|
Arivia posted:I think from looking at that it thankfully uses the 3.5 psion and not the 3.0 one, with the big difference being the 3.0 psion needed high stats in different ability scores for each different discipline, it was a horrible mess. Yeah it just uses intelligence IIRC, but it's been a while since I played with a psionic class (they are a bit meh tbh, kindof like a warlock). e: The worst part about PRC is precisely that you can have only one character. There's so many cool options that being able to have a party would be great. Private Speech fucked around with this message at 03:17 on Dec 4, 2021 |
#
?
Dec 4, 2021 03:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 18:28 |
|
|
Apropos of nothing other than it brought me joy. Here's the first attempt in an SCS Hardcore run on that rear end in a top hat mage in the Carnival tent: Only change to Hardcore was to drop mage pre-buffs to Tactical, one notch below Hardcore. Didn't know what to expect from the dude so I put some levels in before going in. He pre-cast Spell Deflection and Ghost Armor. Combat sequence: Throwing dagger to face Spell Failure Crit Spell Failure Crit Death Very satisfying to watch those giblets fly. NWN talk has been fascinating for many reasons, not least because I had no idea of PWs. My NWN2 story is that I played it while possessing the worst PC purchase I ever made: a Pentium 4 based heap of poo poo. I bought a new-generation NVidia card that supported AGP, the old generation interface in the heap of poo poo, just to play that game because Obsidian - and paid a premium for the card too. It ran like heaps of poo poo as you may expect from that unholy confluence of technologies. But I still enjoyed it till about half way.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2021 03:22
|
|
|
My second ironman attempt died to freaking Tarnesh, the FAI guards were useless  Someone make the thread, I couldn't update it over the holidays properly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2021 05:22
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:Am I misremembering or did you say after the expansion came out, or too late in development WOTC said t would have been fine to destroy the Wall of the Faithless?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2021 06:02
|
|
|
I feel like the story works better if you can't destroy it. I'm not sure it would have worked if you could win that decisively.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2021 06:44
|
|
|
It's not like what ended up in there became canon anyhow. Like the official line is that the Spirit-Eater "just talked" to the corpse of Myrkul and moved on lmao
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2021 06:56
|
|
|
Basic Chunnel posted:It's not like what ended up in there became canon anyhow. Like the official line is that the Spirit-Eater "just talked" to the corpse of Myrkul and moved on lmao I’m not even sure if there is a canon inclusion of the events of MotB, I haven’t seen one at least Prior to 5e, the rule was that FR video games weren’t canon for the actual setting until they were incorporated or mentioned in a book - the canon version of the Baldur’s Gate games was the novels, and NWN 1’s OC and Hordes of the Underdark get very small mentions in the official Grand History of the Realms.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2021 06:58
|
|
|
Arivia posted:I’m not even sure if there is a canon inclusion of the events of MotB, I haven’t seen one at least this will never happen perhaps they could interest you instead in a little place called CANDLEKEEP
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2021 07:04
|
|
|
Basic Chunnel posted:Oh it'll be addressed... once WOTC gets tired of the Sword Coast and finally throws the spotlight on Thesk, Thay, Thrusk, Rashemen. The real happening spots. Their day will come. There weren’t published plans or a lot of details on Candlekeep prior to 5e, actually. I wish they’d not hosed up things as 5e does, but getting more details on the place in and of itself is pretty nice.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2021 07:06
|
|
|
zedprime posted:You're kind of restating the point. The OC was by most accounts rushed and there was serious talk of just releasing the tool kit because the point of NWN was meant to be multiplayer custom modules, with live DMs, and persistent MUDs. It was a multiplayer game with an implementation reference you could happen to play single player. Its legacy has kind of split the difference - fanatics will tell anyone listening about their favorite persistent world but the popular experience was with the single player expansions (which got actual attention and came out good) and single player modules. This is another reason that NWN1 fell flat to me, but I couldn't say why for a long time. I acquired it right after it came out because I was at the time a mark for D&D games, but I consider gaming very much a solo diversion and it was clear that this game was meant to be a multiplayer... slog, in my opinion. I had just come from playing EverQuest, which had left a bad taste in my mouth, and I had no idea why anyone would want to play an online RPG. I realise that I'm comparing apples and gnomes here, but that's how I felt in 2002 and still do for the most part going on 20 years later.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 00:11
|
|
|
Do y'all have any ideas for reasonable point-buy systems for the 2e IE games? "Reasonable" is obviously in the eye of the beholder, but Google hasn't been very forthcoming on the topic[1]. By reasonable I mean that you create characters that are of the power of say the NPCs in the game. Going by their stat totals alone isn't useful, since most of them have totals well into the 80s, which would then allow for say 18/18/18/10/10/10 with an 84 total, which could be pretty powerful depending on what you were building. So do you then other limits on the lines of: - at most one or two stats at max - at most one stat dumped - min dump is say 7 - must put at least one dump stat at say 12 for any class ??? Just wondering if any of you PnP players have used interesting point buy systems specifically for AD&D 2e. Pointers to discussions elsewhere would be appreciated too. I've been doing rolls in the low to mid 80s but allowing char/wis dumps for eg. Which then makes all the fighter based classes very easy to get to say 18/18/18/11/x/x and you have a group of very powerful characters even without point totals in the 85+ range. [1] Though it did throw up this math lecturer's blog on various D&D systems: http://deltasdnd.blogspot.com/2017/09/turnbulls-monstermark-system.html. v1ld fucked around with this message at 00:38 on Dec 5, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 00:32
|
|
|
My own dumb house rules that I implemented and adhere to: I allow for 87 points total (this is based off of imoen’s total, it feels right) for a bg1 character, with the intention of using all of the stat books on my guy. So a bg2 character ends up with 95, which is on par with Sarevok in ToB (also feels right!) I also won’t allow any of the boosted stats to exceed what my race’s max would normally be (e.g. a dwarf would start bg1 with 16 dex, later boosted to 17, the actual dwarves’ max) Lastly, I don’t do dump stats, the lowest stat I’ll go is 7 wisdom as it’ll eventually become 10 with the tomes
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 00:40
|
|
|
I seem to remember (or have my brain making up memories) a lot of people who were sick of rerolling and dump statting would do templates instead since the IE 2E implementation was very kind to dump statting making point buy infinitely abusable. Depending how power gamer you are feeling, keeping in the 70s total with something like 18,18,14,10,8,8 or 18,16,14,10,8,6 or similar templates juicing it a bit more. Double 18s is character defining at any rate and everything else is frosting and the only thing 18,18,18,3,3,3 loses out on is specific classes and multi/dual classes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 00:44
|
|
|
I usually take the first roll I'm given or reroll for a maximum of one music loop because there are so many potions scrolls pieces of equipment and buffs that stats ultimately don't matter too much.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 00:56
|
|
|
v1ld posted:Do y'all have any ideas for reasonable point-buy systems for the 2e IE games? "Reasonable" is obviously in the eye of the beholder, but Google hasn't been very forthcoming on the topic[1]. Depending on what your goal is, you might prefer a standard array rather than straight point-buy. Say, 18/14/14/10/10/8, putting each number into an ability of your choice. This would prevent having too many stats maxed or dumped. That said, some things to keep in mind: Most classes really do want an 18 in their primary ability (this is more true in crpgs than in paper, but mostly less true in 2e than in 3e). Most classes don't care at all what their tertiary ability are at; a 10 might as well be a 8 might as well be a 3.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 00:58
|
|
|
I go for max str/dex/con if some sort of melee class. If a mage or something that doesn't need high physical stats then I just go for max dex, 16 con (since iirc casters don't get bonuses for con past that?) and then max int or wisdom depending on what type of caster. It doesn't usually take a lot of rolling to get there unless I'm using a class that won't let me dump stats much. Rolling like a Paladin or a Druid can be a pain in the rear end because you can't grab those points out of charisma to boost stats.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 01:14
|
|
|
I really really wish 2nd Edition gave bonuses for stats in the 10-14 range. The fact that 7 dex is the same as 14 dex is so frustrating. 7 con is the same as 14. 8 strength is the same as 15 (outside of weight allowance). So the 18/14/14/10/10/8 split is often saying “only one ability score gets a bonus”
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 01:14
|
|
|
in case anyone's trying to do similar math for the 3e games, 3e by default expects PCs to have stats of 15/14/13/12/10/8 before racial adjustments (this is equivalent to 20 point point buy), computer games may or may not follow this of course
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 01:27
|
|
|
Thanks for the ideas, folks. I should have said that I'm rolling with a party of 4 custom characters so I can try out various builds in the same run - love this so far. But I got the Bracers of Dex yesterday and realized that none of my chars need it, which is kind of ridiculous for one of the best items in the game. I built that entire party like I build a single CHARNAME, which is the root of the problem. The party is already powerful from me allowing myself to pick the builds of my choice instead of what the game provides. Also, I have only just realized this: zedprime posted:the IE 2E implementation was very kind to dump statting making point buy infinitely abusable. I'll go with the templates/standard stats arrays ideas and set up some templates I feel are reasonable. Suspicious posted:I usually take the first roll I'm given or reroll for a maximum of one music loop because there are so many potions scrolls pieces of equipment and buffs that stats ultimately don't matter too much. Good point on the stats potions and scrolls. Wish the game had a better ui for those as the scroll and potion cases just hide them away. I don't have all the potions memorized so I almost always forget to quaff one at the right times. The pick rolls for one music loop is a super cool idea, by the way. I get sick of that loop playing as I set there hitting the reroll button. Using that as motivation to just get on with the game is neat. 
v1ld fucked around with this message at 01:42 on Dec 5, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 01:40
|
|
|
One thing I‘ve always want to do was do a run with any of the premade characters. The BGEE ones are all.. subpar but that can make things interesting.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 01:58
|
|
|
Jay Rust posted:One thing I‘ve always want to do was do a run with any of the premade characters. The BGEE ones are all.. subpar but that can make things interesting. I don't know if the EE kept it, but the original version of TotSC included a predone party that was accurate to the Baldur's Gate novels, which was a nice touch. Abdel Adrian was the first character I actually killed Sarevok with myself as a ten year old with no idea what I was doing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 02:01
|
|
|
Abdel is still around as a bgee premade. 17 str, 14 dex, 16 con, he’s a worse Khalid
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 02:03
|
|
|
A potion of giant strength, a potion of agility and a potion of fortitude and they're the same.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 02:41
|
|
|
we love prebuffing don't we folks. Hill gian -- no, fire giant strength, imoen wanted to drink an invulnerability potion but no, she couldn't do that, I told her it's not fair but it's the law -- those potions are for beefy boys. Beefy boys only. And we need our beefy boys, don't we folks. You've got Minsc, you've got Coran -- he learned all his tricks from me, you know, Coran -- and Ajantis, it's terrible that nobody likes him but it's true, he doesn't have any friends -- he can drink the potion too, if he absolutely has to, but everybody's saying, everybody's saying you need Minsc out there on the frontlines. Give em all your pots. All your buffs. His Thac0, it can't be beat
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 03:10
|
|
|
Jay Rust posted:I really really wish 2nd Edition gave bonuses for stats in the 10-14 range. The fact that 7 dex is the same as 14 dex is so frustrating. 7 con is the same as 14. 8 strength is the same as 15 (outside of weight allowance). So the 18/14/14/10/10/8 split is often saying “only one ability score gets a bonus” People in this thread probably already know this, but (most) 3E stat bonus adjustments are trivially easy to non-permanently mod into IE games. Just adjust the appropriate .2da files and drop them in the override folder (can’t remember if you have to create that folder from scratch or not).
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 03:32
|
|
|
Settled on 80 points distributed with these constraints: 18 for one stat, +32 for 2 stats with max 17, +30 points for 3 stats with max 15 and min 7. 80 is a lot as can be seen below, but it's also first time through with SCS/Hardcore so I'll take the help. Current party is going to be edited to: Berserker/Mage: 18/11/17/11/15/8 (Bracers of Dex, Tomes of Wisdom) Fighter/Cleric (Dwarf): 17/15/14/9/18/7 (Tome of Constitution) Sorcerer (Elf): 14/18/16/9/7/16 (Tome of Charisma, Algenon's Cloak) Kensai/Thief: 18/17/15/7/9/14 (Tomes of Strength & Dexterity) These greatest-hits-of-powergaming classes will have a much larger effect on ease of play than the stats, but hey I want to try them ALL and the pain of dualling the Berserker and Kensai at 9 is sufficient penance.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 03:36
|
|
|
Is SCS worth using? Does it make the game tedious or is it fun? I think I tried it once a long time ago but I can't remember what my impressions were.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 05:01
|
|
|
There's really no simple answer to that, though my experience is that the fun to tedious bullshit ratio is usually about 70-30. There are a LOT of options and it's worth reading through them all to see what it changes. You can adjust most things on the fly and it also has settings tied to the difficulty slider.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 05:18
|
|
|
Take a look at the README to see if you like the changes, the core of the mod is under the AI Enhancements section: https://gibberlings3.github.io/Documentation/readmes/readme-stratagems.html It's made the combat way more interesting. It's very modular, so you can pick and choose the bits you want at install time. On top of that it lets you set the difficulty individually for the AI from within the game. So for eg, I installed all the AI components but none of the improved enemies or fights components. In-game difficulty is set to Hardcore but pre-buffing is limited to Tactical, which lets mages use very long-term spells like Stoneskin or Ghost Armor for pre-buffing, but not spells that are 3 rounds/level. So far it feels great, the combat is fun without feeling tedious even though options like enemies use potions is enabled, as is the one where they alert each other. But I'm still very early in this second, Hardcore run. I got all the way to Baldur's Gate on Tactical with no pre-buffing before I restarted for this custom party at Hardcore run. That just felt like Core with improved combat though a few encounters were buffed quite a bit: Bandit Camp will go to full alert when you start the battle because of the call for help component and it took a few tries to get through. v1ld fucked around with this message at 05:23 on Dec 5, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 05:20
|
|
|
One of the 2e Player's Option books had a point-buy system that gave you 75 points to split between your ability scores.Jay Rust posted:I really really wish 2nd Edition gave bonuses for stats in the 10-14 range. The fact that 7 dex is the same as 14 dex is so frustrating. 7 con is the same as 14. 8 strength is the same as 15 (outside of weight allowance). So the 18/14/14/10/10/8 split is often saying “only one ability score gets a bonus” It's definitely a weird system in a vacuum, but there's a good reason for it - the assumed 3d6 roll for an ability score has a bell curve, with the majority of results falling in the 8-13 range. Getting bonuses from your stats in AD&D is intended to be for rare and exceptional characters only. This is also why point buy for a 2e-derived system is kind of bad, honestly. The higher a score already is, the more valuable each successive point becomes, so the system incentivises min-maxing. It's really not designed for players to be able to assign points freely. 3e onwards is much more point-buy-friendly, since bonuses progress linearly, but you get almost the opposite "problem", where the ability score roll doesn't account for how rare a roll in the 15-18 range is, so having the assumed stats for a functional character is actually really difficult if you're rolling straight.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 08:40
|
|
|
Ginette Reno posted:Is SCS worth using? Does it make the game tedious or is it fun? I think I tried it once a long time ago but I can't remember what my impressions were. I’ve been playing the series since release but still only play on normal difficulty and without tactics mods. I just don’t find them necessary. That said, the mod is modular and you can tweak to taste the different settings. I think if you’re a player who sleepwalks through the game as it is, it might be worth a shot.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 08:44
|
|
|
I like most of the changes in SCS. Certain BG1 encounters can be quite tough if you install them, but then those limited quantity potions are in the game for a reason. In BG2 it mostly just expects you to understand how layered spell defenses work and effectively moves some of the more powerful items to later in the game (since getting them can be too difficult for an early game party). It has some potential to be tedious if you're running a party without True Sight or Detect Illusions because mages do love their invisibility.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 09:14
|
|
|
Yeah I'm kinda undecided. I think if I did try it I would probably not enable enemy prebuffing since that sounds tedious. I don't mind them fighting more intelligently but I'm not sure I want to turn every encounter into one where I need to use every last buff and consumable I have.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 09:28
|
|
|
That's almost exactly my thoughts when I started using it too and I went with Tactical difficulty with no pre-buffing for that first run. Give it a try with those settings, see if you like it by the Bandit Camp. The other two components to consider whether to include are Better Calls for Help and NPCs use Potions. For that first run I enabled calls for help but not potions. Calls for help makes the entire Bandit Camp slowly become aware of your starting the fight and come over to help which is horrifying to see the first time, especially the two named combatants attacking you together. But we do get sleep and web, so it's manageable. Potions hasn't been tedious this run but I'm still very early in the game, let's see how I feel after combatants start going invisible and stuff. On the plus side they drop more potions for you to use, I just need to remember to.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 15:15
|
|
|
v1ld posted:Settled on 80 points distributed with these constraints: 18 for one stat, +32 for 2 stats with max 17, +30 points for 3 stats with max 15 and min 7. This has worked pretty well and the biggest changes have been to make my party squishier through less HP and AC for the most part. Was thinking of those allocations and some more thoughts that I wrote up here for my own future reference. In 2e stats at 15 or over get bonuses that scale up in a mostly non-linear fashion. There are Tomes that let you raise stats by one point in the game, one for each stat except for Wisdom that gets 3 tomes. So 14 is an interesting stat value as well since a tome will push it to 15 where it will then provide a bonus. 9 Int is a big breakpoint since it lets you use wands and scrolls. +32 for 2 stats with 17 max vs +31 or +30 . +32 allows for 17/15 or 16/16, both of which are quite powerful allocations. . +31 allows 17/14 which puts one stat at a high level and the other can take a tome to get into bonus level or 16/15 which is still pretty powerful. . +30 allows 17/13 which has no tome benefits for the lower stat and 15/15 for benefits to two stats. So +31/30 are pretty significant changes to +32 and each worth considering. +30 for 3 stats, max 15, min 7 The 9 Int breakpoint to use wands/scrolls makes this pretty good as is since you probably want 9 int on most characters. Some interesting splits: . 15/8/7 lets you boost one more stat, but no 9 int unless you use a tome. . 14/9/7 lets you use wands and put another stat in tome range. This feels good as is though moving it to +29 would have a significant effect because of the 9 Int breakpoint. I'm going to stick with the +32 for 2, +30 for 3 for this run as I'm no 2e systems or BG expert and can use the additional help. E: Reason for doing it this way is entirely from the sample templates/stats arrays y'all gave. Having primary at max 18 and a couple other stats in the 17-15 range is why it's set to 18 for one, +32 for two stats and some flexibility in the remaining 3. v1ld fucked around with this message at 16:08 on Dec 5, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 16:04
|
|
|
Opponents constantly chugging healing and invisibility potions can get pretty old after a while, especially later on when they have big hit point pools and carry a lot of potions. That's the one thing I would seriously consider toggling off, although ideally there would be an option to just tone it down a bit. On the other hand, it really underscores how powerful save-or-else spells can be for neutralizing durable opponents. It isn't as big a deal if you have a spellcaster-heavy group and have somebody set up with multiple casts of greater malison and doom. Fruits of the sea fucked around with this message at 16:12 on Dec 5, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 16:10
|
|
|
Private Speech posted:PRC stands for Player Resource Consortium, basically an engine mod that implements as much of PnP D&D as possible - https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1647391559. You can stack it with most other modules, it's quite popular on PW servers as well. lmao incarnum
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 16:28
|
|
|
Everyone's mileage with SCS is different but my hot take is that I love most of it for BG1. Especially the poo poo that the improved enemy AI scripts do, the calls for help, and I think in BG1 I think it makes the spellcasting enemies a lot more varied and fun and interesting. That's because they have limited spell books so the particular combo of spells means you have to employ often quite different tactics to take them down. I almost always use it for my BG1 playthroughs. The harder encounters for BG1 are mixed, I don't think the author got the fairness component right in some of them (looking at you, wolf of ulcaster  ). The abilities they get are too punishing given the level and abilities available to your characters. I use some but not others.For BG2 generally I'm not a fan of SCS. The improved AI is still great and I wish that there was an option just to have those scripts in and nothing else (and maybe there is now? I haven't used the mod in years). However what SCS primarily does in BG2 is bring mages and spellcasting even more to the fore. It adds a lot more complexity to spellcasting by making certain buff strippers less powerful, or certain buffs more powerful, but that has the side effect of making spellcasters even more untouchable unless you have strong mages yourself to counter them. The author has made changes in line with spell descriptions and stuff, it's all well researched and fair. It means that more of the spells you can learn are actually needed (instead of the 2 or sometimes 3 buff removers you need in the base game) and it also means not every enemy mage can have the same spells cast in the same order. That increases the difficulty and variety in a sense, but imo it makes things a lot more tedious and not more fun. Every mage encounter involves having to pause the game and look up a big table of which spell spells get rid of which protections, and then puzzling out which order they need to go in based on which ones this particular mage has used and the fairly arbitrary (but different from base game!) ways that they overlap. The harder enemies for BG2 are interesting and a bit more fair than BG1 given your characters in BG2 overall are more powerful. It does kind of require you to use all your resources on them, in some cases before almost every encounter in a dungeon, which requires lots of resting and preparation. Some of them are still just unfair or not particularly fun (improved demiliches ugh). TL;dr I love SCS for BG1 but don't use it for BG2.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 20:03
|
|
|
My rule of thumb is to skip past any of the mod components that include the word “improved” and just stick to the “smarter” ones
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 20:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 18:28 |
|
|
goblin week posted:lmao incarnum There is Soulknife too if you want something more to lmao at.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2021 20:21
|
|