62 replies to this topic

[Jarno Mikkola]

DrAzTiK, on Jan 27 2010, 11:15 AM, said:

Well, I would like to set +++++ for true fighters. (and true fighters kit). But only if of course the ApR is not already fixed (unfortunately, I am afraid this horrible situation appears often...)

For ... barbarians , I don't want more than ++ of course !

Ghrm, the Barbarian is a Fighter Kit...
Now, as I do not know exactly how to code this, I promised to try, so I'll try, and let's then see if this mod is even worth the hassle.

yarpen, on Jan 27 2010, 11:17 AM, said:

Quote

Yeah, for example the Mind Flayers have ApR of 4.

That's not the problem. Thug who wields long sword and have ApR set on 2 in his .cre file is the problem of this component. I think we have to beg Demi for Creatures Revision (I'd love to see his work on it).

Is the Fixpacks, DavidW's(SCSII), the Quest Packs, Tactics... etc. creature improvements not enough? Decides, Demi already does a lot I believe when he makes the spells iow. immunities.

[Ardanis]

"Jarno" said:

It can be done, but searching the right kind of parameters on how to do the task can be a bit hard...

Say you wish them to be enemies, or neutral as well?
+NPCs or not? It can be hard to code the Neutrals without the NPCs, but I should have a solution that works +50% of times...
How about the Weapon Styles?
You do know that some of the creatures have their own items that have special proffs?
How you wish to manage the attacks per rounds?
What about the Rangers, Barbarians, Paladins? 2?
What about the Multi Classes? Same 5 would be easiest to code.

Custom ApR/Thaco/items are the main problem, as that'll call for arbitrary decisions. Reading creatures for such stuff and upgrading only they're clean is the only reasonable way to code it on a global scope. Nothing I or Mike wouldn't be able to handle.
Just so you know, I was even going to suggest it for SCS, although didn't for some reason.

Quote

I suggested to "secretly" raise his profinciency to +++++ (granting him +2 to hit, +3 dmg, and +1 apr), but he correctly pointed out that it didn't seemed something I should do within Item Revisions.

As I've said (I think), can be made with two subcomponents, one without proficiencies, another with them. Right now, they all have profs coded in, so it's just a matter extracting/commenting them out.

[Dermit]

Demivrgvs, on May 11 2009, 09:17 AM, said:

Regarding Minsc, my biggest issue with him being a ranger is that he shouldn't be able to cast spells considering his wisdom and intelligence. If we add that the Realms lore tells Rashemar warriors who travel alongside their witches are barbarians/berserkers, I see very little reason to keep Minsc as a pure ranger (though that was partially covered by his unique Rage). Another solution is probably a unique kit, a crossing between a ranger and a barbarian/berserker, and I cannot promise something like that (though I quite like it ).

I hope you decide to do this, it would make a great optional component. The NPC Kitpack mod changes his title to Rashemaar Ranger(though shouldn't it be Rashemi or somesuch?), as a purely cosmetic exercise. Something like that would make a good title for any kit you gave him, thus going with all the existing dialogue that refers to him as a ranger. Custom kit should, like you said, be a mix of the two classes, keeping charm animal, maybe HLA like tracking, maybe taking two weapon style profs out or switching for two handed, and giving a few barbarian abilities, like better berserking and increased speed.

Could also expand this to give optional kits to other classes, like Archer for Kivan, and maybe Cavalier for Ajantis, etc.

Edited by Dermit, 17 May 2010 - 02:15 PM.

[Igneous]

I've just been experimenting with this, and it appears the rows in your revised .2da's are mis-spaced. For wspatck.2da, this doesn't seem to be an issue, but the extra rows in wspecial.2da are causing weird behaviour in-game (e.g., there seems to be an inexplicable +1 THAC0 bonus being applied across the board, regardless of weapon type or proficiency, and the THAC0 bonus granted for grandmastery (and possibly others) is too much).

[EDIT] Oh, forgot to add that I was able to correct the issue by exporting the vanilla .2da's using NI and changing the values from there... in case it wasn't obvious.

Edited by Igneous, 06 December 2010 - 03:25 PM.

[Demivrgvs]

Igneous, on Dec 7 2010, 12:12 AM, said:

I've just been experimenting with this, and it appears the rows in your revised .2da's are mis-spaced. For wspatck.2da, this doesn't seem to be an issue, but the extra rows in wspecial.2da are causing weird behaviour in-game (e.g., there seems to be an inexplicable +1 THAC0 bonus being applied across the board, regardless of weapon type or proficiency, and the THAC0 bonus granted for grandmastery (and possibly others) is too much).

[EDIT] Oh, forgot to add that I was able to correct the issue by exporting the vanilla .2da's using NI and changing the values from there... in case it wasn't obvious.

Mmm, very strange as I didn't notice any issue before and I'm pretty sure I fixed a similar issue ages ago. Anyway you're right about wspecial.2da, it has an extra space for each row, but wspatck.2da seems fine.

I'd like to to update the attachment but for some reason it seems like I cannot upload anything right now.

[Mike1072]

I removed the extra carriage returns that snuck into the files somehow. I also extended wspatck.2da to level 50, so it can be installed after installing a level 50 ruleset. The first post has been updated with the new files. Maybe someone could check to make sure they work?

[Igneous]

Mike1072, on Dec 6 2010, 07:55 PM, said:

Maybe someone could check to make sure they work?

From a bit of cursory examination and quick testing, it certainly looks like it.

[Ardanis]

Hey!

As soon as they hit mid levels, rogues and priests start experience an abundance of proficiency points, since they can only have one max per weapon.

Proposition is to allow for one more star for all non-GM (save maybe wizards), and the progreesion changed to something like:

0 0 1
1 0 1 // Weapon Focus? In 3rd E everyone can have it
1 2 3/2
2 3 3/2
3 4 2

[Demivrgvs]

Ardanis, on Mar 13 2011, 10:09 AM, said:

As soon as they hit mid levels, rogues and priests start experience an abundance of proficiency points, since they can only have one max per weapon.

Do they? I experienced this only for mages despite their slow rate (1/6 lvls) because of their extremely limited choices (why the hell they have no clue how to use a light xbow which is the easiest weapon to use?!?). Thieves get 2 prof points +1/4lvls (5 or 6 points within almost all of SoA), and I guess most mid-low lvl thieves would go for daggers, short swords, short bows and/or xbows (3 or 4 points) plus either single or dual weapon style (2 or 3 points). Adding to that a blunt weapon (I'd say clubs are better for them than staves) may come handy, and a more effective melee weapon like long swords or even katanas is a quite common choice (though IR's backstabbing penalties lowers their appeal).

Perhaps it is just me, but having them spend 2 points on each weapon type they want to focus on may cause them to become too "specialized", no?

Quote

Proposition is to allow for one more star for all non-GM (save maybe wizards), and the progreesion changed to something like:

0 0 1
1 0 1 // Weapon Focus? In 3rd E everyone can have it
1 2 3/2
2 3 3/2
3 4 2

Mmm, this kinda breaks the balance I tried to reach by having everyone get proficiency (+), warriors specialization (++), and fighters grandmastery (+++++). Are you then going to suggest to let warriors (aka barbarians, paladins, rangers) get mastery (+++)?

I fear it would be a too radical change to AD&D/vanilla's system, wouldn't it?

[Jarno Mikkola]

Demivrgvs, on Mar 13 2011, 07:52 PM, said:

Mages...(why the hell they have no clue how to use a light xbow which is the easiest weapon to use?!?).

Because the light xbows don't have a straps in them... the kinda that lets you drop the weapon when you start to cast spells... or are you going to cast the spells with the bow in one hand, that's hard man. Yeah, it would be a back up... but then you can specialize to the xbow by sacrificing the 1000xp from the start and gain a few hp's too from dualing a 2nd level fighter to a mage... did this plenty in IWD, with regular bows. Not to mention you gain the warriors apr bonus (+1/2) from the bows proffs.

[Ardanis]

Quote

Thieves get 2 prof points +1/4lvls (5 or 6 points within almost all of SoA), and I guess most mid-low lvl thieves would go for daggers, short swords, short bows and/or xbows (3 or 4 points) plus either single or dual weapon style (2 or 3 points). Adding to that a blunt weapon (I'd say clubs are better for them than staves) may come handy, and a more effective melee weapon like long swords or even katanas is a quite common choice (though IR's backstabbing penalties lowers their appeal).

They don't really use more than 2-3 weapon types. By 16th level that's a total of 6 stars, which basically covers all needs until the endgame.

Quote

Perhaps it is just me, but having them spend 2 points on each weapon type they want to focus on may cause them to become too "specialized", no?

Proficiency with a backup weapon is good, but shouldn't it be fighter's department, to use efficiently a lot of different weapons? I find it slightly strange, that fighters generally end up proficient with less weapons than fairly average on combat priests and rogues.

Also, if you agree on my thaco nerf proposal, then extra +1 thaco will be hugely useful.

Quote

Are you then going to suggest to let warriors (aka barbarians, paladins, rangers) get mastery (+++)?

Yes.

Edited by Ardanis, 13 March 2011 - 01:37 PM.

[leania]

Quote

Are you then going to suggest to let warriors (aka barbarians, paladins, rangers) get mastery (+++)?

It would be good idea, but we should consider whether the change is overpowered or not.

As you know, barbarians, paladins, and rangers already have many advantages/features what distinguish from fighters, so the change may cause another balance problem.

[Ardanis]

Quote

It would be good idea, but we should consider whether the change is overpowered or not.

As you know, barbarians, paladins, and rangers already have many advantages/features what distinguish from fighters, so the change may cause another balance problem.

That's why I've suggested to move all fighter-only bonuses to the last two points.

[Dakk]

I've tried the Revised Grandmastery a couple of times in BG1, but I'm not sure what I feel about the ½ attack removed for ++. Incidentally I was looking through the BG1 manual (yes, that's weird) today and I noticed that the True Grandmastery tweak of BG2Tweaks is exactly modelling the proficiency table of BG1 - except that it adds a very spurious full attack on grandmastery instead of a half attack.

I'd like to try to that, how can I change +++++ to only give half an attack?

Also, where do the numbers in original table come from?

[I cant quote your original table for some reason, it looks like crap (probably because of new forum software), so I'll just old school this.]
According to the BG2 manual:
+++ = 2, 2, 3/2
++++ = 2, 2, 3/2 (exactly the same as +++, but with improved speed factor)
+++++ = 2, 3, 3/2 (lame)

BG1 manual:
+++ = 3, 3, 3/2
++++ = 3, 4, 3/2
+++++ = 3, 5, 2 (this is what I'd like to change True Grandmastery into)

[Demivrgvs]

Dakk, on 04 February 2012 - 07:21 AM, said:

I've tried the Revised Grandmastery a couple of times in BG1, but I'm not sure what I feel about the ½ attack removed for ++.

Such change is an absolute must to keep fighters (especially unkitted ones) on par with other warrior classes such as paladins and rangers. This is even more true in BG1, where a low level paladin/ranger can have everything a fighter has (vanilla's mastery and high mastery were pathetic, but even True GM ones don't make enough difference) plus tons of additional features.

Long story short, weapon mastery is pretty much all true fighters have over paladins/rangers, they shouldn't have to wait mid-high lvls (e.g. GM at 9th lvl) to finally be able to outmatch an unbuffed paladin/ranger in a regular weapon duel!

On a side note: Paladins and rangers were not supposed to get specialization (++) in the first place within base AD&D rules (PHB).

Quote

Incidentally I was looking through the BG1 manual (yes, that's weird) today and I noticed that the True Grandmastery tweak of BG2Tweaks is exactly modelling the proficiency table of BG1 - except that it adds a very spurious full attack on grandmastery instead of a half attack.

I knew, and that's why I always avoided TGM considering it very OP.

Quote

I'd like to try to that, how can I change +++++ to only give half an attack?

It's quite simple, just edit Line 5 of wspatck.2da as described here.

Quote

Also, where do the numbers in original table come from?

Which "original" table?

Edited by Demivrgvs, 06 February 2012 - 05:14 AM.