Ring of Triumphant Advance didn't double the morale bonuses to abilities – fixed
The Ring of Sacred Touch didn't provide a damage bonus to touch attacks – fixed
An oracle, who gained access to Mystic Theurge, Hellknight Signifer, or Loremaster prestige class by merging a Spellbook with an Angel's Mythic Spellbook now properly gains a caster level and new spells
Metamagic (Extend Spell) didn't increase the duration of the Bestow Grace of the Champion spell – fixe
Cleaving Finish Feat worked incorrectly – fixed
Finally! (assuming it's really really gonna work, you never know...)
Fiery Body, Iron Body, and Ice Body spells are now considered as efects with a polymorph descriptor, and remove all polymorph effects from the target
+
Aspect of the Wolf, greater Animal Aspect, Aspect of the Falcon, Aspect of the Bear, Aspect of the Stag, Blessing of the Salamander, Frightful Aspect, Geniekind, Fiery Body, Ice Body, and Iron Body spells now benefit from Master Shapeshifter feat and got the polymorph descriptor
+
Frightful Aspect and Dragonkind I, II, and III could be active on the same character at the same time – fixed
NNNooooooo - they didn't do anything wrooooong, reeeeeee
Mythic Legend incorrectly calculated the caster's level of a Sorcerer multiclassed with a Mystic Theurge – fixed
As long as it means, what i think it means - nice!
Now it's possible to select the 'Metamagic (Completely Normal Spell)' feat via the Extra Feat mythic ability
Yup!
Trickster's combat feats will no longer be available to a Loremaster who is not following a Trickster mythic path
That's some back&forth going on with these things... Also RIP my all-powerful Ember... Long live just powerful Ember?
Still no fixing to the Beneficial Curse being not too beneficial - makes me sadge. (unless me be blind)
One question though - was there any reason to not, like, provide us with a steady stream of all these good things over the time? As opposed to making us wonder if the bug reports are even being read, or is there more than just one gruesomely overworked poor person on patching duty? It's not like i don't appreciate the need to develop new projects and keep up with the dlc roadmap and whatnot, but most of those (mechanical in particular) issues persisted (and still do) for literally years now... YEARS, Karl.
I donno - maybe it's just me, but for the pricetag the game boasts (which, it's completely worth, but still) i kind of expected things to be better than that...
Bugreports come in hundreds to thousands daily, a huge chunk of them being duplicate, so unfortunately it's impossible to communicate back over each of them. But I can assure you they are read, all the time, every day :) The priority for fixes is chosen based on (not neccessarily in this order):
- The frequency of reports for the issue;
- How gamebreaking is the issue itself and what % of playerbase is affected;
- Community demand for the issue that we community managers can highlight to the devs;
- How complicated is it to fix this specific issue;
- How interconnected is this specific issue with other mechanics (how big is the chance something will break/require a chain of changes elsewhere)
If a bug hasn't yet been fixed, then it's lower on priority list, simple as that. Not because it is unknown (unless it's very fresh and we've not yet browsed any bugreport with it).
Fixed issues with damage for the following Honorable Judgment Gnome Hooked Hammer, Nature's Wrath Greatclub, Bellowing Howl Shortspear, Jharsygax pet, Club with Nails, Dark Glowing Scythe, Boots of Stampede, Vicious weapons;
Does it mean they won't trigger as separate source that benefits from special effects like Bane and Holy/Axiomatic/etc Weapon? Because currently Regill with 10th level of Hellknight can get four iterations of 2d6 Holy damage on each hit of Honorable Judgment (two in main strike, two in bonus hit).
We've sharpened the daggers, and now they all deal slashing damage.
You wanted to say Piercing? Or Piercing/Slashing is intended behaviour?
Yes, it adds to the existing damage now, not as a separate source.
And intended to be piercing/slashing, yes.
Okay, that is all fair and good, but
Bugreports come in hundreds to thousands daily, a huge chunk of them being duplicate, so unfortunately it's impossible to communicate back over each of them ...
I understand\relate to\sympathize with that. Was never trying to imply, that yours was an easy job, nor that your feedback mechanisms were wrong... nor that the prioritizing algorhythms in my head are superior to yours:) No, i was merely asking... how should i put it. You see, try as i might, i won't believe, that you guys just up and came up with all the things, patchnoted above, in a span of a last week or so (or should i?))
So the real question is: was there really no other reasonable-ish way of introducing those patches other than making players wait few years for a gargantuously sized patch with a... gonna call it Delta-testing to fish for the most immidiate new bugs, attached to it ?(actually good idea, too bad there doesn't seem to be Gog support to it)
Were really ALL of them THAT interconnected and dangerous to try and release as you go? (probably shouldn't ask if getting them packed in that big of a package really is safer somehow - lacking the knowledge to play a judge of that)
It's just... if the other approach was an option at any point, but was dismissed because, like, it was estimated, that the time total needed to account for\adress all the risks\complications needing further solving, would be, like x1.5 to what it ended up taking - i, personally, would you rather go with that anyway. Just one man's opinion.(wonder if i am alone at that)
Of course this patch has been in production for a while, maybe 3 or so months now. Smaller patches come out every month on average, and these bigger monstrous updates land multiple times a year, usually containing groundwork and files for upcoming releases and a lot of fixes that are being internally tested together with these releases (This time, DLC4).
What we can release from this build - we already release as smaller patches, the rest requires the build to be complete. And don't forget that a patch release with all uploads and platform approvals is a timesink in itself, too, so making multiple smaller patches is usually slower than getting a big single one out.
Since you are being so transparent, can i ask how much of the survey was incorporated into the future production timeline? 100%?
We're always doing a heavy analysis of every survey we launch. It doesn't mean we'll be acting on every its point - some things may be too expensive or too complicated to implement, deemed satisfying as is, or be heavily against vision of the designers. But it certainly has an impact on our future releases and updates. For example, DLC6 was planned to be entirely different, but we've changed it after looking at the community survey.
I see, thanks for clarification. Just really couldn't help, but get worked up about the desperation between the size of this thing and those minor patchlets. Really did make me quite... desperate for quite some time, as could be observed from rant above(and will continue to do so, apparently *sadge sigh*).
But anyway - may not have looked that way, but it was really good to see the game getting some much needed medicine, so, best of luck!
Thank you and have a nice day :)
devtrackers.gg