Larian Studios Forums Divinity: Original Sin 2 Divinity - Original Sin 2 - Suggestions and Feedback How NOT to do XP mistakes from D:OS

Of course D:OS1 is beatable with any combination of classes - that wasn't the point of the OP's post. The point is the XP progression of the game and how they impact inexperienced players i.e. players (who are mostly not on this forum) who are trying the game for the first time.

The OP made secondary point that when somebody makes a legitimate criticism of the game and somebody else who imagines himself to be more skilled than others (based on exactly no evidence) comes along and says that anyone criticizing the game it is doing so due to their own shortcomings as a player. Other than proving that point, you have accomplished nothing.



You're just adding noise to the forum. If you have anything constructive to add to the conversation, then do so.

And again.
Those who can't understand that if they are THAT bad with the game (and keep the noise up on the forum too BTW), there is the Explorers Mode. Period.

I'd be really disappointed and surprised if they added respawning enemies.

The game is meant to be somewhat difficult and therefore rewarding. In my opinion there absolutely HAS to be the possibility of failure. I want my choices to mean something and they won't mean anything if I can always trade time for XP and this game is about decisions not grinding. If you failed it means you made the wrong decisions.

Take the XCOM series, that series is pretty brutal and you can absolutely waste hours of gameplay and fail only to start the whole process over again, that is the punishment for failure in that game and I love it.

So if we accept that the game is designed to allow for a certain amount of failure and then you fail, how is it that the game is broken unless you falsely believed that you shouldn't be allowed to fail?

You SHOULD have to scrutinize all of your decisions in this game and agonize over where to put that extra point. You SHOULD have to come up with a viable plan to get enough XP to get over the next hurdle.

If I had to use one word to describe the game it would be "Rewarding". You don't get that feeling without some chance of failure and that level of reward directly correlates to that risk.

I don't think D:OS will ever be that brutal, where you can get halfway through with a subpar build and then basically can't progress. There will probably be a respec option. I think most of the difficulty of the game should be within each fight, where you develop strategies to beat them, rather than on building your characters perfectly. That said, if that they do take that hardcore route, I'd probably make it on a difficulty level even above tactician mode (minus perma-death, for those who want the hardest experience without that).

And in the other direction, maybe we do need a difficulty below explorer's mode, as ludicrously easy that mode already is to most people, just so there's the most freedom. It doesn't seem like it would be too much work to implement an ultra-easy mode that further boosts player stats.

I didn't find it that ludicrously easy, though I admit I'm not the most tactically-minded person. Both the current difficulty levels were bumped up with the last release though, and the devs acknowledge it was probably a little too much: the answer to satisfying everyone is really for the harder difficulty levels to make their début, whenever that happens.

Much kudos to this!


Some people somehow see that it IS totally possible to make a flawed build and fail the game. That was the point of my ranting in the thread...


There basically can be cheats/trainers whatever for this.

This brings up an important point.

The main difference I notice with the latest release is the power curve. That is, you start off weaker and become powerful at a faster rate. That, of course, means that your enemies do too. Hence an enemy several levels above you will be a lot harder in the current release than in the previous one.

That can make a game less tactical because, a powerful enemy might require a very specific tactic (which may not be available until a specific level). It becomes less of a problem solving task and more of a guess-what-the-developer-was-thinking task. It's an important thing to get right as guess-what-I am-thinking is not something most people will find enetertaining for 100 hours.

I guess we could call it the superman/kryptonite problem. You can't beat superman because he is too powerful -- unless you guess his one weakness.

The OPs point about D:OS1 could be framed the same way. If there was a problem, it isn't necessarily lack of XP, it could be that fighting enemies n levels above your party is not a tactical challenge due to the power curve.

I actually don't think it was a problem in D:OS1, but it is probably the most important thing to get right in the new game to keep it challenging without degenerating into a superman/kryptonite guessing game.

So far it seems to be more difficult to fight with level 2 vs level 3 than with level 5 vs level 6, mainly because your possibility to improve your equipment pretty much sucks at the low level, if you don't pickpocket and/or kill every other prisoner. Second because you now have more and better skills and therefor more tactical options.

Fighting the crocodiles for example felt pretty risky for me and my friend, but when we fought the lizards later on we never felt really threatend, we fought pretty halfhearted and teleported our own heroes in front of the enemies to troll each other.


I think it is pretty impossibe to reach a state were you can't progress anymore. But it is possible to reach a state, were you just think: This is not fun anymore, I want to do something different.

Exactly. Developers never make an impossible game. The testers will catch that.

They may not catch something tedious because, after testing the same things for the hundredth time, it will be pure meta-gaming and it probably gets tedious for them either way.