Has anyone played the entire game with this mod? If yes, how does the balance end up being?

excellent !

Lmao that use of Oglaf

Excellent use of Oglaf.

@Citrovand Semantics can be a difficult topic to deal with. Well done Sir/Madam.

Hmm, I actually think the mod makes sense.
But wouldn't it make some certain fights slogs to get through?
Like, how would you get around that happening?

@View The Phenom
As far as I know it should play the same sound clip as -1/-2/-3 penetration.

If a character attacks at -4/-5 penetration, does the relevant sound clip play to notify you?

Wow, an actual meaningful and passionate disagreement between two gamers on Steam w/o rage quits, bans, or needless immature character assassinations--Well done to both of you!

@Citronvand @MrJane

@MrJane Yeah, I guess it really depends on the game and what we're talking about. I certainly don't think realism is always important. Not even sure "realism" is the correct word, perhaps suspension of disbelief or internal consistency would be more accurate, I don't know.

I think the reason I care so much about armor in particular, especially in CRPGs, is because of my background in playing pnp RPGs like D&D which misrepresent armor quite a bit. Not to mention all the movies and tv-series where armor is pretty damn useless. If you are curious what I'm talking I really recommend this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrVc1v90b7o

I think Pillars of Eternity handles the armor mechanics way better than D&D. I am quite pleased to be honest, with the exception of the minimum damage, hence my mod. I'm sure there something you care about that I don't and that's fine. Anyway, thanks for you comments.

@Citronvand; You had said it didn't make sense, and that was something worth debating... but, if you're just picking and choosing what matters and what doesn't, then there's really no point in discussing any level of realism. Too bad. I do have to say it was nice to have a disagreement with someone and for once not get called a ♥♥♥♥ or whatever. Safe travels to you, sir.

I'm not really too worried about armor penetration one way or another, but A+ for the Oglaf reference!

@MrJane. "You argue about the need for immersion while targeting a spell with a giant red circle, using a UI that floats above the characters, go in an out of menus... if there was any chance of immersion or "realism", it is long gone"
That's obviously not true. I can be immersed in a book even though that is just words printed on a paper or a pen and paper roleplaying game for that matter.

"to complain about armour means you should also complain that a lightning bolt or a gun to the face should kill a person immediately."
Of course there are other things that doesn't make sense from a realism standpoint, like food. But I personally don't care about those things you listed, so it doesn't affect my suspension of disbelief that much. Armor, however, does.

The idea of that article works with movies, literature, etc., but it will NEVER work with a video game. You argue about the need for immersion while targeting a spell with a giant red circle, using a UI that floats above the characters, go in an out of menus... if there was any chance of immersion or "realism", it is long gone the moment you start to use any of those features. You are playing a game and a game comes with rules. Do you play a board game and go, "Ugh, these little plastic people are so immersion breaking. They don't make sense! We should be using real people." I'm exaggerating a bit, of course, but to complain about armour means you should also complain that a lightning bolt or a gun to the face should kill a person immediately. A fireball should light the ground on fire (and the people). Etc. Video games can't have realism, unless they're built from the ground up to attempt it (and some certainly try).

@MrJane We are coming from 2 different outsets. You're arguing from the gameplay mechanics/balance perspective, I'm not. Of course I can see why the developers would add minimum damage when discussing gameplay, in fact I orginally explained why I thought such a decision was dumb. But I omitted it and instead went with "it doesn't make sense" because I ironically didn't want to provoke anyone.

When I said it didn't make sense I meant it from a realism standpoint. Wait, stop, hold on a minute. I know what you're thinking, I used the 'R' word in a fantasy setting. If you are going to complain that I used 'realism' in a fantasy setting I urge you to read this: https://www.themarysue.com/realism-vs-consistency/
Basically, having a little rat nibble on my magical full plate armor, with iron skin enhancement and it is hurting me somehow without itself being magical or having a damn good expanation is completely shattering my suspension of disbelief.

uhhhh, attacks still do damage so that you don't impotently swing at an enemies and have no way to kill them once you run out of spell casts. characters completely invulnerable to most damage would also ruin the game's balance

I hate it when people say "It makes no sense." It sure does. It's a video game mechanic. The game developers didn't want PCs to be able to completely mitigate damage, so they gave it a minimum. Makes perfect sense. I'm all for people making mods to make the game how they want, but don't say it doesn't make sense just because you don't like it.