Giving PoE another chance

[Sizzle]

Branching story...? In PoE...?

Aside from the Act 2 faction allegiance I don't think that there is ANY narrative branching beyond simple cosmetic differences in the resolution of sidequests.

To be fair, many quests can be finished in several ways, so it's not just a cosmetic difference (unless you'd like to apply that to practically every modern, non-AoD RPG).

 

[ilitarist]

You can also can roleplay as a very different person in PoE. You also have a varied path with end game sidequests (mostly brought by 3.0) and a choice of what happens to the world.

But it was rather forgettable. I remember my character being Stoic, Rational and slightly Cruel drifter but not much beyond that.

 

[Ezeekiel]

No matter how many chances I give PoE, it doesn't magically become more interesting. Haven't tried 3.0 yet, though. Does it add lots of new content to the early parts of the game, or do I have to slog through most of it before seeing any cool shit?

 

[anvi]

PoE is gold you fuckheads. I shed tears of joy every single minute i played it.

Are you sure it wasn't your brain leaking out of your eye sockets?

 

[Lacrymas]

This thread deteriorated fast...

 

[anvi]

How do you decline that which has never inclined?

 

[Drog Black Tooth]

is this like giving your bitch of an ex another chance

just why dude why

 

[Barnabas]

To truely appreciate PoEs story you have to be an intellectual. If not it will go over your head and you'll dismiss it as convoluted in your ignorance. If you don't read a lot of books and are into jrpgs you just won't get it.

 

[anvi]

^ Luls

 

[Barnabas]

I get bored around Twin Elms I think they rushed the ending obviously but I still pushed through both times. I just hope dead fire has more content felt like it was kind of shallow compared to Baldurs Gate in terms of the world building. It's a beautiful game though just needs more towns and more random npc interactions more humor. I still can't believe the loading times it had in 2015 being a 2d game. I always want to fire it up again though.

 

[HeatEXTEND]

Don't you mean douse in fire ?

Now, did PoE actually improve from it's release ? Not talking about bug fixes. Have the loading times been fixed ? Has the character progression been improved (from being a complete turd) ?

What are the actual differences between it's current and release version ?

 

[Haplo]

Character progression has always been excellent IMO (well, except for maxing level by the start of Act 3).
All classes are interesting and each FEELS unique and different. That's more then the old IE games could claim IMO.

The expansions have added extra talents, spells and levels, therefore build variety is improved.
Load times are not great still.

 

[Barnabas]

The loading times are a little better. The first loading screen upon loading a save is agonizing though.

 

[Sizzle]

What are the actual differences between it's current and release version ?

- A complete overhaul of the attribute system, as well as several skills such as survival and athletics.

- An entire big questline about your position as the Lord/Lady of Caed Nua.

- Rebalancing of XP gain for bounty quests, less trash mobs in certain areas, fine-tuning of most classes (for example, the Ranger sucked in the release version, and is much, much better now), items, spells, and abilities.

And that's just for the base game, TWM is an entirely new and different (and improved) beast.

All in all, the differences are pretty noticeable, and even the people who dislike the game admit that it's better now.

 

[HeatEXTEND]

Hmm, might actually have to give it another whirl at some point .

Thanks.

 

[vivec]

I agree with a lot of people saying that it is possible to totally skip the dialogue. This is how I played after a while if going through boring toneless scripts about how whiny each character is. There were no original, innovative ideas which triggered any kind of curiosity. This I can not forgive, especially from an obsidian game. About the combat, it was interesting until I understood that there were only a few ways to play. Most abilities, weapons, and skills are basically pointless. The ideal way to play is to tank with the fighter, do a switcheroo with the cypher and stun/incapacitate with the wizard. After I reached defiance bay I had had too much of it.

 

[Haplo]

Sure, that works, but wizard spells are fairly limited at the early levels. Plus I didn't find playing a wizzie in PoE particularly fun.

Did you try a Barbarian? Now that's a fun class.
Ranger is also much better than I'm used to and the animal companion is actually a great asset for flanking and rear protection.

 

[vivec]

Sure, that works, but wizard spells are fairly limited at the early levels. Plus I didn't find playing a wizzie in PoE particularly fun.

Did you try a Barbarian? Now that's a fun class.
Ranger is also much better than I'm used to and the animal companion is actually a great asset for flanking and rear protection.

Why punish yourself playing suboptimal chars? Barbarian is pretty much a gimped fighter. Ranger is a gimped chanter/fighter hybrid. Anyway, you get Sagani, who is a great reminder why you should not play a ranger.

 

[Lhynn]

Why punish yourself playing suboptimal chars? Barbarian is pretty much a gimped fighter. Ranger is a gimped chanter/fighter hybrid. Anyway, you get Sagani, who is a great reminder why you should not play a ranger.

Did you not read it? because its more fun.
Chanters are boring shit, playing a fighter (or a paladin for that matter) is like watching grass grow.

 

[Haplo]

Barbarian a gimped fighter? LOL, good one!
My Barbarian leads the damage charts by a factor of 10 times the lead on the next char. On PotD. Sure he wouldn't be nearly as good without priest buff and cipher and occasionally wizzie debuffs, but that goes without saying and those magnify the power of everybody. I wouldn't trade him for 3 Fighters.

And I do have Eder. Sure, he's built to tank but uses Bittercut sabre with Spirit of Decay, which is perhaps the top damage one-handed weapon.

Do you know what Carnage does? Do you know that Carnage secondary strikes (at 2/3 damage) count as ability use and therefore receive an accuracy boost of +1 per level like most skills?
What other character can reliably hit 3-5 enemies per attack, often disabling most of them via on-hit effects, such as prone. And instantly attack again when he fells one enemy leading to chain deaths.
Not to mention his level 11 Heart of Fury, with which he makes a full attack action (so 2 attacks if dual-wielding or with bash-shield) against every enemy in range. Each of those strikes causes carnage aoe centered on each enemy. Mass tombstone. Now per-encounter.

Frankly a well built Barbarian is OP.

Sagani a reminder why you shouldn't play a ranger? Did you actually use her and have gotten her a few levels? She's built of awesome. A bit squishy, sure, but absolutely great at sniping back row casters / disabling entire groups with Stormcaller. Itumaak is nuts also. Sure, dies very fast if you try to use him as a tank, but use him to flank/kill enemies going after your own back row/chase marauders and he can pump some fantastic damage with Merciless Companion with knockdown CC to boot. Accuracy on both is great if they target the same enemy. Sagani has Twinned arrows with penetrating shots to hit up to 4 times per attack, with possible on-hit effect on each.

Their pair, along with Grieving Mother, does the most damage in my party - with the exception of my barbarian, of course.

 

[Maculo]

Sure, that works, but wizard spells are fairly limited at the early levels. Plus I didn't find playing a wizzie in PoE particularly fun.

Did you try a Barbarian? Now that's a fun class.
Ranger is also much better than I'm used to and the animal companion is actually a great asset for flanking and rear protection.

Why punish yourself playing suboptimal chars? Barbarian is pretty much a gimped fighter. Ranger is a gimped chanter/fighter hybrid. Anyway, you get Sagani, who is a great reminder why you should not play a ranger.

I would not call Barbarian suboptimal. In fact, the only class I would call truly weak is Fighter (weak relative to Wizard and Priest master race), but even then you can make use of the class. With the Firebrand glove and high might/intellect on a barbarian, you can push out great numbers, especially once you get intimidating presence. Alternatively, you can make a decent interrupt themed character due to carnage. Plus, the shouts and intimidating presence are decent in my opinion.

I also would disagree with your ideal way to play. It does not take into account how bullshit Priests and Wizards are, even on PotD. Specifically, Priests can ignore status effects, buff might and perception for big numbers, stack Shining Beacon (which I believe can chain interrupt certain enemies), and use Cleansing Flame to buff DoT damage (great with envenomed strike). With some exception, a single Priest can carry a party in late-game fights. You do not need to tank or disable much when a single character can melt an entire encounter.

Barbarian a gimped fighter? LOL, good one!
My Barbarian leads the damage charts by a factor of 10 times the lead on the next char. On PotD. Sure he wouldn't be nearly as good without priest buff and cipher and occasionally wizzie debuffs, but that goes without saying and those magnify the power of everybody. I wouldn't trade him for 3 Fighters.

And I do have Eder. Sure, he's built to tank but uses Bittercut sabre with Spirit of Decay, which is perhaps the top damage one-handed weapon.

Do you know what Carnage does? Do you know that Carnage secondary strikes (at 2/3 damage) count as ability use and therefore receive an accuracy boost of +1 per level like most skills?
What other character can reliably hit 3-5 enemies per attack, often disabling most of them via on-hit effects, such as prone. And instantly attack again when he fells one enemy leading to chain deaths.
Not to mention his level 11 Heart of Fury, with which he makes a full attack action (so 2 attacks if dual-wielding or with bash-shield) against every enemy in range. Each of those strikes causes carnage aoe centered on each enemy. Mass tombstone. Now per-encounter.

Frankly a well built Barbarian is OP.

Sagani a reminder why you shouldn't play a ranger? Did you actually use her and have gotten her a few levels? She's built of awesome. A bit squishy, sure, but absolutely great at sniping back row casters / disabling entire groups with Stormcaller. Itumaak is nuts also. Sure, dies very fast if you try to use him as a tank, but use him to flank/kill enemies going after your own back row/chase marauders and he can pump some fantastic damage with Merciless Companion with knockdown CC to boot. Accuracy on both is great if they target the same enemy. Sagani has Twinned arrows with penetrating shots to hit up to 4 times per attack, with possible on-hit effect on each.

Their pair, along with Grieving Mother, does the most damage in my party - with the exception of my barbarian, of course.

While I do not think Barbarian is weak, I do think a Wizard can practically do the same (Citzal's Lance provides carnage) as Barbarian, but with more defenses (elemental barrier, arcane veil, etc). Plus, when Citzal's Lance is not an option, you have a host of other spells to fall back on.

 

[Haplo]

A wizard is more versatile, sure.
But I wouldn't say that he can "practically do the same". Citzal's Lance won't produce Prone-on-crit or Stun-on-crit. Note that with accuracy buffs, enemy debuffs and Dire Strikes your crit rate vs non-dragons can shoot trough the roof. It won't chain attacks with no recovery after killing an enemy via Blood Thirst. It won't aoe murder like HoF. There are other nice on-hit effects, which barbarian is way more likely to trigger due to multiple hits per attack, such as destroy vessels of St. Ydwens or summon vessels/paralyze/twin stones of Gray Sleeper or.... Firebug of Unlabored Blade.
And I'm not sure about the Lance's damage.... but I doubt it reaches barbarian levels, who with Firebrand or superb quality Hours of St. Rumbaldt does 50-100 buffed damage - in an aoe. Tidefall probably does even more, but I didn't count the dot.

Also while a wizard might have more Deflection/DR short term, he's missing staying power with the low health threshold. Not to mention the tedium of buffing-up for every combat and requiring frequent rests.

Again, a wizard won't aoe recover endurance via draining weapons, such as Tidefall (which also does aoe wounding dot). Then there's Savage Defiance, which is a great heal. Overall a barbarian is more durable I think. As he can contain most enemies he's facing with on-hit effects (or just brutally murder with Firebrand before they really get a chance to act) plus usually outheal the incoming damage (Savage Defiance, Shod-In-Faith boots, perhaps Silver Tide). The only real threat are status effects. Those can lead to a quick demise. But a priest can protect from those....

 

[vivec]

You guys are thinking too hard. You are *actually* worrying about the status effects, which in my hard run I had never to worry about. Now, I have *not* played PotD, simply because I can't see why I should engage even more into a game which I do not like. And honestly, if you really have to invest this much to defeat the game it only means you are building suboptimally. Sure, priest spells are "awesome" but by the time they take effect, my cypher has charmed the boss to get his own minions at least once. I have never really even have had to invest into Durance's spell list to care about the battle. Spamming, whispers of treason > everything else.

 

[Haplo]

That might be effective, however on PotD there will be some grazes (=laughably short duration) and even misses if you don't debuff your enemies.
Plus that's an awfully slow and boring way to play.

 

[Maculo]

You guys are thinking too hard. You are *actually* worrying about the status effects, which in my hard run I had never to worry about. Now, I have *not* played PotD, simply because I can't see why I should engage even more into a game which I do not like. And honestly, if you really have to invest this much to defeat the game it only means you are building suboptimally. Sure, priest spells are "awesome" but by the time they take effect, my cypher has charmed the boss to get his own minions at least once. I have never really even have had to invest into Durance's spell list to care about the battle. Spamming, whispers of treason > everything else.

I do not agree with your assessment, especially when it comes to PotD and WM content. In fact, I believe Cipher loses its shine, especially against Concelhaut, the Twin Dragon fight, and the Sporemind. The defense stats on those enemies get pretty high without debuffs and Ciphers have to build up focus.

Also, I would argue that your Cipher strategy requires more work than a single Priest. A Priest just needs to stack 2-3 Shining Beacons to dominate many trash fights, because the damage is so high. What makes Priest even better, is that on the harder fights (Sporemind, Twin Dragons), you have the option of going all out with Crown of Faithful > Avatar > Holy Fire > Shining Beacon(s) > Envenoming Strike > Cleansing Flame. The only downside is the need to rest more often.