enough to argue about a particularl game system that is particularly important to them.

 

It doesn't actually say anything at all about what other games they play. Not a thing. Just that this particular game system is important to them. I argue like ****-all about Star Trek, but you can't judge *anything* about what other fiction I enjoy based on that. Same here. It's Josh Sawyers personal opinion, based on his assumptions about people who play D&D.

 

Note that while Josh says he's played every edition of D&D, he also says he's enjoyed other games far more. He's a fan of D&D, but he's not a *FAN* of D&D. He's played it as part of his general interest of playing RPG's, and enjoyed it. It's not his favorite, and he'd rather play others. He specifically points out flaws in D&D as reasons for doing things certain ways in PoE, as well.

 

Look. I don't know Josh. Neither do you. We're both making assumptions here based on what little we know based in interviews, forum posts, etc. All I know is that Josh Sawyers body language, mannerisms, statements, and complaints in the past have led me to the conclusion that he is the kind of RPG player I've met in the past who vaguely looks down on people who play D&D regularly and tries to get everybody interested in this new obscure system that nobodies heard of instead.

 

You can see some of that in the interaction between him and Null in the video today. Clearly the two get along, but there's a little bit of real ****-eating in Josh's smile when he turns to Null and says "And what about your favorite system?" and there's a little real hesitation in Null--a little stammering, a glance at Josh's eyes, etc.--before he starts to discuss (reluctantly) his love for 3.5. You can tell this isn't a new conversation and it's not a topic Null is eager to pursue again. That kind of thing, little hints like that.

 

Can I prove any of it? Nope. Not a thing. Just my thoughts. Doesn't even matter, anyway.

 

 

You seem really upset about Sawyer citing a general trend that, as the term implies, while being generally true also by definition does not describe the entire playerbase. There is a reason why people use qualifying statements like "probably" (the one he specifically cited) and "generally" and so forth. Large populations do have attributes that can be summarized, on average, while allowing for the fact that individual variation does exist.

 

Concluding that he looks down on people who enjoy D&D is unlikely given that the guy puts up Instagram's of him BSing with coworkers over a game of 3.5 D&D.

 

In a word: Chillax.

 

No, I'm not really upset about anything. I'm having a discussion about something with somebody.

 

You see, this is why I don't talk to people.

 

Also: Weasel words do not a free pass make.

 

 

Qualifying words and phrases are important for delineating the limits of knowledge. Especially useful when discussing large groups.

 

While we're on the topic of subtle word choices though, did you know that despite stereotypes and generalizations being theoretical synonyms, they have very different connotations? For example, one typically chooses to use stereotyping over generalization when one is offended (rightly or wrongly). One might open a post with the use of stereotyping due to feeling as if one's personal tastes and preferences were being unfairly "put in a box" as it were.

Edited February 23, 2017 by Fiaryn

[Sedrefilos]

 

Classless = good for single character, action based rpg.

Class-based = good for party based, tactical rpg.

imho, always.

 

Classless is usually superior for all cases, though.

Classes are a crutch. A limiting genre convention that should be ditched as soon as possible.

So there.

 

If the game is party-based, even if it is classless, you'll eventualy "class" each member by yourself since you want them to fulfill specific roles. So it is an extra effort that you wouldn't have to make if there were class on the first place.

When you are the only pc in the game, though, why have classes? Play how you like.

So there

[aluminiumtrioxid]

Sawyer is a little bit of an RPG snob/elitist. Over the years I've noticed a real tendency for him to look down on and subtly (or not so subtly) insult people who are real dedicated D&D enthusiasts. He seems to act as if being into obsure RPG systems means he's more knowledgable and a superior gamer.

 

 

I dunno, being familiar with obscure systems beyond "well, I played D&D" is the mark of a more knowledgeable (and arguably superior*) gamer.

 

And I say that as someone who is willing to go to conventions just to play D&D, and whose most commonly used system in the last few years has been 5E (albeit not by a very wide margin).

 

*Inasmuch as every system has a particular set of circumstances it shines in, and familiarity with a wider range of systems allows you to pick the one best suited to the needs of that particular game.

[Katarack21]

I use stereotyping when I'm talking about people; I use generalization when I'm talking about things. You stereotype a group of people and their ideas; you generalize about a company or a type of car.