Valci

i expect that some companions will be with you from the start... specifically Edor, Aloth and Pallegina who might well have traveled with you on the boat having accompanied you since PoE1...

Anyone that has ever fired a gun is familiar with recoil... Basically it's the momentum of the gun which discharges through the body and is equal to the momentum of the bullet. It gives us funny videos such as this too: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RjBe5jK6SMg Sure, it has very little to do with the damage the bullet actually does but as an abstraction of the "adequacy" of the gun wielder it's workable. Personally I preferred the old school system where strength affected melee damage, carrying capacity and there were strength restrictions on equipment, where dexterity affected aim virtually as well as ability to parry/dodge (which translated into AC back then as the system was simple but still), intellect affected number of spells for mages and so on and so forth... I know some didn't like it but I found it more realistic to what we have in PoE... But as long as the suspension of disbelief isn't too great I can live with it...

@illathid - Dragonball Z ... Really?! Come on you can do better mate. Personally I never got into it but from the bits that I saw of the super-super-duper-ultra-super-duper super saiyan it's not something I'd want similarities to... But ofc that's just me ...lol

I never min-max. In fact I never drop any star below 10 which for me is the average. However I only play on PoTD these days and it's entirely viable even with regular NPC companions (I also never create custom one cause the lack of interaction doesn't suit me). The only case in which min-maxing makes sense for me is for PoTD solo runs where you need to squeeze every ounce of performance from your character. In a full party virtually anything is viable...

That's very subjective... I enjoy my chanters quite a bit. Ofc they shine on higher difficulties where fights last longer but either way they are hardly more boring that the martial classes...

@Gromnir - One of the many reasons why I never dump stats... Besides the RP aspect ofc. Some players (the loudest often enough) want to have their cake and eat it too which unfortunately affects everyone...

No more muscle wizard is a plus for me. Had myself a really tough time roleplaying that... I understood very well how people were rationalizing it and I tried to but at the end of the day it was a struggle to make it hold water. Either way for me there SHOULD be a clear cut difference between physical strength and mental strength and spiritual strength... Like one being portrayed by strength one by intellect and the other by resolve for instance. Either way, it seems like a step in the right direction for me mechanics be damned... You can always alter those while testing or in future patches.

@Barleypaper i disagree personally. I think its a step in the right direction and i do agree with Sawyer that large power-gaps are undesirable especially if you consider the point of view of the designer (though i dislike them even as a player). You go to all this trouble to design 12 classes and you end up with 80% of the playerbase playing 3 or them... how is that good design? Might as well only have those 3 OP classes and be done with it. Moreover, without previous knowledge of which classes are super powerful and which are sub-par you punish the players (especially those that are just starting with the game) for a choice they made at the start if/when they end up being stuck due to a sub-par choice. In BG1's expansion (SoD) there was an encounter where the "good" choice was to have a one on one duel with some celestial lieutenant of Caelar Argent... the difficulty varied greatly based on which class the protagonist chose. A new player who chose the "wrong" class would get stuck there or alternatively would be obligated to make a choice that may not be in character for his protagonist... or ofc he could downgrade the difficulty (if possible) which would enhance the feeling that his character is weak even further ... either way you detract from their fun and punish them for what is essentially bad design (imho). Going further from this idea, there is a potential consequence even for a seasoned player who for instance would want to complete the game on PotD in that he might be/feel pigeonholed into selecting from a very limited class pool which again hurts his enjoyment of the game...

He made me curious too but sadly I was disappointed... No tentacles

hehehehe... havent seen that before... quality. TY!

@Morty & Lephys ... I agree with that as previously discussed... ignoring logic (ex. allowing a character who dumped str to 3 to wield a great sword for the sake of "diversity") is a whole other ballgame though. it has nothing to do with "tradition" and everything to do with common sense...

whichever way you look at it imho it is only viable if the monsters start the fight buffed as well so that the playing field is even. Why would the game put you at a distinct advantage by design? Or are the monsters supposed to be stupid? what about the humanoid ones? ... see where im going with this? But then if you allow the monsters to start the fights buffed you make player buffing a requirement and also you end up in a situation where both sides are buffed and cancel each other out which is the same as if neither were buffed pre combat to begin with.

In principle i agree with an approach in the vein of what you're describing in that we would have diversity and options for "builds" while keeping a distinct feel for each class. And i think PoE did a relatively good job in this though ofc it can always be improved. I do think that having different deflection values for classes for instance does make sense and such but as a general point i doint disagree with you. Where i do take issue is the ability of any character being able to use any item... i just dont see that as realistic as mentioned above... Though i dont think item usage should be linked to classes but with stats as per the example i gave. If you have enough strength to wield a large two-hander you can if you dont you cant... same with heavy armor. If you dont have a certain level of intellect you cant read a scroll for instance (lore doesnt really do it for me as that is different then knowing how to read which would be intellect related for me). Dont have enough dexterity... you get a penalty to ranged accuracy... and so on and so forth. Imho this would allow a variety of different builds but would make your choice of attributes matter so that you could build a character able to do almost anything but not at the same time... if that makes sense

@Lephys I take your point... I was simply stating my preference. I prefer systems where the classes are as different as possible from each other and I don't believe ask classes should be able to fill all roles. For instance, no, I don't think a mage should be a tank. I prefer systems more rooted in lore but also in realism... By that I mean that for me it makes sense that you should need higher strength to wield a large two hander or wear heavy, bulky armor... Conversely, it makes sense that you should have higher intelligence in order to learn and cast spells. That is why I think it makes sense for each class to have a main stat. A warrior with crap strength (so he can't hit hard) and also crap dexterity (if we're taking a rapier wielder for instance) SHOULD BE a crap warrior as far as I am concerned no matter of he had maxed intellect. I'm over simplifying it a bit but anyway, the gist of it is that for my part I prefer distinct roles for classes (with some overlap ofc between certain classes) and stats that logically affect the performance of those classes. Would I trade that just for added flexibility and more viable builds even if it goes against logic as well as the lore of the setting? No.

See but that right there is the point of disagreement. Many of us don't think pre-buffing would make things better... Quite the contrary in fact. And have explained why more then once. Ofc the fact of the matter is that it boils down to the preference of play style. As previously stated I prefer it when there is an even playing field between the heroes and the monsters and I don't much line one-shot kills from either side (like petrification or on the other side finger of death for instance). Casting something like greater malison followed by finger of death can make short work of even the toughest opponent like a dragon (or even a disintegrate spell)... And that defeats the purpose of the epic enemy that requires team work to defeat etc. I prefer less powerful magical effects that can turn a battle if used smartly and in combinations... One-shot skills/spells just aren't my thing. But I do acknowledge that some may like them... But for me, no argument will change my mind in that sense. And I'm mostly happy with how PoE has approached this aspect of the game... Could they add other interesting mechanics? Ofc. But for my part i'd prefer them to be in line with the strategy they've shown thus far...