Larian Studios Forums Divinity: Original Sin 2 Divinity - Original Sin 2 - Suggestions and Feedback Misleading descriptions are very annoying!

It would be nice to know what a given ability actually does just by reading its descriptions. Unfortunately, this is not the case. It seems the only sure way to figure out what something does is to try it, which gets annoying for new players.

Descriptions range from extremely accurate to extremely vague, and even misleading.

Here is an example of how a misleading description gave me a completely wrong impression of what one ability does, which is why I never intended to even try it (until I did).

Firstly, here are 3 ability descriptions that are pretty common in the game and make sense for the most part:






Notice anything in common? They all refer to the caster as "you" and "your", and all of them only apply to the caster. So every time you see 'you', 'your', or 'yourself', you know right away that the ability is applied only to the caster, and not to any other characters.
Abilities that can be applied to other characters use words like "target character", "allies around you", "enemies", etc.

And now here is the Evasive Aura ability:



Why did I avoid this ability? Because according to that description, it only applies to the caster, and it costs 1SP/2AP, while there is another Aero ability called Uncanny Evasion which does almost the exact same thing, except that it can be cast not only on yourself but on any target character, while it cost only 1AP and has shorter cooldown:



Also, the 20% movement buff is actually better than the 1m buff of the Aura, because most characters have Movement higher than 5m, so 20% > 1m. So everything about Uncanny Evasion seems to be better than Evasive Aura.

That's until I actually tried Evasive Aura when I got it from an item. It turns out the aura is applied to ALL ALLIES IN A 8 METER RADIUS! When I found this out I started cursing at the game and the people who wrote these things!

Could the developers PLEASE stop using this loosey-goosey vague nonsense and show SPECIFICS like "single target", "caster only", "area of effect", RADIUS, etc. etc. etc.
Very few AOE abilities specify radius, which is also BS.

In another post I complained about how the description of the Chem Warfare grenade specifically says it deals damage to Magic Armor, instead of just saying "deals poison damage", which are completely different things.

Sorry for my outburst but I'm sick of being lied to by the game. What is so difficult about saying "Sets Evasive Aura for 1 turn to allies in a 8m radius"?

I feel your pain.

Here is another I noticed recently.

Warning: minor spoilers ahead

Somewhere near Reapers Coast cemetery (Stonegarden) you find a stray dog that will disease you after doing the talking. In the Disease status tooltip it states that it can be removed by a certain number of things, RESTORATION among them if I am not mistaken. I did just that (with my cleric) and it wasn't removed at all. Maybe it was referring to Ranger's Healing ability (which worked btw) but I re-read the tooltip several times to be sure.

And I am pretty sure there are lots of misleading descriptions all over the game.

Thanks for reporting.

The complaints are valid but on the topic of the dog, there is a reason the disease doesn't go away. Try talking to him.

To be fair, the skill name does say it's an "aura". There are a bunch other "aura" type effects in the game and they all function in the same manner.

You could say, it's just how you interpret things. To me, by "you" and "your" it means it's a friendly-only spell. "Target character" would mean you can target anyone, whether enemies or friendlies. Whether it's single target or aoe is a different thing. I'm just saying, in this case, it is rather your own assumption that failed you.

That being said, you don't want to be so literal in this particular game. Even though it's more serious than D:OS1, it still tends to be comical. Also, there *are* indeed many descriptions that are either vague or don't convey the actual effects very well. I agree that descriptions of skills/spells could be done better. Important information like casting range, aoe radius, intended targets, and so on, should be stated clearly and precisely. There were times after reading a description I would be like, so what exactly does this do?

But hey, it's a Divinity game. Your best course of action is to try things out. Don't assume. Never assume. In this game anyway.

Not true.
I interpret things the way the game 'teaches' me to interpret things. Refer to my OP to see some examples of why "you" or "your" refers ONLY to the caster in 99% of skill descriptions, and not to multiple allies or party. "You" is the character that you are currently controlling, not the party.

Not convinced yet? Here is an example of how the game describes another spell that affects all allies around the caster:


Now THAT is a good description. It's clear, there's no confusion. It's just missing the radius, but that's fine.

Now compare that to Evasive Aura, which also applies an effect to all allies around caster:



If you still don't see the problem, I can't really help you, but that description is garbage.

The issue has nothing to do with whether i'm being too literal, or anything to do with assumptions, it's that the game is not being consistent in its presentation and info.
In fact, the game could use a little more literal explanation of things, instead of super vague and confusing hints.
It's true that certain aspects of the game are best discovered by trial and error, but the game shouldn't mislead deliberately.

I don't know what makes you think that these small mistakes were deliberately made. I assume they are thankful for any constructive feedback.

That's said, thank you for sharing your opinion.

The description could be a bit better, but the word Aura is a pretty big clue that it's an AoE around the caster.

And if I could trust the game to use correct definitions of terms, that wouldn't be a problem. I don't just read a spell name and automatically know what it does, maybe you can, but I'm not that good. Spells have descriptions for a reason.

This is probably the first and only spell I've encountered so far that is named "Aura" so I can't know what it means in the context of the game. What I DO know for a fact, is that so many other spells define "you" and "your" as the caster only or "self", so this description indicates exactly that. I'm actually trying to avoid making assumptions, and get hurt for it.

I've played many RPGs in the past, and I'm used to some level of vagueness, but not this. This is crossing a line. It's not a complete game-breaker but a serious annoyance for new players. Of course after I try all the spells, it won't matter, but i'm still new at this game, still figuring out how things work, and making decisions based on reading a description without having tried something.

But here's the thing, now that I know I can't trust anything the game says, I'm good. I have no expectations of anything, so I'll just have to try everything, period. The game and I are on the same page.


I never said they were deliberate mistakes (I sure hope they weren't). It actually feels like one dev started composing the descriptions, did a decent job, then another one took over in the middle, threw some words together and left it.

It might mean that or it could also just have been the name of the skill. Two posts above yours the skill soothing cold is posted. Despite the 'pretty big clue' in its name, it doesn't cause a chill effect. There are probably dozens of skill names like these in the game. To be clear: there's nothing wrong with the name of a skill not exactly representing what the skill does. The point is that the actual description of what the skill does, does not mention an area of effect and isn't entirely consistent with descriptions of other skills. That could be improved in my opinion.

It's true what Yaeri said about Soothing cold. First time I saw that spell I thought it would surely remove the burning status and maybe set 'wet' or 'chilled' or something like that. Why would it be named 'cold' otherwise, right? The actual ability does none of that. That's why I was relying on the descriptions.... until I found some descriptions to be misleading too.

It should also say "... for all allies around caster in a 5m radius" because it's a relatively small radius, so if you're someone who spreads your party member around the battlefield, that spell may not be useful.

Before I tried First Aid (huntsman), I read the description and thought "great, it's even better than the DOS 1 version because now it removes a bunch of status effects". That's until I found it has a much shorter range of 6m, which is not indicated in the description, and that makes it not that useful in many situations.
This is not something I should have to find out by purchasing and trying out the ability. This should be indicated somewhere so the player can make informed decisions.

That is not how Aura skills work. An aura skill is not applied on anyone but yourself. But the Aura has an extra effect which is applied to matching target characters within range and will wear off as soon as they are no longer in the Aura skill's range.
E.g.: You cast evasive aura. Fane is in the Aura's range but Ifan is not. If you now run closer (and close enough) to Ifan he will benefit from the Aura despite not being in its range when you were applying it. If Ifan was quite far away from Fane and he is no longer in the range of your Aura, he will lose the Aura bonus he initially had.
-> An Aura is a passive AoE buff applied in real time around whoever's the Aura's center.

Hint: There are foes in this game with permanent evasion or reflection Auras. Get on high ground and teleport them 30-60 meters away (rude!). This should give you one or two turns without any of their allies being affected by those mean, mean Aura buffs.

The issue I see is, that I don't remember there was a tutorial message going up when (first) encountering an Aura. It should explain how Aura skills work. That way you'd have some clarity and you could avoid lengthy skill descriptions. Without such a tutorial I agree that the skill description should be extended to properly explain the skill functionality.

In general I join your wish for more accurate skill descriptions. As well as a somewhat more in-detail description of the undead perk: In which cases does health gain count as "healing", therefore turn into damage, and in which cases does health gain not count as "healing", thus remain healsome? (Such as necromancy and mosquite swarm; maybe they even used a different terminology for those so it is implicitly already implemented in skill and perk descriptions; not able to check right now.)
But I also see the advantage of keeping skill descriptions concise, avoiding redundant information. It should not be necessary to mention, that a skill such as crippling blow requires you to be in melee range of your target. Right now there's too much avoidance of information though, so some descriptions are rendered lacking information. Maybe the developers will adjust that, when they're going for gameplay enhancement patches in some weeks or months.

I agree that it should be explained. You know how auras work in the game because you've used them. As a new player I didn't know how the game defines 'aura', so that's why I relied on the descriptions, because there isn't anything else. And if the skill info is so vague, then I have to just try all skills, which is ridiculous! For all I know the aura may be applied only within melee range, which for all practical purposes that would be worthless as a party skill. But the game almost never specifies radius or range of skills..

OH YEA! I'm just loving this! I just found out from a different forum thread that the Spread Your Wings skill, when activated, gives you another skill called Flight, which allows you to leap around similar to Tactical retreat.



Where is that mentioned? Why do I have to find these things in a frigging forum? Why isn't that in the game?
I thought SYW only lets you 'float' above surfaces, that's it.

If you look at Medusa Head, it says it also gives you the Petrifying Visage skill. But this one says nothing about an additional skill. Why the inconsistency and hiding info ?

SERIOUSLY, I'M ASKING THE DEVS, WHY THE ARE YOU HIDING THESE THINGS FROM THE PLAYER?!
I've made so many wrong decisions because of the bad skill tooltip info.

(forgive the outburst, i'm sure it'll pass... until the next one)

You *could* say in this case the description doesn't do the best job possible, but to be honest, getting mad over this? That's a bit too much.

When you actually use this skill, there's an obvious pop-up that lets you know you get a new skill, and when it's added to the hotbar, it's easy to notice that too. So I'd hazard a guess that you never bothered to try it out.

Now there's nothing wrong with wanting to be able to tell *exactly* what a skill does just from reading its description, without even having to try it. It's reasonable to ask for such a thing. But like I said, it's a bit too much to get so upset over the fact that you can't figure such things out easily just by playing the game, and feel like they're "hidden" from you on purpose. Personally, I never had any trouble with things like this, and I'm sure it's the same for the majority of people. If I find out I've been missing something that's actually obvious, I'd just go "ohhhh that's sneaky" and let myself be amused by it.

Also, my personal opinion is, games like this are partly fun because of finding things out by ACTUALLY TRYING THINGS OUT. Again, it's not exactly "wrong" to casually rely on things as they are given to you ingame without ever thinking "there might be more to it". But then AGAIN, it's a bit too childish to get mad when such an approach fails you. This is as polite as I can put it; my thought is "too casual" but that expression might cause undesired drama. We all know this game requires a bit more thinking and attention to get the best out of than the run-of-the-mill hack-n-slash.

It's irrelevant to me what you consider childish to be honest. All that is besides the point and I won't indulge a response to that specific point. I could say that going around calling players' complaints childish, is, well, childish in itself.

I feel free to let the devs know how I feel about all the BS info in the game.

You make my point yet again - unless I try every skill, I can't be sure what it does. That's bad for game play, especially for new players. We're not talking about things like quest details, or environmental interaction, or other role-playing elements you can find through trial and exploration, this is skill information that's already available in the description, only very inconsistent. Again, since I knew that Medusa Head, for example, mentions the additional skill it gives, I would expect to see similar level of detail on the rest of the skill descriptions. The inconsistency in the writing is frustrating.

This would be like having one type of potion say "restores 200 vitality", and another potion say "restores some vitality, and does some additional stuff". That would be laughable. I shouldn't have to drink a potion to find out how much it heals or what else it does. In role-playing terms this is info that is (or should be) available, not something you have to test.

Here's how I've been seeing it:

Two times you reported issues, two "outbursts" - as you put it, a lot of text in caps, angry faces scattered all over the place. Even the title of the topic *has* to express your frustration.

You are not pleased with a product? That's fine. How about giving a feedback in a calm, tactful, and *constructive* manner? I mean, is there any real purpose to trying to prove to everyone you are *very* angry? Does it make your point more valid?

"When I found this out I started cursing at the game and the people who wrote these things!" It's mostly ok if we throw some benign profanity while playing and then let it go and no one knows about it. But saying it out publicly on the forum makes it a lot more offensive.

So what words would you use to distinguish between the two ways of giving feedback as I mentioned here: a cool, polite way, and an angry one with angry emotes? I would love to know your angle on this. Personally, I call those who are able to stay cool and act cool when something undesirable happens the "more mature" ones.

PS: Anyway, I'm not here to argue. My point is, it would look nicer if we keep our feedbacks cool and constructive. That's it.

I've posted about many more issues than just this, and have commented on others. This is the one I feel the strongest about and probably the only one I"ve used caps or angry faces. And yes, I do feel the need to vent a little, and let the devs know this is a real issue for me. If I express frustration, it's always toward the game, not others in this forum. I don't know why some people in these forums tent to make things personal. Some even like to throw insults at others, just because they disagree, which I've criticized. Maybe you don't, but calling someone childish or immature is approaching that. And all this just because I've used too many angry faces for your taste. Poor thing I hope you'll be OK. Thanks for the constructive criticism, and for staying on topic.

Maybe time to steer it away from people's different approaches to things. We all have our own styles.

Here is something else about skill info tips as you read them in the vendor inventories. Two examples:




Two Scoundrel skills, nothing too special about them, both do Magic damage, one applies Silence, the other applies Sleeping. OK, so far so good.

That's until I purchased them, and learned them, and this is what I saw in my skill menu:



It turns out I cannot use the first one because it requires a dagger, while the other one doesn't. Not to mention that Chloro turns out to be a long-range skill (13m) which, I couldn't know even after learning the skill. I had to actually memorize and test it to see the range.

And before anyone responds with the same old "try it and find out", let me say this: Buying all these skills, learning them, and testing them just to find out which ones I can even use, and to discover any other 'hidden' effects they may have, and then having to reload my game to undo everything, all this should not be part of the normal game play.

If the vendor screen shows the skill class requirement, e.g. "Requires Scoundrel 2", it should list ALL requirements IMO, including weapon req.
Other scoundrel skills are pretty explicit about this, e.g. "Dagger attack that deals...", so again, skill info varies from explicit to extremely vague and hiding reqs.

Let me end with some smileys just to make sure I don't offend anyone's sensibilities