Why is this the only RPG that gets barbarians right?
Strong, intelligent, able to wear any armor and wield any weapon like Conan the Cimmerian.
 Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
 Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
They copied Diablo 2.
True
Most Barbarians in RPG are just Berserks. Conan would be something of a Fighter/Thief hybrid.
This game was such a chore holy shit. Also open world was awful idea.
This game is good, but the pace is terrible.
It makes little sense because you're pressed to solve the urgent crisis but hey, I can take a random bounty and do shit.
The main quest should have been reworked with some plot device to give you reason to actually explore the whole map - like, hunt for relics to open a temple or some shit to reach the final destination and that takes you throughout the whole continent and demands you to curry favor with factions (more than you have to), get money to buy these artifacts... the list goes on...
I also found the change of tone disturbing. You spend poe 1 with becoming an aristocrat and suddenly you are a pirate and everyone takes it for granted.
It is absurd and breaks immersion. Would have been much better if POE2 was a different campaign, with different characters and another Watcher...
I also think the same, but IIRC the suits wanted a direct sequel so...
Could've been the same watcher and I wouldn't mind using the old map and traveling to other maps like wm 1 and 2. Deadfire setting was bad. A lot of questionable design choices. Shame.
>intelligent
Name one intelligent barbarian.
They are stereotypicaly dumb.
Conan had 17 Int and was a Fighter/Thief
moron take
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noble_savage
The stereotype of “barbarians” having the equivalent of high wisdom/intelligence stats is upwards of 300 years old. Why do you think america named so many states and territories after the tribes they vanquished… even during their racist period?
Because the names sound cool.
>Why do you think america named so many states and territories after the tribes they vanquished… even during their racist period?
perhaps racism isn't what you think it is and your understanding of american history is based on a cartoonish narrative?
What is racism?
a pejorative used to label in-group preference as pathological by conflating it with xenophobia and not universally applicable to a mass of people.
Created by ~~*Trotsky*~~ in the 1920s
trotsky murdered so many russians that they killed him in south america. nowhere on earth he could flee
Doesn't this just reinforce anon's original point that American colonists had respect for the noble/wise but barbaric/savage native population?
Also, why bother nitpicking the difference between xenophobe and racist? Any notable in-group preference held by a person interacting with people outside of that group will inevitably result in less preferential treatment for those out-group people.
NTA but it's useful to point out normalized social and survival behavior vs. irrational phobia levels, distinctions you can't make with leftists around.
Less preferential treatment for an out group doesn't qualify as a phobia.
Colonizing largely untamed land and risking you and your family's life against hostile natives sometimes isn't the same as 'vanquishing tribes racistly' hence other anon bringing up the cartoonish propaganda of the left.
I am sure the average colonial pioneer's mind was on his next meal and shelter from the elements more than say, constructing false propaganda narratives against a race of people.
>I am sure the average colonial pioneer's mind was on his next meal and shelter from the elements more than say, constructing false propaganda narratives against a race of people.
people emigrated to america because it was notoriously easy land to farm.
Only reason the original pioneers struggled was because the brits sent their most stupid people on purpose.
Yeah, life was super easy mode. Total non-issue. You and me would've thrived with minimal effort, right?
Conan the Librarian
Because you play D&D shit.
This
>Name one non-horny bard
>Name one young wizard
>Name one good orc
DnD brain rot
Fafhrd
>intelligent
i wish they'd port PoE to PoE2. all the changes like multiclassing, subclasses, balance changes, using PER for hidden objects with the PoE1 story/setting would make for a great game.
Never going to happen, but it would be cool if it did.
now the question is why cant any game get bards right
Because having a bard instantly negates any kind of lore explanation you have for magic in your setting. It's like psionics.
>but it doesn't have to be magic
A bard without magic is just a moron with a flyte in the middle of a battlefield. Makes for a great painting and even a symbol but practically offers nothing in that situation.
>well, they can have a sword or dagger
Then he's just a rogue/fighter with a flute.
Bards shouldn't be a class unless the entire lore revolves around magic happening with music/art.
>Because having a bard instantly negates any kind of lore explanation you have for magic in your setting. It's like psionics.
I don't follow.
Take any setting. How does magic work there? Does it have anything to do with music/art? Yes? That's cool but it only happened in Kubo as far as I'm aware. No? Then the bard is just a weird wizard who likes music. Thing is, in most settings with a bard class, the lore explanation of magic has nothing to do with music/art and yet the bard is a distinct class of caster that somehow makes magic happen differently without even trying to explain it.
Why can't there be the "mystical power of music", the "arcane power of wizardry", the "divine power of faith", and the "hidden power of the mind" in the same setting? Why do things even have to be explained in a fantasy?
>Why do things even have to be explained in a fantasy?
Because nerds need every single detail explained to them
Sounds like Sci-Fi nerds, not Fantasy nerds. Fantasy nerds understand the verisimilitude of humanity using techniques and forces they don't fully understand for extremely long periods of time.
The level of detail needed varies depending on the level of autism of each nerd. I consider myself a mid case and I'm willing to overlook a lot of lore inconsistencies but what you described is very close to a kitchen sink setting. Those are never good, not in their entirety at least. Kitchen sinks only appeal to braindead normalgays and the kind of nerd who only cares about gameplay.
>I consider myself a mid case
You should reevaluate yourself.
>what you described is very close to a kitchen sink setting
It isn't. A setting having more than one supernatural discipline is completely normal in fantasy. Kitchen sink is like when a setting has cyberpunk mixed with wizards mixed with space aliens mixed with cowboys mixed with mounted knights.
>It isn't. A setting having more than one supernatural discipline is completely normal in fantasy. Kitchen sink is like when a setting has cyberpunk mixed with wizards mixed with space aliens mixed with cowboys mixed with mounted knights.
That's why I said close. If you try fleshing out a setting with at least four different kinds of magic and how different cultures form around them, you'll be walking on eggshells in order to not have its internal logic collapse. Not saying it's impossible, just very hard. That's what I meant when I initially replied to the post asking about why can't anyone do bards right.
>If you try fleshing out a setting with at least four different kinds of magic and how different cultures form around them, you'll be walking on eggshells in order to not have its internal logic collapse.
Not at all. It's quite common and perfectly normal to have different forms of magic and fairly easy to keep them distinct and interesting.
no it's not, it's normal in rpgs to have the same magic system govern every single supernatural thing iin the whole world, just having cosmetic differences in practices depending on the region
No, it isn't.
then how about you name one big rpg system that does what you're saying then
cause D&D sure as frick ain't it
Clerical magic and arcane magic being separate things is common as can be.
post some non obscure shit then
Wizardry
Any D&D based game
Dark Sun even has psionics as well
There's honestly so many that it's unthinkable that you need them listed. It would be easier to list RPGs that don't do it, like Elder Scrolls and Diablo.
Those are all examples of exactly what he said, it's purely cosmetic differences.
No they're not, but you're just going to keep moving the goal away every time your backboard is about to get shattered like usual so what's the point of conversing with you when you just keep repeating "no" dumbly like a parrot?
Nope.
TES has Alchemy, Enchanting, Tonal Archetecture/The Thu'um, and normal magic
If talking rpg system as in tabletop, then WoD and CofD has worked fine enough with each splat's system's differing sources of power without contradicting each other (with the only exception being how WoD non-mages don't deal with Paradox, but even that had some suggestions. With Sorcerers showing that non-dynamic magic can be done without Paradox)
Fantasy without laws to its magic is just not good. It's not that it has to be explained, in fact fantasy is better if unexplained but there should be a framework to the magic that shapes the world, a set of laws that govern how things work that the author(s) stick to.
Otherwise you just do whatever you want and call it magic which makes for bad writing, bad worldbuilding and great reddit lols0random meme copypasta and troony level excuses like well why can't there be noble savage orcs in Tolkien's world it maaagic. They never understood Tolkien in the first place nor fantasy.
Reddit tier lore writing not only doesn't have any laws to magic, it overexplains things to boot.
It's like calling everyone adventurers casting fireballs, the magic loses any mystique or portent it had and is now mundane.
Chanters work well, however, as the setting was written to accommodate them alongside other types of magic pretty nicely.
Deadfire Barb/Fighter is fricking amazing.
>Berserker Subclass Barbarian, but get Modwyr which makes you immune to intellect afflictions, so you're no longer Confused by Enrage
>Devoted Swords, or just no Subclass Fighter
>Mob Stance causes you to do an AoE full attack every time you get a killing blow
>Every hit of that AoE triggers Carnage
>Carnage can kill things and trigger another Mob Stance attack
You're basically a blender.
I just fricking hate the way both PoE games handle accuracy so much. This issue is compounded in Deadfire even further with the way the game handles armor too. You can take upwards of 5x the damage an attack is "normally" supposed to do which is absurd
I think anyone playing PoE 1 and noticing what happens when the canon-weilding ogres all backstab the same target turn 1 should have noticed the stupid consequences of how damage scales with accuracy buffs and evasion debuffs. But then you play deadfire, get boarded by a ship of pirates, and 5 rogues with guns all backstab one guy turn 1 and make them explode.
It's so bad, entirely reliant on knowingly exploiting AI to make them target the one guy in your team with 150 deflection in your party.
ship fights in particular are moronic early game, but get a lot easier later on when you can survive the alpha strike and also have more crew to soak enemy hits
Deadfire is pretty easy to mod. What changes to accuracy could be made? Broadening the hit range and minimizing the crit range? Then you would need to rely on hit to crit conversion buffs instead of on accuracy itself.
The only class I can think of that isn't scared to dump Int would be Rogue, I think. Maybe Soulblade? Anything else? The game is just designed to encourage keeping stats at or above 10. I don't know why they didn't just set that as the baseline, really.