Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Zangi]

Armors are 40c each.  If you looted all the humans you kill, should be enough to spring for... at least 3, maybe the forth too if you sell off weapon loot at 5c each.  The pasty guy is the 5th.  All the hirelings come with their own armor.

[gimli]

Yeah, but new level 1 hirelings are 250 a pop. I didn't realize that the stash was effectively unlimited storage, so I wasn't looting everything in sight, but even if I had, I probably wouldn't have enough to buy a full party straight away.

It's easy to collect that 1k for the 4 hirelings in the beginning, if you loot everything in the starter areas and sell all the crap @ your first visit in Gilded Vale. That's what I did. [I've recruited the wizard companion, so I had to pay for 4 hirelings only.]

[Sergarr]

I would have removed stats completely. If you're a Ranger, you should do Ranger stuff competently, I would think, same for Mage or Rogue.

Or remove all combat mechanics from stats completely and let them work for scripted events, dialogue... maybe skill bonus, I dunno.

I don't like much the alternatives. D&D stats are flawed in their own way: Int, Wis and Cha are all "dump stats", except you need them because you're a class that needs them, not because they do anything desirable for that class. It's in the class description that "Clerics with more Wis get more spells" or whatever. But that's specific to that class, the "generic" advantage of Wisdom is better Will saves. Meh. Str, Dex and Con are the only "stats for everyone" (Str less if you don't plan to melee), but that classes with requirements have to sacrifice just because. In the end, all warrior classes end up with those 3 stats, all mages have to minmax their required stat while trying to still be survivable, and Rogues are the only ones that really care about Int to get better skills.

They tried to fix that, but yeah made Intellect the "spell coverage" stat. I would have just named it differently and having no bearing on actual IQ. Like... uh, Power? Or something. The Schwartz. Then call Dexterity "Aim" and Perception "Dodginess". Might is alright IMO, it doesn't say "physical strength", literally. But still, most of those stats give doubtful benefits.

What would I do is replace all combat-affecting stats with a single one called Power Level which indicated how powerful you are relative to your Class Level. The rest 5 stats would be social-affecting. That way kills two hares: easier to balance and more space for role-playing.

[Zangi]

Everyone has over 9000 powerlevel, except companions.  Dump stat on all the social skills with custom adventurers.  Companions will all be pretty weak.

[gimli]

My game is now more or less unplayable.

There's a bug with the item called Drinking Horn of Moderation. If you ever equip it it will permanently ruin your cipher character and it will persist across saves and even if you remove the item.

Basically it makes it so you can never increase focus in combat ever again. If you've played cipher, this is basically GG. The best part is this item is extremely easy to get and super good for ciphers so you're bound to use it on one the moment you get it.

What a stupid bug.

Yeah. 

..Now some funny stuff with regard to Obsidian & the bugz!

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Escapist article from 2011.

[Drakale]

Why would they disallow spell templates by default for the 'expert' setting, it literally make mages unplayable. Took me a while to figure out why spellcasting never worked right...

[Sergarr]

Everyone has over 9000 powerlevel, except companions.  Dump stat on all the social skills with custom adventurers.  Companions will all be pretty weak.

Okay. Didn't think that one through.

Then just make all 6 stats to be social-only. Make Class Levels + Feats to be the only things to determine combat power.

[AlleeCat]

Still, the outrage about these two specific instances seems to be just being angry for the sake of being angry.

Jamie Foxx recently made an offensive joke about Bruce Jenner's possible transition to female on an awards show. The rest of his bit was fine. Does that mean people are getting angry just for the sake of being angry?

While I agree that the game itself is not offensive for having a couple offensive things in it, I don't think that we should just ignore the offensive things either.

[Retropunch]

and there is an enormous difference between the Devs adding something problematic and then standing for it or not, and the Devs allowing random assholes to write iffy semi-content.

The "dark universe" argument is the same as saying "my character would do it" after doing something grossly unpleasant in a table top pen-and-peper rpg and seeing a table full of disquieted stares.

I disagree - where do we set the bar? what if it turned out that it was actually written by one of the writing staff - does that suddenly make it ok? Furthermore, how can we judge the persons motive - there are plenty of mythological tales along the same vein as that poem which they could be alluding too. You're also assuming that for some reason that the devs didn't vet these additions - whilst it admittedly looks like they didn't in some places (spelling mistakes and whatever) they must have had at least a quick pass through as I imagine they got some ridiculous stuff (I banged jacks mum lol) which wouldn't make it in regardless - hence it's of the same level of 'standing for it' as the rest of the content.

Whilst I agree that there is a cut off point with the 'dark universe' theory (as the comic that was linked to demonstrates) the poem is woefully tame in comparison to infanticide (something that still happens in real life with alarming regularity) or a ton of the other themes regularly mentioned in the actual game content.

Overall, in a game where you're involved in slaughtering hundreds of people, regularly faced with infanticide and do plenty of evil/offensive things (if you want to) how can one off colour poem - the sort that you'd definitely expect in a bawdy medieval tavern song - be seen as offensive? The only way is if you presuppose the persons motive based upon your feelings, which is a ridiculous thing to do.



 

[Sergius]

Still, the outrage about these two specific instances seems to be just being angry for the sake of being angry.

Jamie Foxx recently made an offensive joke about Bruce Jenner's possible transition to female on an awards show. The rest of his bit was fine. Does that mean people are getting angry just for the sake of being angry?

While I agree that the game itself is not offensive for having a couple offensive things in it, I don't think that we should just ignore the offensive things either.

No, it means that these two specific instances seem to be only offensive to a tiny and very vocal minority, not even representing the trans community (and they aren't even clear enough that they're about trans people). I said nothing about the rest of the game in comparison to these two instances, or that the game is ok because "only two tiny bits are really offensive". That they are offensive at all is arguable. They aren't complaining about other parts of the game that could probably be much more clearly offensive to many people, they are complaining about these instances (a limerick, about... some guy who slept with another guy. Because all heavens forbid that someone complains about unwittingly sleeping with someone they didn't want to sleep, or becomes a drama idiot and jumps off a cliff. And a fantasy story probably written by a lesbian couple where they weren't being treated right by some bigot. Oh noes, the lesbian couple must be a bigot!!11 how *dare* they write about bigotry against them! Damn wizard bigots.)

Jamie Foxx recently made an offensive joke about Bruce Jenner's possible transition to female on an awards show. Does that mean that any complains that he has a horrible singing voice are automatically true?

I'm sure many of those "backer authored content" thingies are more objectively offensive or at least creepy. So? Complain about them then, instead of making a big stink about... some homophobic guy that jumped off a cliff.

[Frumple]

Sweet blue crumbling bumblehump take it to another goddamn thread.

[Sergius]

Sweet blue crumbling bumblehump take it to another goddamn thread.

Then it's up to the OP (who's been bringing it up, a lot, I must say) to decide to tell us all to put it to rest.

[lordcooper]

Why would they disallow spell templates by default for the 'expert' setting, it literally make mages unplayable. Took me a while to figure out why spellcasting never worked right...

Because it's a difficulty level designed for people who've already finished the game and have mastered the mechanics.  Hence it being called 'expert'.

[GrizzlyAdamz]

Sweet blue crumbling bumblehump take it to another goddamn thread.

Then it's up to the OP (who's been bringing it up, a lot, I must say) to decide to tell us all to put it to rest.

Seconding this. GGPan is bringing it up, it's up to (him) whether or not to pre-empt a thread lock or to allow more controversial issues to be discussed.
If things get out of hand, we can always start another thread after all.

[Drakale]

Why would they disallow spell templates by default for the 'expert' setting, it literally make mages unplayable. Took me a while to figure out why spellcasting never worked right...

Because it's a difficulty level designed for people who've already finished the game and have mastered the mechanics.  Hence it being called 'expert'.

I don't think it really adds anything other than frustration to the game, but ok.