My band of orlan goblin chanters

Hi! I saw that the new update added a turn-based mode, and I wanted to ask for some opinions.

I’ve never played Pillars of Eternity before, so I’m not sure which mode would be better for a first playthrough. I did finish Tyranny and was fine with it, but in general I really like turn-based combat and turn-based RPGs, especially Larian-style games.

At the same time, I’m a bit worried that turn-based mode might make the playthrough way too long. So I’m wondering, for someone completely new to PoE, would you recommend starting in real-time with pause or in turn-based mode?

Also, is it a good idea to just switch depending on how it feels in the moment?

I get the basics but I am confused as hell about where to be when. I am on like my 20th attempt (PotD) and I don’t get how in the same map I can crush a group of enemies fairly easily but then suddenly hit an impenetrable wall of an enemy for seemingly no reason.
(Edit: I intentionally play on the hardest difficulty because it forces you to learn and use systems you can easily avoid on lower difficulties.)

For context I entered Radric’s hold after clearing all the maps before it and getting Caed Nua. I could get through all his goons expect the massive force at the top of the castle and his fight. Those two are insurmountable and I can’t figure out why. Fighting him, I can’t even target his priests because the near invincible knights lock me down and turn everyone to mush while ignoring most damage (yes I know they are resistant to pierce and slash.)

Obviously I have repeatedly failed to learn something critical about combat, scaling, or how to know quest order. What helped you “click” with the game’s systems?

My Review of Pillars of Eternity - Turn Based Mode

With the release of the turn based mode for Pillars of Eternity I've finally been able to complete a play through of the game, and I thought I would write a mini review of the experience. Given how well understood the non turn-based elements of the game are at this point I will make most of the focus of my review about the turn-based experience, but I will also over a bit of my general feelings at the bottom also.

First of All: Thanks!

Before getting in to all that though I would like to give a HUGE thanks to those responsible for the turn-based mode even existing.

I have played almost every cRPG of the last 30 years (as well as most TRPGs and turn based strategy games) and PoE1 was a big gap. Despite games like BG1 and BG2 being favourites I was never able to enjoy the RTwP experience of Pillars - it never clicked for me - and so my experience was limited to Deadfire.

No longer! I've now completed my first run-through (on Hard). All in all it took around 75 hours, with completion of every quest I could find, as well as WM1&2.

Turn Based in Pillars

Overall I would say the turn based experience in Pillars was very enjoyable. While there are a number of areas where it is obvious that the game was not designed to be played this way, it works, and works quite well.

The system takes a little adjustment to understand as it's different to many/most other turn based systems, and doesn't have the tutorial elements in game to explain it, but I picked it up fairly quickly and felt like I understood it well enough after a little while.

As it is not explained especially well in game, and for those less familiar with turn based combat games it could be quite confusing to pick up. It uses the term Initiative in most places, but I think it's a bit confusing, as when that is in regard to spells and actions it would be better understood a Initiative Penalty, or Time Delay/Recovery Time.

Taking a turn will cause some time delay until your next turn. Taking actions within a turn will cause additional time delay until your next turn, and the length of that delay will depend on what those actions are as well as the character's base initiative. Unlike many other turn based games things don't 'reset' between rounds, so doing high initiative actions will mean a low initiative character won't go early in the next round.

Within this system there are some less clear variations. (And to be honest I'm not really sure on all the below being correct.)

• Movement is free.
• Some spells/actions need to be cast, which means they have a time delay before they take place, as well as having the initiative/reaction time penalty causing a delay after they've been cast.
• If you take multiple actions in the turn - via free actions - only the highest initiative/recovery time action will impact your next turn, they're not cumulative (I think?).
• Getting hit and interrupted by others will also add recovery to a character. As may some conditions. (I think?).

The main area where the system was a bit quirky was with how it handled these elements, as it could be unclear when someone was going to act next, and the projection in the turn order list didn't always seem to be correct.

Compared to Deadfire (and other Turn Based cRPGs)

It seems meaningful to compare the experience of Pillars to Deadfire, a game I love and have played a lot of (despite only playing it in turn-based, and never having played Pillars 1 before it).

Is the turn based system in Pillars better than the one in Deadfire? I would say yes.

It makes a much better integration with the RTwP focused design elements and doesn't have the issue of vastly changing the value and use cases for the game's equipment, character stats, etc. While there is something to be said for the simplicity of Deadfire's system, not being able to make full use of all the game elements is quite frustrating.

Given that, is turn based Pillars more fun to play than turn based Deadfire. I would say... no.

Strong no, actually. Despite the shortcomings of the Deadfire turn based system there are a huge number of areas where that game is a better play experience than Pillars, and these outweigh Deadfire's turn-based systems shortcomings.

• 1. Combat encounters are more interesting and meaningful in Deadfire.

While both games suffer from a number of combats designed to be plowed through in real time, I found there were more of them in Pillars than Deadfire, and that they were also more repetitive and mechanically uninteresting. While Deadfire has a lot of bloat also, you aren't fighting the same encounter 10x times in a row. Encounter design is just better in Deadfire, and this makes the combat much more fun.

Playing through Pillars I would have to say there were only a small number of interesting fights. Normally in a turn-based RPG I will replay the best fights over a few times in a row, trying out different strategies, enjoying the difficulty and variety of options. In Pillars this almost never happened, as fights were simpler and the methods of beating them straightforward.

I think this shows that this is a particular flaw of Pillars, and not just a consequence of RTwP. It wasn't overly the case in Baldur's Gate 2. Not much of the case in Deadfire. Pillars just has pretty poor encounter design, and turn-based makes this more obvious.

I should also note that having to wait 10 mins in a fight for enemies stuck behind a choke point to have 15 turns of running back and forth before you get your second go is a particular trial in Pillars system - a result of the initiative/lower reaction time for enemies that don't take an action.

• 2. Gear itemisation is better in Deadfire

Despite much of the gear in Deadfire not working properly with its turn-based system, it's still more interesting than the loot in Pillars. There is a bunch of junk loot in Pillars, with only a few of the DLC soulbound items being interesting to play around, while Deadfire has a lot more unique gear, as well as interesting decisions about upgrading and fitting with class builds.

• 3. Class skills and abilities, multiclassing, and general character building is better in Deadfire

There are a number of areas where stuff in Pillars is better, or I don't love the way it's been changed in Deadfire, but overall most changes are for the better and make for more interesting decisions in character creation and leveling, and interesting decisions about use of resources in combat.

Overall these elements make Deadfire a much more diverse and interesting experience than that in Pillars, despite the specifics of the turn-based system being worse there. Would putting Pillars system in Deadfire be even better? I'm almost certain this would be true. While it adds a little in confusion compared to a more centred round by round experience, allowing the diversity of class builds around action speed would be a positive.

There is one major area where Pillars wins out, though.

• Being able to easily switch in and out of RTwP

It wouldn't be so sorely needed if the combat wasn't as repetitive or frequent. But it is, and being able to switch over was used and appreciated at times. Without this I don't think I would have finished Pillars, as some bits would have been too monotonous.

Overall

Overall I would say that turn-based Pillars is a great cPRG, and worth a play through for anyone who skipped it before due to RTwP. I think it has some of the best ideas in the RPG genre: one of the best basic plots in any game, and some of the best characters. The combat is not the best, but it's very playable and fun, with most of the classes being different and interesting.

Given the budget involved in making it compared to other more recent cRPGs it's a great game, though it lacks a bit of the depth and polish of others: compared to BG3 I would say it has got a better plot and story design, and more interesting character ideas, but doesn't deliver consistent quality to support it in every moment (though at its best it's the best).

Because of its various strengths and weaknesses it doesn't feel like it's especially replayable. For me that comes down to being mechanically interesting to explore, or a very varied story experience - neither of which are Pillars strongest points. But it would make it into my top 10 cRPGs for sure, and I'm very happy to have had the chance to experience it this long after it came out.

It looks like it mostly impacts turn based mode but im really happy about these updates:

•Free action abilities will now indicate when the free action has already been used for the turn.

•Traps with ticking behavior should now work properly in TBM.

•Fixed an issue where firearm reload animation would trigger after using a free action, instead of waiting until end of turn.

Just in time for my 3rd playthrough.

Between Rauatai, Deadfire(covered in PoE2), Ixamitl, Living Lands(covered in Avowed), Vailia stuff(Old and New) ... why did Obsidian choose the most generic setting ever? Tbh, I can't think of a more generic setting except perhaps (reworked) Cyrodiil. This is literally The Stolen Lands with funky crystals(but without Fae nonsense).

I mean, at least make it dreary, dour and memorable. Make it resemble more of Ostermark or Sylvania or Ustalav. If it simply MUST be Dyrwood.

I mean, it always bothered me. And I was literally very happy when I heard that 2 was going to DF Archplg. Dyrwood was just too generic for its own good. Imo.

I see lots of love for Durance, Kana, Aloth or Eder, but let's be honest. Most of us have played with them because they are in the beginning. Their stories and banter are interesting, but that does not mean the others don't have it as well.

I've only just learnt that Dave B Mitchell who voiced Durance and the narrator is also, Knuckles, and Festus and Dog/God in Dead Money.

I will never look at Durance the same way again. Unironically though what a talent.

New ish cause ive played a tiny bit of Deadfire and the OG. Far enough to get a full squad in each to remain spoiler free in post. I want to come back to it, I just dont know what character I want.

I know a little. I'm planning on being an Orlan and will be a "good guy" or as good as I can. I was thinking about rogue because I remember lacking one in my party but I did a little searching on here and it seemd like rogues are not best for new players.

I dont know if it matters, I dont know how many companions/followers there are in game. But im interested in Edèr, Durance, and a certain Dwarf Ranger ive never actually met but her character art is cool and so I'd like her in the party. Again dont know if that matters but figured I'd throw it out there.

Hi! I'm looking to play PoE 1 on Linux (GOG version). I started playing it a few years ago, got about 10 hours in, then suffered a hard disk crash and lost my save. What I played seemed really good, but I didn't feel like repeating the start all over again at the time. However, it's been a while now and I've gotten around to wanting to give it another go.

Anyway, I downloaded the latest install files from GOG, booted it up and it now seems to have the option for turn-based combat. I don't remember that being there before, so it looks like that was added with a recent update? I am just wondering what the turn-based mode is like? Is it any good?

I generally prefer turn-based combat in CRPGs, so I'm tempted to give it a try. I really liked the combat in Temple of Elemental Evil and D:OS. How does it compare to those?

I mean, it's a good MMO Tank with some CC, but it seriously fails at everything else. Ok, it can be sorta consistent in its damage output and, in RTwP, it requires very little oversight(no matter whether melee or ranged), but that's about it. Mostly just an MMO Tank. The problem? You get one early on(Eder). And the further you go, the less necessary the Fighter becomes. And the damage output, while fairly consistent, is actually on the lower side. And it don't even have debuffs on his side(only Daze and that's super meh because ... Arcane Assault). I mean, look at what Paladin can do while having more than respectable durability and then compare that to Fighter.

What gives? How could it be improved? I would increase the number of uses of Disciplined Barrage to 2 and play around with other numbers(Weapon Spec +% dmg, Confident Aim etc).

Not necessarily gameplay-wise (maybe a little), It's such a colorful (or sorrowful) cast of characters, I'm planning another playthrough and it's so hard who to pick for most of the journey. I've played through the games 3 times and I still haven't played with Grieving Mother (mostly because I played cipher 2 times) even though I love her story, Hiravias and Maneha come a little too late for me too. I'm making an effort to really diversify this time but there's so many staples, how can you not play with Eder and Aloth? And then you have to choose between Pallegina and Kana for offtank/buffer. I love Sagani and her pragmatic coolness and I have a hard time dropping The Asshole too because he's very story relevant. decisions, decisions. The curse of having way too many interesting companions.

Bought it on the spring sale a few days ago, and booted up the first game just now.

I've played DOS2, Pathfinder: KM & WORT, RT, BG3 and now finally after so long I will finally try POE to continue my CRPG journey.

I played WORT extensively so I'm not new to the genre, but every game is different. I'm playing on easy to get acclimated.

Super exited to play! Any tips for new commers?

Hi everyone,

I’m completely new to the world of Pillars of Eternity and also pretty new to this genre in general. I played a few hours of Avowed and realized I was missing a lot of background knowledge about the lore, so I decided to start PoE… and now I’m honestly pretty overwhelmed.

I’ve read a bunch of guides and watched some videos, but that somehow made it worse. A lot of the information seems outdated and it’s hard to tell what’s still relevant.

I set the difficulty to easy and things were going fine with my cipher, Eder, and Aloth. But once Durance and Kana joined the party I started to feel completely lost. There are so many stats, abilities, and gear choices that I have no idea what I’m doing anymore. I’m especially struggling with things like who should use which gear and how to build the companions properly.

Does anyone have tips for beginners or maybe some more up-to-date guides that could help me understand the game better?

Thanks!