KickStarter Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pre-DLC Thread [GO TO NEW THREAD]

[Fedora Master]

Still the idea of non-party members getting exp for something they haven't even witnessed is retarded so better leave that setting on default.

The default IS to share the experience with absent companions. I understand why they did it, since you don't want to switch out in a dude when he's 5 levels behind the rest of the party but doing it via XP sharing seems a little odd.

 

[Luckmann]

the reason I ask3ed about how many people in party is it says in the first screen shot Amari got 9XP when bandit died..in 2nd the person who killed it got 54. If there are 6 people in the party when Amari got 9 perhaps everyone else got 9 too? With it off the 54 EXP may have gone to a single person. If that is the case, its really sort of the same thing. Or maybe I am not understanding something.

Yes, this is literally what I just said earlier.

 

[Serus]

Still the idea of non-party members getting exp for something they haven't even witnessed is retarded so better leave that setting on default.

The default IS to share the experience with absent companions. I understand why they did it, since you don't want to switch out in a dude when he's 5 levels behind the rest of the party but doing it via XP sharing seems a little odd.

Nope, the option says: "only ACTIVE companions share the experience" and it's turned on by default. To get it shared with absent companions it needs to be turned off.

 

[hexer]

So most recent ratings on steam do not complain about the difficulty, but bugs galore and an 'unfinished' feel.
Any 'dexers playing the game have an opinion on that?

I'm 10 hours in and had like 2 pathetic cosmetic bugs so far - party walked on top of the bush and weapon didn't show up being held inside inventory until I reopened it.
There's no unfinished feel.
Also, I really dig the kingdom management part!

 

[Urthor]

Loading times on SSD are getting PoE1 long between areas and there are a lot of areas

 

[Fedora Master]

Still the idea of non-party members getting exp for something they haven't even witnessed is retarded so better leave that setting on default.

The default IS to share the experience with absent companions. I understand why they did it, since you don't want to switch out in a dude when he's 5 levels behind the rest of the party but doing it via XP sharing seems a little odd.

Nope, the option says: "only ACTIVE companions share the experience" and it's turned on by default. To get it shared with absent companions it needs to be turned off.

You're right.

 

[holla_cabezas_de_mierda]

Still the idea of non-party members getting exp for something they haven't even witnessed is retarded so better leave that setting on default.

The default IS to share the experience with absent companions. I understand why they did it, since you don't want to switch out a dude when he's 5 levels behind the rest of the party but doing it via XP sharing seems a little odd.

in my experience it actually does not make a huge difference in the long run even if you have a 10th level party and add a 1st level character because the first level character will level up very fast and eventually only be 1 or 2 levels behind. But I could see this generation of whiny cunts on steam bitch and moan about this for days and decide its a bug and spam everywhere the game is bugged.

 

[toro]

https://steamcommunity.com/app/640820/discussions/0/3393916911747925939/
Just read this steam post and it sounds bizarre. Can anyone confirm this?

It's confirmed. Looks like a restart.

No. It is only a display thing, it seems. You still get the same old XP by the looks of things. Just the display is glitched.

It's NOT only a display thing.

"Only active companions receive experience" OFF means that the XP is shared between ALL the companions you have (which means the active party and the guys sitting in the capital).

"Only active companions receive experience" ON means that the XP is shared only between the active members in your party.

There is no significant difference if you don't have a lot of companions because active companions are more or less the same with ALL companions.

But it is a significant difference if you have the complete rooster of companions.

In my case I killed a couple of kobolds just for testing and the results were: OFF - 9XP increase for all companions, ON - 18XP increase only for party members.

Overall it's the same amount of XP but that's like double the experience twice faster leveling up for the party members.

I imagine that the discrepancy is even bigger with bigger monsters.

 

[Luckmann]

I just noticed that when you're sneaking, everyone actually speaks in a hushed tone, and when Linzi disarms a trap while sneaking, she whispers "Applause please." rather than the usual cheery/loud tone.

I have no idea how they did that, if they actually recorded two versions of, like, all the basic voiceovers or something, but that's actually a really nice fucking touch, and it makes dark areas (especially if you don't have a Light spell or torches up) actually feel more oppressive. Yeah, I know it ultimately doesn't matter that much, but it just occurred to me how cool that is.

https://steamcommunity.com/app/640820/discussions/0/3393916911747925939/
Just read this steam post and it sounds bizarre. Can anyone confirm this?

It's confirmed. Looks like a restart.

No. It is only a display thing, it seems. You still get the same old XP by the looks of things. Just the display is glitched.

It's NOT only a display thing.

"Only active companions receive experience" OFF means that the XP is shared between ALL the companions you have (which means the active party and the guys sitting in the capital).

"Only active companions receive experience" ON means that the XP is shared only between the active members in your party.

There is no significant difference if you don't have a lot of companions because active companions are more or less the same with ALL companions.

But it is a significant difference if you have the complete rooster of companions.

In my case I killed a couple of kobolds just for testing and the results were: OFF - 9XP increase for all companions, ON - 18XP increase only for party members. That's like double the experience.

I imagine that the discrepancy is even bigger with bigger monsters.

Did you actually bother to check how much XP you were actually getting? Because based on my testing earlier, it's absolutely just a display thing, and the thing doesn't seem to matter at all.

Of course, it might matter later, when you meet new CNPC:s to recruit, but as far as gaining XP in the active group, it literally does not matter.

 

[Serus]

Ok, so now that the experience panic turned out to (probably) be a display/rounding issue we can return to bashing/praising the game or talking about game mechanics and strategies.

 

[hexer]

So some Steam chump picked up on this before the Codex? Sad!

WTF?! XP sharing among party members is a common thing in pen & paper DnD 3.5 / Pathfinder campaigns.
Why are people acting surprised?

P&P is truly dead

 

[toro]

https://steamcommunity.com/app/640820/discussions/0/3393916911747925939/

Luckmann quote from Steam:

Please ban this man he is from the RPG Codex, a hate-forum that acts as a platform for harassment and misogyny and hosts attacks on rpg developers everywhere do not trust him.

How fucking retarded are you? Piece of shit.

Edit: He deleted the post.

 

[Ezeekiel]

A DnD party without a healer of some sort is asking for a lot of trouble

You get showered in (crappy) healing potions looted from human enemies early on in this, though... I didn't miss having a proper healer for quite some time tbh. Only the stat debuff/dmg stuff made me reconsider.

Playing this game on normal (but 100% enemy dmg) with a fully optimized party would make it a total cakewalk imo, unless you get a bugged encounter.
Guessing that's the real reason you can't get a full custom party from the start and new custom companions cost an arm and a leg.

 

[toro]

Did you actually bother to check how much XP you were actually getting? Because based on my testing earlier, it's absolutely just a display thing, and the thing doesn't seem to matter at all.

Of course, it might matter later, when you meet new CNPC:s to recruit, but as far as gaining XP in the active group, it literally does not matter.

I agree. Overall you get the same amount of XP regardless of this setting's state but it's distributed differently.

ON means that the active party members will level up faster (like at least twice) but non-active companions will not get XP while OFF means that all companions will level-up at the same rate.

 

[Mortmal]

Okay, how the hell do you keep a barbarian like Amiri alive? Enemies seem to love to focus her down all the time and I've already stuffed her full of +AC gear.

Shut down her IA, send valerie with 30+ ac on front before anyoneelse so she aggro everything , they wont target anyone else cause you will destroy them all quickly one by one with all your other chars.Amiri need full strengh and the best weapon possible and she will devastate anything.

Those trolls don't really seem to give a fuck about 30 AC, sadly enough.

Defensive stance+ teamwork feats they sure will give a fuck, even can tank troll king for a while.

 

[Lacrymas]

How is the game balanced if that's the case, though? You'll level twice as fast with the setting on, but basically be forced to go with the same team the whole game (which isn't that big of a problem, I doubt many people switch their party members much). Would there be enough xp if you share it among everyone? This seems like a weird design choice.

 

[holla_cabezas_de_mierda]

Reading the steam reviews is triggering the shit out of me. I now understand how and why the decline happened and have a target to direct my anger towards for it occurring in the first place. I worry the amount of whining is going to discourage any developers witnessing this to avoid making difficult RPG's at all, even with difficulty options.

And this is difficulty issue is the most incredible part of this to me. The developers added a way to completely change many/most of the difficulty settings. The ability to fine tune the difficulty is more detailed and extensive than on almost any game I can remember. You would think being told this fact would be enough to settle their issue, but no- most of the idiots are actually already aware that these these options exist and they refuse to change them. Their reasoning for not being willing to change the difficulty is that they "should not have to" and that "they always play CRPG's on hard", because they are seasoned and accomplished gamers. So instead of taking 15 seconds to change the settings themselves like the developers intended they instead want the developer to make the changes for them using code and a patch. How does this make any sense? And its not like this is some isolated complaint, it seems about half the complaints are about this issue. Maybe more than half even.

The entire thing comes down to their fucking feelings being hurt by name given to the internal difficulty settings. How does it make sense to them that they ask for a patch for something they can just go change in the settings right now? And how is it that so many fucking other idiots agree with and seem to share this same type of thought process? its totally bizarre. Its like mass mental illness. Its fucking insane as hell.

 

[Elex]

I think it's the later that's bugged--with the campaign being so long, 4th level being more than enough to defeat the stag lord and all that. Or maybe that's a built-in cheat for challenge parties with less than maximum companions...

If it's not a bug, it should have been properly explained.

fact: the game need a manual

fun fact: the manual will be around 950 pages, nobody will read it.

 

[toro]

How is the game balanced if that's the case, though? You'll level twice as fast with the setting on, but basically be forced to go with the same team the whole game (which isn't that big of a problem, I doubt many people switch their party members much). Would there be enough xp if you share it among everyone? This seems like a weird design choice.

I wish I knew the answer but overall I have the same feeling as you.

I do know that I've wasted a huge amount of XP on the companions which are sitting in the capital. That's why at the end of chapter 2 I'm like lvl 7 while other people are lvl 9(!?).

Anyway, the setting doesn't make sense unless you somehow are forced to used them in battles. Also there is an option to train low level companions in your capital (and you pay with BPs for that).

 

[toro]

So some Steam chump picked up on this before the Codex? Sad!

WTF?! XP sharing among party members is a common thing in pen & paper DnD 3.5 / Pathfinder campaigns.
Why are people acting surprised?

P&P is truly dead

It's XP sharing among all companions regardless if they are in the party or not. Still common?

 

[fantadomat]

Buahahahah religious people arguing about whose orgies are better

 

[Fedora Master]

There are some neat setpieces in this game. Did you guys see the Mite stand up comedian in Old Sycamore?

 

[bataille]

Buahahahah religious people arguing about whose orgies are better

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orgia

 

[Background Character]

There are some neat setpieces in this game. Did you guys see the Mite stand up comedian in Old Sycamore?

No, I killed them all

 

[HoboForEternity]

Tries this for an hour or so.

The character builder is brilliant. Informative, intuitive and looks. Honestly its better than deadfire. Even for someone who never played pathfinder and his DnD background is only from IE games and neverwinter night games, it is readable and did a very good job at introducing you to the rules.

The breadth and variety of classes is crazy for a project this scale.

The combat is okay, i just got trough the tutorial and UI is pretty good too.

Graphics looks good. Not amazing like deadfire but it isnt ugly.

I will delve more seriously after i am donr with dragon quest
as someone who liked deadfire, think this is even better.