123 réponses à ce sujet

[AndarianTD]

MagicalMaster wrote...

When you ask a companion what they think of you, you get a X out of Y indication.  Is that all of the possibilities within the module or the total scale for them for all modules combined? I think I ended with 10/14 for Robin, for example -- does that mean I missed things or that I'm about 75% of the way to the maximum "approval"
or whatever for her?

It's within the module. You'll see the new, higher maximums when you start Chapter 2. So while it does mean that you "missed some things," not all of them are obvious or within your control. Some are based on Charisma checks, for example, that your character may or not make. Also there are more than 14 points worth of increases available for Robin, but the total is capped at 14. The details are listed in the hint file, if you want to see what they were. "Maxing out" the relationship is satisfying, but fortunately, not necessary. Ending Chapter 1 with a final score of 10 or higher is considered a successful romance, and enough to get Robin to start falling in love with you in Chapter 2.

Also, regarding the Lore check...the idea of only having a few points in a skill is pretty anathema to most people -- you either fully invest in lore (or another skill) or you don't bother.  So if you have a DC of 20 and expect everyone to have 4 base ranks...why not just make the DC 16?

I tried to design Sanctum to provide a module experience that was a bit "outside the box," and that doesn't necessarily adhere to stereotypical NWN gameplay patterns. It's something I try to warn the player about in the README file: 

Don't assume that gameplay patterns that are common in other modules will necessarily apply.

The utility of a moderate amount of a more broadly distributed selection of skills was a key aspect of this that I deliberately designed into the module. It's also why I added a section to the README with advice on skill selection that included some non-maxed ranges. Sanctum is heavily scripted and very skill-focused, with a lot of checks going on, sometimes affecting gameplay under the covers where you may not see them.

So the module design is actually intended to encourage and reward a bit more of a skill "dabbling" approach than is typical for NWN, even when this may be cross-class for your character (which in my experience is even more anathema to most players). To list a few examples:

• The amount of XP you get from reading books is scripted to depend on your Lore;
• Having even a single rank in Spellcraft (even if it's taken cross-class) has a significant influence on gem handling and helps with using Len's Alchemy set;
• Having even a single rank in Open Locks (again, even if it's taken cross-class) facilitates handling a few very difficult locks (e.g. the safe), since it gives you the ability to use some (strategically placed) high-value lockpicks.

None of these are show-stoppers if you don't have the requisite skills. But the advantages are there if you do.

Exact words are " And you sense and understand the gem's magic well enough to use it."  That's different from "You suspect you'll be able to figure out exactly how to use the gem when you try."

I don't think that's inconsistent with the idea that the requisite understanding and ability to sense the gem's magic will fade when the skill boost ends, though.

So 48 minutes per day at 2 minute per hour?

I don't think I changed the default clock-to-game time settings, so yes, that sounds about right.

Because he says "No, the monster had a gland that secreted a potion that delayed the poison's effects. It was a vile fluid that it made me drink daily when I got close to dying."  Made me think the presence of the fluid in a person would minimize the impact of the poison while active -- and thus "stacking" it all at once would not help.  There's a reason that if you're sick with something you take medicine every day or every few hours versus all at once.

Yes, I can see why Orion's remarks might give that impression. I don't think I should change the stacking, but do you have any advice on how I might clarify how it works that wouldn't come across as too jarringly OOC?

What is the point of the 4 charges on the set, then?

That's just a left-over from my initial attempt to use the "standard" NWN charges functionality to implement the Alchemy Set's features. It really didn't work right, given that I wanted to have multiple types and numbers of uses, and I ended up having to completely script the functionality without it. If you found it confusing, then I'll see if I can remove it in the next update.

Well, I quite literally didn't want to put all of my eggs in one basket.  For all I knew there was only a 50% chance of it working (or possibly I still had to do something else entirely) so I didn't want to risk all of the eggs at once -- wanted to make sure it actually worked first.

Yep -- in hindsight, that makes perfect sense. It's an easy fix; I just need to adjust the Beastman's script that takes the eggs to handle multiple instances.

Modifié par AndarianTD, 18 décembre 2013 - 03:34 .

[MagicalMaster]

AndarianTD wrote...

Some are based on Charisma checks, for example, that your character may or not make.

Well, I was a sorcerer with 18 starting Charisma so I am *reasonably* sure I made all of those.

AndarianTD wrote...

Also there are more than 14 points worth of increases available for Robin, but the total is capped at 14. The details are listed in the hint file, if you want to see what they were. "Maxing out" the relationship is satisfying, but fortunately, not necessary. Ending Chapter 1 with a final score of 10 or higher is considered a successful romance, and enough to get Robin to start falling in love with you in Chapter 2.

Looks like the number is 15 according to the spoilers, so not exactly much of a difference.  Wound up with 11, though, went back and checked the save.

AndarianTD wrote...

I tried to design Sanctum to provide a module experience that was a bit "outside the box," and that doesn't necessarily adhere to stereotypical NWN gameplay patterns. It's something I try to warn the player about in the README file:

Don't assume that gameplay patterns that are common in other modules will necessarily apply.

That's not a gameplay pattern, though -- that's character building.  Gameplay pattern is whether looting everything you see has negative effects or whether slaughtering innocent civilians gets you in trouble or whether you can rest whenever you'd like without consquence or whether infinite healing potions are available or whether you need to loot everything you can as soon as possible or risk losing it or and so on.  It's something that changes what you DO rather than how you build your character.

Whereas with skills, if I discover that I'm expected to have something (which often still isn't clear -- I don't recall anything saying how the DC was 20 for the Soul Gem in-game) I have to either use console commands or wait until I level to try to change something -- and what if I'm a 16 wis/12 int/14 cha half-elf cleric?  I only get three points per level, meaning that if I continue to max at Heal (which turned out to be incorrect information, I ignored Heal and was perfectly fine) and Persuade (as is basically recommended) that I'd have to wait two levels to be able to put a cross-class rank in Open Lock (and sacrifice Spellcraft/Concentration/Tumble to do so).  You can't just "play differently" to "fix" it.

AndarianTD wrote...

The utility of a moderate amount of a more broadly distributed selection of skills was a key aspect of this that I deliberately designed into the module. It's also why I added a section to the README with advice on skill selection that included some non-maxed ranges. Sanctum is heavily scripted and very skill-focused, with a lot of checks going on, sometimes affecting gameplay under the covers where you may not see them.

So why I was I failing so many persuade checks despite maxing Persuade and having equivalent to level + 3 + 1 skill (cross-class)?  Why was I failing crystal checks versus maxed Spellcraft?  I mean, you're simultaneously saying "Hey guys, it's a good idea to spread out your skill points among a bunch of different skills" AND saying "Hey guys, you really need to max out skills or you're hosed."  It's contradictory and not consistent.

I mean, the ReadMe says "decent Persuade skill" -- but even effectively MAXED persuade was failing.  What do you expect people to make of these mixed messages in terms of mechanics?

AndarianTD wrote...

I don't think that's inconsistent with the idea that the requisite understanding and ability to sense the gem's magic will fade when the skill boost ends, though.

Maybe because "it's magic."  In reality, though, it feels like seeing an unassembled piece of furniture without instructions and being unable to figure it out.  Then you get an intelligence boost and realize how they fit together.  Then the boost wears off and you forget what you just figured out...which makes little sense.  It is much, much easier to remember something you've already figured out than learn it for the first time.

AndarianTD wrote...

I don't think I changed the default clock-to-game time settings, so yes, that sounds about right.

While I was perusing the spoilers file, it mentioned resting advances the clock eight hours.  Is that the case?

AndarianTD wrote...

Yes, I can see why Orion's remarks might give that impression. I don't think I should change the stacking, but do you have any advice on how I might clarify how it works that wouldn't come across as too jarringly OOC?

Well, upon hearing your explanation and reading the spoilers, it seems to be the best choice is to immediately split all of the doses in a way that gives everyone an equal length of time to live (or prioritize a certain companion if their stats are more important than yours as the PC).

Are you comfortable with the optimal solution being to immediately use all of the fluid as soon as you find Orion and know its use?

AndarianTD wrote...

That's just a left-over from my initial attempt to use the "standard" NWN charges functionality to implement the Alchemy Set's features. It really didn't work right, given that I wanted to have multiple types and numbers of uses, and I ended up having to completely script the functionality without it. If you found it confusing, then I'll see if I can remove it in the next update.

I definitely did -- the only thing I was looking for in the message was "Can I use it or not?" and I was looking at the charges for uses.  Especially since everything else in the module works in such a way.

New point: I found one bluesteel bar (from the trapped forge) but apparently there were three?  How big of a deal is that -- trying to figure out whether I should use console commands to go back and pick up the other two.

Also remaining from earlier...

1, those three particular spawn points I mentioned earlier

3, the dying system seems a bit buggy.  I'm still not sure how it works -- and I've literally had situations where I "died," a companion healed me, I got up, and then I died again.  I've also had situations where a henchmen went down, got up, went down, got up...this repeated like five times and I was awarded 29 XP each time for killing him (while using the companion healing kit on them).

5. something seems very messed up with the persuade.  I was level 8 and had 12 persuade.  Orion was level 7 and had 11 persuade.  Yet he made every persuade check and I failed every one (during the delaying tactic, for example).  I had both more raw persuade and equal level based persuade. What was the deal with that?

Modifié par MagicalMaster, 19 décembre 2013 - 04:55 .

[AndarianTD]

A couple of quick comments:

MagicalMaster wrote...

That's not a gameplay pattern, though -- that's character building... [a gameplay pattern is] something that changes what you DO rather than how you build your character.

I don't think I agree that this is a particularly meaningful distinction. Character building is an integral aspect of how you play a game, and very much something that you "do" throughout the course of play. This is especially the case when you're leveling up periodically (typically eight times in Sanctum 1). In any event when I write about "gameplay patterns," I'm referring to every aspect of playing the game and not exempting character building from it.

Whereas with skills, if I discover that I'm expected to have something (which often still isn't clear -- I don't recall anything saying how the DC was 20 for the Soul Gem in-game) I have to either use console commands or wait until I level to try to change something -- and what if I'm a 16 wis/12 int/14 cha half-elf cleric?

Consider your own character, who by your description had an un-adjusted talent rating of 6. The intention was for you to use the Adventurer's Guide (a plot item that you should be carrying) to cover most of the required skill check. The Legend Lore power will give you +12, and the guide has an additional +2 when you hold it, for a total of +14. That's over 2/3 of the DC 20 right there. Add your character's +6 talent score and you already had the check made, without any other considerations, even if your character had taken zero ranks in Lore. The same applies to your 16 wis/12 int/14 cha half-elf cleric. And that doesn't factor in anything else, such as how mind-enhancing magics can be used to boost your talent (which I tell you about in your journal), and how bonuses from intelligence actually double-count: int bonuses boost your Lore skill and your talent rating at the same time, so drinking a simple Fox's Cunning potion by itself will give you another +4 on the check. That's why there are potions of both Fox's Cunning and Owl's Wisdom right there in Orion's equipment pile when you find him. Just using the Adventurer's Guide (+14) and drinking those two potions (+4 and +2) will make the check even for a player with Lore and talent ratings of zero (10s across the board in Int, Wis, and Cha). And that doesn't count other options, such as having Robin cast Eagle's Splendor (which she has it in her spell list) for another +2, or use her Bard Song for another +1.

So the risk of failing the check is actually minimal for anyone who uses the items and options they have available, and builds a character with a reasonable set of mental abilities. That's basically the puzzle: make a list of all your talent and Lore boosting options, and keep using them until you can make the check (which Orion's dialogue and the gem's Use Unique Power: Self ability will allow you to test). While taking a few ranks of Lore helps provide a buffer for missing some of these or for characters with unusually low mental scores, and it is useful for role-playing the module in general, strictly speaking it isn't mandatory. There are also items available in the random treasure list and for sale in the Earthen City that I put there partly as a hedge against those rare but extreme cases where all of these considerations might somehow fail to be enough (along with a dialogue line in a conversation with Robin suggesting that you go to the Earthen City to look for something that might help).

EDIT: It looks like I accidentally deleted the Ring of Insight from the Earthen City when I added it to the random treasure system in v4.0. I didn't intend that and I'll add it back in v4.2. There are still other items there for boosting Int and Wisdom, though, as well as several additional items in the random treasure system that would help.

Modifié par AndarianTD, 20 décembre 2013 - 12:01 .

[MagicalMaster]

AndarianTD wrote...

I don't think I agree that this is a particularly meaningful distinction. Character building is an integral aspect of how you play a game, and very much something that you "do" throughout the course of play.

You don't see a difference between "There's a lot of dragons with
powerful fire breaths, so you'll need to buy fire immunity and
resistance gear to survive" and "There's a lot of dragons with powerful
fire breaths, so you'll need to have Improved Evasion or 10 levels of
RDD to survive?"

AndarianTD wrote...

Just using the Adventurer's Guide (+14) and drinking those two potions (+4 and +2) will make the check even for a player with Lore and talent ratings of zero (10s across the board in Int, Wis, and Cha)

Fair enough.  In which case why say "Minimum Recommended Ranks of Lore: 4" if it actually winds up not being required given the calculations you made?  The section in general (especially the last sentence) makes it sound like having ranks in lore is required to play the module.

[AndarianTD]

MagicalMaster wrote...

You don't see a difference between "There's a lot of dragons with powerful fire breaths, so you'll need to buy fire immunity and resistance gear to survive" and "There's a lot of dragons with powerful fire breaths, so you'll need to have Improved Evasion or 10 levels of RDD to survive?"'

I see a difference, but I don't see it as an especially important one when one is talking about gameplay as a whole (which I was). What would you propose as an alternative way of expressing the idea that I was trying to get across?

Fair enough.  In which case why say "Minimum Recommended Ranks of Lore: 4" if it actually winds up not being required given the calculations you made?  The section in general (especially the last sentence) makes it sound like having ranks in lore is required to play the module.

That could probably use some re-wording. The need for Lore ranks was greater in earlier versions of the module before I toned it down a bit, but it looks like I didn't update that section of the README. It's still a good idea to take a few ranks in Lore if you can for the reasons I described, since it's useful throughout the module and makes handling the situation with Orion easier. Strictly speaking it's true that "there is one situation in which a high Lore rating will be crucial to continuing the game," but it's not quite as dependent on having those base ranks in Lore as I make it sound there.

[AndarianTD]

MagicalMaster wrote...

Well, I was a sorcerer with 18 starting Charisma so I am *reasonably* sure I made all of those...

So why I was I failing so many persuade checks despite maxing Persuade and having equivalent to level + 3 + 1 skill (cross-class)?

Don't discount the possibility of having a streak of bad rolls. It does happen.

Why was I failing crystal checks versus maxed Spellcraft?

What were you trying to do, and when were you trying to do it? If you were trying to cut crystals with a maxed spellcraft and it was failing, then there's definitely something wrong. I don't think I've ever seen that happen playing with a decent spellcraft. If you were trying to use the major crystals to enchant something and you hadn't found Len's Notebook Vol III yet, then that's less surprising. The DC for that is higher, and difficult to make without guidance from the book (which boosts the check substantially).

I mean, you're simultaneously saying "Hey guys, it's a good idea to spread out your skill points among a bunch of different skills" AND saying "Hey guys, you really need to max out skills or you're hosed."  It's contradictory and not consistent.

What you're describing is either consistent with my own experience but not surprising (e.g. using major gems without Len's Notebook), explainable by not recognizing the possibility of getting a string of bad rolls (e.g. persuade), or inconsistent with it (cutting gems with high spellcraft). If it's the third, or you've tested it enough times to be sure it's not the second, then I'd be happy to look into it and/or debug a saved game (if you're willing to share one) to try to figure out why.

Then the boost wears off and you forget what you just figured out...which makes little sense.

I disagree. What else is a magical lore boost doing, if not temporarily infusing your mind with additional knowledge and understanding that fades once the spell wears off? Also, as I stated before, you didn't and don't figure it out until you actually do it. All the dialogue is telling you is that you understand the gem's magic well enough to do so.

Well, upon hearing your explanation and reading the spoilers, it seems to be the best choice is to immediately split all of the doses in a way that gives everyone an equal length of time to live (or prioritize a certain companion if their stats are more important than yours as the PC).

Are you comfortable with the optimal solution being to immediately use all of the fluid as soon as you find Orion and know its use?

That's one approach.The really optimal solution, though, is to beef them up to 7 days to live, and then give them another belt every day to keep them there. Their physical stats don't start taking damage until they're below this level (you can determine this experimentally), so the best thing to do is to keep them just above it so that their combat and skills don't start to suffer as you make your way through the lower ruins. That way, if there's any fluid left once you reach Len's Lab and cure them, it can be used as a potion. (When used on someone who isn't poisoned it'll boost Str/Dex/Con by +2 each for 24 hours.)

New point: I found one bluesteel bar (from the trapped forge) but apparently there were three?  How big of a deal is that -- trying to figure out whether I should use console commands to go back and pick up the other two.

Actually, I changed this slightly in v4.1 and it looks like I didn't update the hint file. There are two, plus a slightly greater than 90% chance of finding something that's the equivalent of a third (the Golem Head). You can't miss the latter if it's there, since it has to be in one of the two guardian remains that contain plot-critical keys. The third is:

(*SPOILER*) in the northern part of the same area where you found the other one (*END SPOILER*).

It's definitely worth finding the other bar, since it will be quite useful near the end of Chapter 2.

3, the dying system seems a bit buggy.  I'm still not sure how it works -- and I've literally had situations where I "died," a companion healed me, I got up, and then I died again.

It's not buggy, although how it works isn't necessarily obvious. It works that way because I had to script around NWN's hard-coded maximum of -10 hit points before death. Sanctum's dying system allows you to go to a number of negative hp that depends on your constitution and is typically in the -20s before "final death." When you take a hit that would put you below -10, then the dying system intercepts the otherwise mandatory death via NWN rules, siphons off some of your negative hp into a local int representing "Mortal Damage," and sets you to the remainder (between 0 and -9). So if you're hit to -15, say, the dying system may reset you to -5 and give you 10 points of "mortal damage." If you recover while you still have mortal damage, then on the next heartbeat you'll take some of that mortal damage, which will be moved from the int back to your hp and may drop you below 0 again. All of this is indicated in the message window by messages like "You have 10 hp of mortal wounds," "You are overcome by your mortal wounds!" (at the precise time that you collapse again after being healed), or finally, "You have recovered from your mortal wounds" when your mortal damage goes back to zero.

something seems very messed up with the persuade.  I was level 8 and had 12 persuade.  Orion was level 7 and had 11 persuade.  Yet he made every persuade check and I failed every one (during the delaying tactic, for example).  I had both more raw persuade and equal level based persuade. What was the deal with that?

A couple of things. First off, based on your feedback I will double-check those persuade checks. I did change how some of those were done in v4 and it's possible some of them aren't working right. But again, don't discount the possibility of having had a streak of bad rolls. Also, depending on the circumstances, it may not be appropriate to compare Orion's and your rolls. The delay is one where they should be comparable, but convincing Robin at the Destroyer statue, for example, isn't. The first persuade you get there (if you have 14+ wisdom) is very difficult because you're trying to convince her by the strength of your own persuasion alone, and because the reward is actually two relationship points if you make it. If you fail, Orion comes in to help, and that DC is lower because now you're working together to try to convince her. If that roll is made, then the two of you share 1 relationship point each. Given the circumstances and the rewards involved those particular checks aren't intended to be equivalent.

I've also had situations where a henchmen went down, got up, went down, got up...this repeated like five times and I was awarded 29 XP each time for killing him (while using the companion healing kit on them).

Now that doesn't sound right -- unless it's happening while they're suffering the effects of the poison. The way the poison works is that it keeps re-applying a temporary str/dex/con decrease at regular intervals. (When this happens they'll say, "Ooh, I feel sick.") The result is that their physical stats will fluctuate a little while they're poisoned. If they're near 0 hp, then a poison-induced decrease in constitution can cause them to collapse. You shouldn't be getting xp for that, though -- I'll take a look and check that out.

Modifié par AndarianTD, 21 décembre 2013 - 12:47 .

[MagicalMaster]

AndarianTD wrote...

I see a difference, but I don't see it as an especially important one when one is talking about gameplay as a whole (which I was). What would you propose as an alternative way of expressing the idea that I was trying to get across?

At a minimum I would include what you said here: that dabbling in a bunch of skills can be useful.  Perhaps even recommend that if you have, say, 4 skill points per level that you should only choose 3 skills to max out and spread the fourth point per level among other skills.

I would also be clearer about the exact benefits of investing into skills in your world -- for example, Heal winds up being useful not for bandages but for making the potions.  Of course, I skipped Heal entirely on Very Hard and did perfectly fine while you claimed it was the most important skill besides 4 points in Lore.

Right now it just feels like you're saying "Ha ha ha, I changed the rules and you basically have to mostly blindly guess what to do!"  Saying "Higher ranks in Spellcraft will allow you to use them more effectively" does not mean anything.  Is that a 90% chance of success for having Spellcraft plus 1% extra per rank?  Is that 20% chance of success for having Spellcraft with 8% extra per rank?  One of those is very, very different from the other.

To be clear, I realize you already have a ton of documentation but you only dedicated 1/3 of one page (out of seven) to skill changes that act very differently compared to default NWN.

AndarianTD wrote...

Don't discount the possibility of having a streak of bad rolls. It does happen.

If you're referring to the Charisma checks, how is that possible?  The Wisdom checks, for example, are for 15+ Wisdom -- are you saying that the Charisma ones are random but the Wisdom/Int ones are not?

Regarding the Persuade checks, I often reloaded at least half a dozen times to verify that I apparently kept failing.  Maybe I had awful rolls for all 20+ occasions but I'm doubtful.

AndarianTD wrote...

What were you trying to do, and when were you trying to do it? If you were trying to cut crystals with a maxed spellcraft and it was failing, then there's definitely something wrong.

Precisely what I was doing.  With maxed spellcraft and 14 int I had two Crystals explode on me when I was trying to cut a gem from them (dialogue with the placeable object).  I reloaded and succeeded after that but...

AndarianTD wrote...

If it's the third, or you've tested it enough times to be sure it's not the second, then I'd be happy to look into it and/or debug a saved game (if you're willing to share one) to try to figure out why.

I am absolutely sure the Red Crystal (just before Beastmen) exploded on me when I tried to cut it.  I'm reasonably sure another did as well but I don't recall which.

But you can imagine why, given I am still failing skill checks with maxed ranks, I would be loathe to NOT max a skill.

AndarianTD wrote...

I disagree.

Eh.  Ultimately this boils down to "it's magic" and is only an issue due to Identify.  I will point out you don't forget the names and properties of items you ID with the lore boost from Identify, though, even once the spell fades.

AndarianTD wrote...

Their physical stats don't start taking damage until they're below this level (you can determine this experimentally)

That's not obvious at all and isn't mentioned in the spoilers either.  Spoilers claims the formula is 2*days + 1 so 7 days would be 15 minimum stats -- so they can still drop down to that.  To be clear -- I'm not objecting to the idea of even mechanical implementation of a lot of this, I'm objecting to the lack of information provided for very, very custom systems.

AndarianTD wrote...

It's not buggy, although how it works isn't necessarily obvious.

I didn't test it extensively (since I wasn't "dying" very often either) but it definitely felt weird.  I thought I got a message about recovering from mortal wounds right before plopping back down but I wouldn't swear to that at all.

AndarianTD wrote...

But again, don't discount the possibility of having had a streak of bad rolls.

I tested the Hellman delay, for example, over a dozen times with more than half a dozen attempts with my Persuade and all of them failed.  All of Orion's succeeded.  Being unlucky is possibly but very unlikely.

AndarianTD wrote...

The delay is one where they should be comparable, but convincing Robin at the Destroyer statue, for example, isn't.

I was actually trying to convince Robin AGAINST Orion originally (I only had 10 Wisdom so no 15+ option).  It always failed with over a dozen attempts until I gave up and sided with Orion to get the relationship point.

AndarianTD wrote...

Now that doesn't sound right -- unless it's happening while they're suffering the effects of the poison.

It was.

----------

1, any thoughts on those spawn points I mentioned earlier?  Particularly the beetles "in" the cabinet?

2, it looks like you've adjusted stat buffs -- was this not mentioned for a reason?  And why not always give +4?  For example, say I have 15 Dex and a +1 dex ring that I swap with a +3 Appraise ring.  If I do Cat's Grace without wearing the ring, I get boosted to 18 and then the ring brings me to 19.  If I do Cat's Grace while wearing the ring, I'll get boosted to 20.  So I'd need to make sure I had the ring equipped or get half the benefit from the spell.

[AndarianTD]

MagicalMaster wrote...

Perhaps even recommend that if you have, say, 4 skill points per level that you should only choose 3 skills to max out and spread the fourth point per level among other skills.

I don't want to over-state or be too heavy-handed about this, though. The module certainly can be played with the probably more common "max or nothing" approach that you describe. It's oriented toward rewarding a broader skill selection only in that there are benefits spread around the module for many different skills, the "entry point" for some of which (like Spellcraft and Open Locks) is only 1 or 2 ranks. The benefit of taking them is that certain things in the module may be easier, and you might miss out on a few of those benefits without them (which is how I think it ought to be).

At a minimum I would include what you said here: that dabbling in a bunch of skills can be useful.

Based on your feedback and for reasons I'll go into more below, I'm becoming convinced that the skills section of the README needs a re-write. Some of it is carried over from earlier versions of the module, and on examination may not always be quite as applicable any more to the current version.

The Open Locks skill is a good example. There are scattered locked doors and chests throughout the module, many of which have locks that are easily picked. There are also a few (more now in v4 than there were before) that are more difficult, along with several high-value lockpicks in stores, in the random treasure system, and in certain strategic locations. If the player has 1 rank in Open Locks, then he can easily deal with the minor locks, and also gets the ability to use, say, a +8 Lockpick to help handle the really difficult ones like the safe. That one rank is the player's "entry fee" to all of that convenience, and it definitely makes the module easier for him to play.

But how important is it, really? Robin can open locks, and her four ranks since v4.0 (+2 for 14 Dex) will let her handle most of them. Her Dex and Open Locks skills can also be boosted, and since v3.4, I gave her the ability to use lockpicks as well. Prior to that, if you didn't take a rank or two in Open Locks, then you pretty much had to write off ever opening the safe. Now you can just walk Robin over to it, hand her the +8 Lockpick, and ask her to use it to open the nearest lock (under the "Use a Special Ability" option on her companion dialogue).

Is having that +1 in Open Locks helpful in playing the module? I think it is. Is it as important as it used to be? No, and I probably should revisit the writeup about it. Can you get by without it? Yes. Can you still get all the benefits you would if you don't take it? Pretty much, if you explore all your options, including (in this case) looking over all the choices available in Robin's companion dialogue. Will you miss out if you don't thoroughly explore all of the module's options, or think to use them if you did? Yes. Is that how it should be? I tend to think so.

I would also be clearer about the exact benefits of investing into skills in your world -- for example, Heal winds up being useful not for bandages but for making the potions.  Of course, I skipped Heal entirely on Very Hard and did perfectly fine while you claimed it was the most important skill besides 4 points in Lore.

Bear in mind that players differ widely in their ability to handle difficult combat in NWN. The single most common complaint I've had about Sanctum is that the combat is too hard. I've also had some players say that it was just right, and some even that it was too easy. That's one reason why I invested so much into developing the difficulty options. Heal is actually quite useful for bandages (Heal Kits), including the Companion Heal Kit, as well as potion mixing; all of those are significantly more effective if you have a higher Heal skill. For players less adept at NWN combat than you or I might be, those extra HP on each Heal Kit use can be a big deal. And Heal Kits are in a strictly limited supply in the module until you make it to the Earthen Temple.

So how much of this do I put into the README? I'm open to suggestions, but I don't want to write a treatise. I do agree that the section on Heal needs a re-write, though. Maxing Heal isn't as important now as it was for previous versions of the module, especially before I implemented the combat difficulty options.

are you saying that the Charisma ones are random but the Wisdom/Int ones are not?

In the case of these particular checks, yes, that's right.

Regarding the Persuade checks, I often reloaded at least half a dozen times to verify that I apparently kept failing.  Maybe I had awful rolls for all 20+ occasions but I'm doubtful.

No, that's definitely enough evidence for me to look for a problem in those scripts. I added a new system for handling those skill checks in v4, and it's possible that some of it is still bugged.

Precisely what I was doing.  With maxed spellcraft and 14 int I had two Crystals explode on me when I was trying to cut a gem from them (dialogue with the placeable object).  I reloaded and succeeded after that but...

OK, then. That was definitely an example of an unlucky roll, but I'm not happy with it either. I did increase the DC on those checks in v4, and I guess there's still a small possibility of failing a cut check with a maxed Spellcraft. Holding the Adventurer's Guide (+2 Spellcraft) does help, but even so I agree that past a certain point those checks should be automatic. I'm going to revisit how they're done in v4.2 (which is already in the works and will be coming out with the Sanctum 2 remake).

Any thoughts on those spawn points I mentioned earlier?  Particularly the beetles "in" the cabinet?

With regard to the cabinet, I agree. I'll tone it down in v4.2. The encounter is random, but it is a bit unfair if you manage to get ambushed in close quarters by a group of Stag Beetles.

The "Vermin Area" in the Upper Ruins is a different case, though. On the "hard" settings I intended it be extremely difficult and to require some strategic thinking. Even I can't clear it in a single go, not even going in fully rested and buffed. But the vermin appear in two different batches, one further south than the other, and the room is very large. You can take them in two or three waves, and you can also bypass the area entirely. The idea there is that you're supposed to exercise prudence, to know when to beat a strategic retreat if you need to, and to use the "draw a few away from the rest and kill them" tactic (which the Horn of Rallying can make even more effective). You're also not far from the door to the Beastman Village, so you can typically retreat to there if you need to. (I have had tests where I did that and some of the vermin followed me -- seeing the Beastman King bound into action to deal with them turned out to be quite entertaining.) Similar points apply to the oozes in Caverns Level 1. If you find yourself overmatched then you're supposed to take them in waves, retreating (or at least, not advancing too recklessly) so that you can deal with them in smaller groups that are more manageable. You can also turn on Robin's summoning if you need it; it's only level 1 and unlike Orion's it's off by default, but it is there.

One more observation to offer about the ooze area, though, is that at that early point in the module you're still a very low-level (3-4) character with a higher-level (6) companion with great weapons and armor. It's actually an intended part of the module experience in the early stages for you to feel a need to some extent to "hide behind Robin," especially when things get hairy. If you're closing with the oozes in Caverns level 1 enough for them to target you with multiple acid blasts instead of hanging back and supporting Robin from a distance with spells or missile fire, then you risk getting taken out. If you do, then the dying system is pretty forgiving and Robin can usually revive you. By the time you reach the ruins that dynamic should be shifting, and you're supposed to start feeling more like you're becoming her equal -- until by the end, she acknowledges that by referring to you as her partner against the Warlord.

It looks like you've adjusted stat buffs -- was this not mentioned for a reason?

I did that in one of the v3.x updates, and agree that it was an oversight for me not to have added it to the README. I'll do it for v4.2.

And why not always give +4?

My intent was for it to always yield a +2 to your stat bonus. I wanted to make it a little more consistent and to cut out the extremes of the 2-5 point stat increase. So it gives 3-4 points instead, depending on how much is needed to get you to a +2 bonus from where you started. The bonus is what typically counts, especially for mental stats in Sanctum. So if you start with an odd stat it gives +3, else it gives +4. I did consider just having it always give +4, but I wanted it to have more or less the same average behavior as the unmodified spell.

For example, say I have 15 Dex and a +1 dex ring that I swap with a +3 Appraise ring.  If I do Cat's Grace without wearing the ring, I get boosted to 18 and then the ring brings me to 19.  If I do Cat's Grace while wearing the ring, I'll get boosted to 20.  So I'd need to make sure I had the ring equipped or get half the benefit from the spell.

Yes, that is one consequence of how it works. 15 going to 18 gives you 3 points of Dexterity for a +2 stat bonus over where you started. 16 going to 20 gives you 4 points over where you started, but again, for a +2 stat bonus. The spell will always boost you to the second highest even score above the one you had when you started, which gives an advantage to starting at an even stat vs. starting at an odd one.

Modifié par AndarianTD, 21 décembre 2013 - 05:50 .

[MagicalMaster]

AndarianTD wrote...

Based on your feedback and for reasons I'll go into more below, I'm becoming convinced that the skills section of the README needs a re-write. Some of it is carried over from earlier versions of the module, and on examination may not always be quite as applicable any more to the current version.

That alone would likely solve a lot of issues.

AndarianTD wrote...

Now you can just walk Robin over to it, hand her the +8 Lockpick, and ask her to use it to open the nearest lock (under the "Use a Special Ability" option on her companion dialogue).

So you simply have to pick the safe?  I thought I just somehow missed a key somewhere and was a tad annoyed.

I mean, the description says "This safe is made of a hard, dark metal and firmly secured to the floor. You're certain that you won't be able to break into it by force" and in the past that has always meant you need a key.  "By force" = "not using a key."  I mean, hell, a common saying is "force the lock" and if you google that the first result is this page on lock-picking.  Maybe say "This safe is made of a hard, dark metal and firmly secured to the floor.
You're certain that you won't be able to destroy it with brute force" or something.

IIRC Robin also refuses to try to open it when you left click on it which also made me think it wasn't pickable since she didn't try and fail, she refused to even try.

AndarianTD wrote...

And Heal Kits are in a strictly limited supply in the module until you make it to the Earthen Temple.

Ah.  Didn't even realize that, oops.

AndarianTD wrote...

So how much of this do I put into the README? I'm open to suggestions, but I don't want to write a treatise. I do agree that the section on Heal needs a re-write, though. Maxing Heal isn't as important now as it was for previous versions of the module, especially before I implemented the combat difficulty options.

I'd mention the Heal skill can be used to make special potions (does that continue in later modules) in a similar manner to Craft Armor/Weapon.  I'll admit I'm rather annoyed you can't take 20 on that sort of stuff, but I at least sort of understand why you did that -- presumably you didn't want a situation where you auto-failed without enough skill and auto-succeeded with enough skill.  I'd personally suggest you lower it from a d20 check to like a d8 check -- so instead of something like a DC of 18 you have a DC of 12 but you only add a d8.  Rather sucks when RNG is such a huge factor whether you wind up with 3 Heal potions or 0 potions even with Heal skill invested (to be clear, I didn't use ANY Heal potions in my case so it didn't affect me, but thinking of others).

I wouldn't even mention the Open Lock stuff now.

I'd be a bit clearer about just how much of an impact Spellcraft has and how much each rank benefits -- if people without it are basically crippled (relatively speaking) then clarity is rather important.  In my case, I managed to avoid using ANY of the gems (I wanted to save the Haste gem and such for a really good item I know I'm hanging onto for a while) so it wasn't important but, like you said, others are not nearly so proficient at combat.

I wouldn't mention Lore except maybe to say you can get some more XP when reading books by having Lore (but make it clear that it's a small amount, not like a level's worth) that's meant to be a side bonus rather than a main focus.

Persuade I'm not sure about given my experience but you've mentioned you're going to check at least some of the Persuade checks.  Hard to say more until I know what you intended.

Craft Armor/Craft Weapon -- beats me.  I didn't use it at all so I really have no idea.  I gave the +2 Adamantite Full Plate to Orion and he had his own weapon...as a Sorcerer I didn't really need anything else.  Is that Full Plate always at the same location?  Can you actually craft magic weapons and armor with those skills?  Some more info on exactly what might be craftable would be nice (and whether it continues to be useful in the future modules).

That's all of the skills you mentioned, at least.  I'm trying another playthrough using a LE Fighter just to see how it goes using a male Robin without romance (basically a bromance with my fighter intending to see Robin restored to rule and who is willing to mercilessly crush anything and everything that gets in his way).  Curious how it'll go.

AndarianTD wrote...

With regard to the cabinet, I agree. I'll tone it down in v4.2. The encounter is random, but it is a bit unfair if you manage to get ambushed in close quarters by a group of Stag Beetles.

Yeah, it's the close quarters part that is the main issue.  Especially since destroying the chest doesn't help.

AndarianTD wrote...

to use the "draw a few away from the rest and kill them" tactic (which the Horn of Rallying can make even more effective).

I just really, really hate "tactics" which equate to "abuse the AI."  I see it in a lot of NWN stuff so I'm not really blaming you, but I still find it rather annoying.  To me, if you see a group of enemies...you need to figure out how to defeat all of them.  That's the encounter.  Not to try to abuse the AI to split it into half a dozen smaller encounters.

AndarianTD wrote...

You can also turn on Robin's summoning if you need it; it's only level 1 and unlike Orion's it's off by default, but it is there.

Presumably that still drains XP though, aye?

AndarianTD wrote...

It's actually an intended part of the module experience in the early stages for you to feel a need to some extent to "hide behind Robin," especially when things get hairy. If you're closing with the oozes in Caverns level 1 enough for them to target you with multiple acid blasts instead of hanging back and supporting Robin from a distance with spells or missile fire, then you risk getting taken out.

I'm a sorcerer.  I ALWAYS hide behind Robin.

Unfortunately, the oozes are immune to Robin's bonus damage (and Flame Weapon damage) and they'd target me at times even standing 30 feet away from the melee.

AndarianTD wrote...

Yes, that is one consequence of how it works. 15 going to 18 gives you 3 points of Dexterity for a +2 stat bonus over where you started. 16 going to 20 gives you 4 points over where you started, but again, for a +2 stat bonus. The spell will always boost you to the second highest even score above the one you had when you started, which gives an advantage to starting at an even stat vs. starting at an odd one.

That wasn't my point -- my point what that you could get up getting a smaller boost than you should depending on what you have equipped.  Should using Cat's Grace and then equipping a ring of +1 Dex give a different total modifier than equipping a ring of +1 Dex and then using Cat's Grace?  Seems to be both of those cases should be the same but they are NOT.  In one case, using both items (with spell first) gives you +4 modifier.  In the other, using both items (with ring first) gives you +5 modifier.

Is there an actual downside to simply making it +4?  Besides slightly more carrying capacity for a Strength buff I'm trying to figure out if there's any difference.  Maybe if you have 11 wisdom and use Owl's Wisdom then you could make the 15+ checks but how many people have 11 wisdom versus 10 or 12?

[AndarianTD]

MagicalMaster wrote...

So you simply have to pick the safe?  I thought I just somehow missed a key somewhere and was a tad annoyed.

I mean, the description says "This safe is made of a hard, dark metal and firmly secured to the floor. You're certain that you won't be able to break into it by force" and in the past that has always meant you need a key.  "By force" = "not using a key."

I worded the description that way because I thought it made the point unambiguously clear. "Break into it by force" does not, on any sensible reading I'm aware of, necessarily preclude anything other than using a key. Certainly not in NWN, where your options to get into something that is locked are limited to (a) bash it, or ( unlock it -- and where "unlock it" can in turn be accomplished by either © picking the lock, or (d) using a key. In that context I think it's pretty clear that "you won't be able to break into it by force" is intended to mean that you can't bash the safe.

Didn't you at least consider that possibility and check it out? All you need to do to test whether a locked object requires a key is to right click on it and select "Unlock" from the radial menu. If the lock requires a key, then the engine will output "A specific key is required to open that object" in the message window. If it doesn't and you have even one rank in "Open Locks," then it will also (safely) try to pick the lock, and tell you its precise DC in the bargain. This is another reason why having even a single rank in "Open Locks" can be extremely useful, and why I said so in the README.

Had you tried this with the safe before assuming that it couldn't be picked and needed a key, you would have realized that was a mistake. In an earlier post you referred to using "unlock" from the radial menu in another situation as a "trick." I see it as basic NWN gameplay, and this is just another reason why. I've played plenty of mods and I use it all the time. Among other things it's the standard way in NWN of trying to determine whether a lock requires a key or what its DC is -- which is precisely the situation you were facing here.

IIRC Robin also refuses to try to open it when you left click on it which also made me think it wasn't pickable since she didn't try and fail, she refused to even try.

Using the standard functionality from the radial menu, yes. All that means, though, is that her skill at the time wasn't high enough to successfully pick it. It doesn't tell you that the lock is actually un-pickable or requires a key. To determine that, you need to use "Unlock" from the radial menu.

This is also one of the reasons why I put the "Try to open the nearest lock. Use your best lockpicks if you have any" option on the "Use Special Ability" menu of Robin's companion dialog. If you had tried using it, she would have tried to open the lock, whether or not she thought she could succeed, with the same results being displayed in the message window as if you had and tried to use the same skill yourself.

Modifié par AndarianTD, 22 décembre 2013 - 01:21 .

[AndarianTD]

[quote]MagicalMaster wrote...

[quote]AndarianTD wrote...

And Heal Kits are in a strictly limited supply in the module until you make it to the Earthen Temple.[/quote]
Ah.  Didn't even realize that, oops.[/quote]
No worries.

[quote]I'd mention the Heal skill can be used to make special potions (does that continue in later modules) in a similar manner to Craft Armor/Weapon.[/quote]
Agreed. Yes, it continues in later modules.

[quote]I'll admit I'm rather annoyed you can't take 20 on that sort of stuff, but I at least sort of understand why you did that -- presumably you didn't want a situation where you auto-failed without enough skill and auto-succeeded with enough skill.[/quote]
Right. It's not so much a matter of success or failure, but the distribution of what kinds of potions you get. I certainly didn't want players with a high heal to necessarily be making Heal potions on every try.

[quote] I'd personally suggest you lower it from a d20 check to like a d8 check -- so instead of something like a DC of 18 you have a DC of 12 but you only add a d8.  Rather sucks when RNG is such a huge factor whether you wind up with 3 Heal potions or 0 potions even with Heal skill invested (to be clear, I didn't use ANY Heal potions in my case so it didn't affect me, but thinking of others).[/quote]
The way the script works for healing plants is that it tries to make a Heal potion first, with a high DC. Then if it fails, it goes on to Cure Critical with a lower one, and so on, until there's a successful roll. I tend to like less randomness too when that's feasible, but in this case the wider distribution helps me to keep the ability from becoming too unbalanced -- especially given the wide variety of Heal ratings that are possible in the module.

[quote]Craft Armor/Craft Weapon -- beats me.  I didn't use it at all so I really have no idea.  I gave the +2 Adamantite Full Plate to Orion and he had his own weapon...as a Sorcerer I didn't really need anything else.  Is that Full Plate always at the same location? Can you actually craft magic weapons and armor with those skills?  Some more info on exactly what might be craftable would be nice (and whether it continues to be useful in the future modules). [/quote]
No, the Adamantine Plate is part of the random treasure system. Yes, you can definitely use those skills to craft magic weapons and armor from various materials -- most notably from the Ironwood Plannks, the Adamantine Bars, and the Bluesteel Ingot from the forge. Determining what can be crafted from can be done in-game, though. Just use the skill on those items and it'll tell you what can be made from them and the associated DC.

[quote]That's all of the skills you mentioned, at least.  I'm trying another playthrough using a LE Fighter just to see how it goes using a male Robin without romance (basically a bromance with my fighter intending to see Robin restored to rule and who is willing to mercilessly crush anything and everything that gets in his way).  Curious how it'll go.[/quote]
I'll be curious to hear what you think. I've never done it. The module doesn't have a lot of options for role-playing an evil character.

[quote][quote]You can also turn on Robin's summoning if you need it; it's only level 1 and unlike Orion's it's off by default, but it is there.[/quote]
Presumably that still drains XP though, aye?[/quote]

Yes, but this is scripted to be considerably less than in unmodified NWN. This only affects combat XP, and in general, I think the larger encounter spawns when you have a larger party pretty much compensates for it. I haven't noticed an appreciable difference in final XP in playthroughs based on how many summons I keep.

[quote]Unfortunately, the oozes are immune to Robin's bonus damage (and Flame Weapon damage) and they'd target me at times even standing 30 feet away from the melee.[/quote]
At times, sure. But it certainly makes a difference.

[quote]That wasn't my point -- my point what that you could get up getting a smaller boost than you should depending on what you have equipped.[/quote]
Yes, that's right -- except "should" is the wrong word to use here. It's merely a smaller boost than you would have received otherwise.

[quote]Should using Cat's Grace and then equipping a ring of +1 Dex give a different total modifier than equipping a ring of +1 Dex and then using Cat's Grace?[/quote]
I don't see why not, given how I decided to re-write the spell. If the amount of the boost depends on your starting value, of necessity that means that the order in which you do them matters.

[quote]Is there an actual downside to simply making it +4?[/quote]Well, what I was trying to do with this was to keep a bit of game balance. You illustrated one of the reasons why with your comment above about getting a smaller number of points than you "should" get. Why is the extra point what you "should" get in that situation, and not "too much?" The very fact that you're approaching it that way takes for granted the idea of the spell being ovepowered compared to how it functions now.

Suppose I changed the spell's bonus to depend only on the recipient's base stat, ignoring other bonuses. That way if you have an odd base stat you'd get +3, else you'd get +4. That would obviate the issue you're describing (the order of putting on the ring would not longer matter), but it would also mean that you couldn't get that extra point if you prudently equipped the ring first. Do you think it would be better if done that way?

Modifié par AndarianTD, 22 décembre 2013 - 01:19 .

[MagicalMaster]

[quote]AndarianTD wrote...

Certainly not in NWN, where your options to get into something that is locked are limited to (a) bash it, or ( unlock it -- and where "unlock it" can in turn be accomplished by either © picking the lock, or (d) using a key. In that context I think it's pretty clear that "you won't be able to break into it by force" is intended to mean that you can't bash the safe.[/quote]
I don't think most people view it like that, though.  I think they view it as "it can either be picked or bashed, otherwise you need a key."  Especially when we're talking about a safe which is SUPPOSED to be impossible to bash or pick (that's kind of the idea of a safe).

Even in places where items get destroyed if you bash it people view picking the lock as very different from using a key -- one involves using the radial menu and choosing Unlock while the other involves left clicking on the object.  Different commands.

[quote]AndarianTD wrote...

Didn't you at least consider that possibility and check it out?[/quote]
Nope, zero points in Open Lock.

[quote]AndarianTD wrote...

I see it as basic NWN gameplay, and this is just another reason why. I've played plenty of mods and I use it all the time.[/quote]
Could you perhaps name some mods where you used this?

[quote]AndarianTD wrote...

Among other things it's the standard way in NWN of trying to determine whether a lock requires a key or what its DC is -- which is precisely the situation you were facing here.[/quote]
I would strongly disagree since I don't think it's standard at all to have only a point or two in Open Lock -- typically only rogues and their ilk invest in that.

[quote]AndarianTD wrote...

Using the standard functionality from the radial menu, yes. All that means, though, is that her skill at the time wasn't high enough to successfully pick it. It doesn't tell you that the lock is actually un-pickable or requires a key.[/quote]
Sure -- but she also had far more than enough skill to unlock everything else as I recall so why should I suddenly expect this to be different?

[quote]AndarianTD wrote...

If you had tried using it, she would have tried to open the lock, whether or not she thought she could succeed, with the same results being displayed in the message window as if you had and tried to use the same skill yourself.
[/quote]
Ah.  That would require me to have some Thieves' Tools, though, to work, no?

[quote]AndarianTD wrote...

The way the script works for healing plants is that it tries to make a Heal potion first, with a high DC. Then if it fails, it goes on to Cure Critical with a lower one, and so on, until there's a successful roll.[/quote]
Fair enough.  My only objection is that at higher levels Cure Criticals are fairly bad while Heals are insanely good but that's more a flaw of the NWN standard mechanics.  Jump from "Heal 25 HP" to "Heal all HP."

[quote]AndarianTD wrote...

No, the Adamantine Plate is part of the random treasure system.[/quote]
Does it always appear?

[quote]AndarianTD wrote...

Determining what can be crafted from can be done in-game, though. Just use the skill on those items and it'll tell you what can be made from them and the associated DC.[/quote]
I meant putting more info in the ReadMe so people can try to figure out if taking Craft Armor/Craft Weapon is worth it.  Doesn't even have to give exact details, just something like "You can also craft +2 weapons and armor with some other properties using these skills" or whatever it can actually make.

[quote]AndarianTD wrote...

I'll be curious to hear what you think. I've never done it. The module doesn't have a lot of options for role-playing an evil character.[/quote]
Depends on the evil, I think.  I admit I very rarely (if ever) play evil -- basically did it here to spite the "good only" description.  In this case the main difference between my guy and a paladin would be that he would cheerfully murder someone he despises to advance himself if he could do it legally.  He's ruthless and vengeful, not "I must set kittens on fire."

[quote]AndarianTD wrote...

Yes, but this is scripted to be considerably less than in unmodified NWN. This only affects combat XP, and in general, I think the larger encounter spawns when you have a larger party pretty much compensates for it. I haven't noticed an appreciable difference in final XP in playthroughs based on how many summons I keep.[/quote]
Hate to sound like a broken record, but...this might be worth mentioning in the ReadMe!  How much less is considerably less?  I was playing on trying to complete the module without saving Orion and just having it be Robin and myself so I'm wondering how that'll affect things as well.

[quote]AndarianTD wrote...

At times, sure. But it certainly makes a difference.[/quote]
Well, even with Toughness and 14 con I would take like 2/3 of my HP in damage.

[quote]AndarianTD wrote...

Suppose I changed the spell's bonus to depend only on the recipient's base stat, ignoring other bonuses. That way if you have an odd base stat you'd get +3, else you'd get +4. That would obviate the issue you're describing (the order of putting on the ring would not longer matter), but it would also mean that you couldn't get that extra point if you prudently equipped the ring first. Do you think it would be better if done that way?[/quote]
First, why is equipping the ring first considered prudent at all?  Ignore your actual implementation and think conceptually.  Should the spell boost your dex by a different amount based on whether you equip a ring before or after using the spell?  Why should that even be relevant?

Second, no, because then it renders items irrelevant.  Let's say you have 15 dex and a +1 dex ring.  You'd get 3 Dex to get to 18 and thus 19 from the ring.  Therefore, the ring is irrelevant.  Now you get another base dex point and have 16.  Thus you get 4 from the spell to get to 20 and then 21 from the ring.  Therefore, the ring is irrelevant.

In neither of these cases does the ring matter.

Simply making it +4 makes it consistently interact with other spells and items without causing any significant negative effects that I can see.  If you think the spell giving 2 modifier is overpowered then make it always give +2 if you want (for 1 modifier).  I personally hate the 34383 buffs NWN uses with stats/bless/aid/immunities/etc and wish they were done away with in the first place -- at least as it applies to buffing others and preferably at least tone down self buffs as well.

[AndarianTD]

[quote]MagicalMaster wrote...

[quote]AndarianTD wrote...

Didn't you at least consider that possibility and check it out?[/quote]
Nope, zero points in Open Lock.[/quote]
That doesn't matter. It tells you if it needs a key whether you have any points in Open Lock or not. That's one reason why I maintain that using unlock from the radial menu should be part of any player's standard repertiore of gameplay options.

[quote]Could you perhaps name some mods where you used this?[/quote]
As I said, it's part of my standard "repertoire" of NWN gameplay options. I use it when I think it would be needed or useful. For example, I use it when I encounter a locked object, especially one that I can't open by just clicking on it. Given the ubiquity of those situations I'd be surprised if I've played many modules where I didn't use it.

[quote]I would strongly disagree since I don't think it's standard at all to have only a point or two in Open Lock -- typically only rogues and their ilk invest in that.[/quote]
Let me emphasize this again: Using "Unlock" from the radial menu tells you if the lock requires a key, whether or not you have any ranks in "Open Lock." Go in game and test it if you don't believe me.

The confusion here, I think, is that it looks like you're treating the "Lock" and "Unlock" options on the radial menu as "Rogue skill specific only." They're not. As I described in previous posts, they are usable by, and provide useful functions and information to, any type of character.

[quote]Sure -- but she also had far more than enough skill to unlock everything else as I recall so why should I suddenly expect this to be different?[/quote]
First of all, that's not true. There are a number of other locks in the ruins that she also can't open without a lockpick, or a skill or stat boost.

Setting that aside, though: why shouldn't you expect this one to be different? Certainly it looks very different from all the other locked containers that you've encountered so far, doesn't it? It's a safe, in a mod where I told you in the README that some skill in Open Locks could be useful; where you should have found at least one +8 Thieves Tools relatively nearby; where you're progressing further and further into an ancient ruin, facing greater and greater challenges along the way; and where I deliberately put a "Try to open the nearest lock with your best lockpicks if you have any" option in plain sight on Robin's companion dialogue, right below "Can you identify my equipment?" Why would I have put that option there at all, if there weren't going to be situations where you would need it (this one being the premier example in Chapter 1)?

[quote]Ah.  That would require me to have some Thieves' Tools, though, to work, no?[/quote]
No. I quoted the exact text of Robin's dialog option in my previous post: "Try to open the nearest lock. Use your best lockpicks if you have any" [emphasis added]. That wording at the end is there specifically to clue you in to the fact that you can also use the option without having given her a set of lockpicks.

[quote]Fair enough.  My only objection is that at higher levels Cure Criticals are fairly bad while Heals are insanely good but that's more a flaw of the NWN standard mechanics.  Jump from "Heal 25 HP" to "Heal all HP."[/quote]
Agreed.

[quote]Does it [the Adamantine Plate] always appear?[/quote]
No, some items from the random treasure system don't get distributed and remain in their various "stores" in the Starting Area. The way I've designed the transfer to Chapter 2, though, is that it'll import all those remaining items from Chapter 1 and distribute them there. So if it doesn't appear in Chapter 1, it'll appear in Chapter 2.

You can make Adamantine Splint from the Adamantine Ingots, though, and there are some good armors in the Earthen City as well. There's also a random treasure drop by General Ythra (not part of the rest of the random treasure system) that is even better if you manage to get it.

[quote]I meant putting more info in the ReadMe so people can try to figure out if taking Craft Armor/Craft Weapon is worth it.  Doesn't even have to give exact details, just something like "You can also craft +2 weapons and armor with some other properties using these skills" or whatever it can actually make.[/quote]
Thanks -- that's a good idea.

[quote]Hate to sound like a broken record, but...this might be worth mentioning in the ReadMe![/quote]
Point taken.  To me it isn't as much of an issue because I don't modify my playstyle on this basis, even in vanilla NWN. If I find the combat too difficult to get by without summons, then I use the summons; I'm less interested in powergaming than in having an enjoyable play experience. But I do realize it matters more to other players. 

[quote]How much less is considerably less?  I was playing on trying to complete the module without saving Orion and just having it be Robin and myself so I'm wondering how that'll affect things as well.[/quote]
Orion is a plot-critical character and you can't complete the module without him. You can delay it by traveling to all of the Earthen City areas except for the Pass to the Surface, and all of the Lower Ruins up to the door to the Shrines room. But that door won't open unless Orion is in your party (he's the "living key" to it), and you can't get to Len's Lab without going through the Shrines room.

[quote]First, why is equipping the ring first considered prudent at all?  Ignore your actual implementation and think conceptually.  Should the spell boost your dex by a different amount based on whether you equip a ring before or after using the spell?[/quote]
Yes. That's how I designed the spell to function. It doesn't give you a constant number of attribute points. It gives you a variable number of attribute points, based not on a random die roll, but calculated to give you a constant number of stat bonus points.

The modified spells have the same distribution in stat increases as the original spell: 3.5, when averaged over all cases (assuming equal weights). For most players, the difference will be transparent; at most they might notice that they never get twos or fives, but the threes and fours that they do get are right around the middle of the expected range. But they will consistently get exactly two stat bonus points, smoothing gameplay, and avoiding what, to me, has always been a frustrating aspect of using them. This allowed me to rely consistently on a constant benefit to be gained by using potions and spells in designing the DCs of various locks, traps, and other skill and talent puzzles, but without changing the average behavior of the spells. This was an important design consideration for me, especially considering the importance of using mind-enhancing magics to boost your talent. The fact that I was able to tell you confidently that the two potions in Orion's equipment pile will, along with the Adventurer's Guide, allow you to revive him, is an example of this.

[quote]Second, no, because then it renders items irrelevant.[/quote]
That was my point. Your objection was that the order of using the spell and an item matters. If the item is irrelevant, than it doesn't. Now, if your real objection is that you want the order not to matter, and that you want to get that exra point, that's a different story. My objection to that is that it changes the average stat increase of the spells, increasing it from 3.5 to 4. That case where you're expecting the extra point is precisely the one where I'm trying to deny it to you in order to keep that from happening.

Whether going from 3.5 to 4 is a big deal is a separate question; there are certainly some spell systems that do it. But my current implementation (as well as my proposed change to get rid of the difference in order of using spells and items) allows me to get and rely on the constant +2 stat bonus I wanted from using them, without having to do that.

Modifié par AndarianTD, 22 décembre 2013 - 03:46 .

[MagicalMaster]

[quote]AndarianTD wrote...

That doesn't matter. It tells you if it needs a key whether you have any points in Open Lock or not. That's one reason why I maintain that using unlock from the radial menu should be part of any player's standard repertiore of gameplay options.[/quote]
I've been playing this game in some form for 8-9 years and would guess that, in general, I know more about it than at least 95% of players.  Yet I didn't know that.  What percent of players would you guess knows about that?

On top of that, maybe I'm simply spoiled by other mods with better AI -- I know in Aielund, for example, that a rogue henchmen will always try to open a lock even if they cannot succeed due to insufficient lockpicking skill.  Which also lets you see how much skill they're short by.  In fact I just went and FRAPSed a clip of this happening which I can upload if you'd like.

The companions will try to open it once when you click on the object and if they fail then they'll say they can't do it if you click on it again.  But they'll still try.

[quote]AndarianTD wrote...

As I said, it's part of my standard "repertoire" of NWN gameplay options. I use it when I think it would be needed or useful. For example, I use it when I encounter a locked object, especially one that I can't open by just clicking on it. Given the ubiquity of those situations I'd be surprised if I've played many modules where I didn't use it.[/quote]
Well, do you think that maybe since I have never ever ever needed to use that at any point in any module prior to Sanctum that maybe it's not as common of a practice as you might think?  And maybe worth mentioning specifically in the dscription/ReadMe at a minimum since you're expecting players to practice some unusual behavior?

I'm not saying you're wrong about the mechanical behavior.  But if you designed a caster boss who had to be beaten by provoking AoO by moving in and out of his melee range so he couldn't cast spells, do you think that would be fair to most players who all in likelihood have no idea you can do that?

[quote]AndarianTD wrote...

First of all, that's not true. There are a number of other locks in the ruins that she also can't open without a lockpick, or a skill or stat boost.[/quote]
Which?  I'm not claiming you're lying but I honestly don't remember them.

[quote]AndarianTD wrote...

Setting that aside, though: why shouldn't you expect this one to be different?[/quote]
I did!  I expected to need a key or a tumbler combination or something.  I expected that it COULDN'T simply be picked since it's a SAFE.

[quote]AndarianTD wrote...

Why would I have put that option there at all, if there weren't going to be situations where you would need it (this one being the premier example in Chapter 1)?[/quote]
Part of a standard AI package/conversation?  In case you found a lock at an earlier level than anticipated?  I mean, clearly you could go through the entire module successfully without ever needing to discuss tactics with a companion or needing to click on the "special mission" dialogue.  I figured that if the lock was openable by picking it that Robin would at least try, so when she simply gave up...

[quote]AndarianTD wrote...

No. I quoted the exact text of Robin's dialog option in my previous post: "Try to open the nearest lock. Use your best lockpicks if you have any" [emphasis added]. That wording at the end is there specifically to clue you in to the fact that you can also use the option without having given her a set of lockpicks.[/quote]
Not what I meant -- I meant that she would be unable to open it without without the Thieves's Tools (which I'm not sure I even possessed).

[quote]AndarianTD wrote...

Point taken.  To me it isn't as much of an issue because I don't modify my playstyle on this basis, even in vanilla NWN. If I find the combat too difficult to get by without summons, then I use the summons; I'm less interested in powergaming than in having an enjoyable play experience. But I do realize it matters more to other players.[/quote]
Players hate using part of what they perceive to be a limited resource unless they absolutely have to.  Since presumably the XP is limited (no respawning monsters) players will try to avoid XP "loss" in any way they can.  On a PW people are perfectly happy using summons...in a campaign I've found that to be far, far less true.

[quote]AndarianTD wrote...

But that door won't open unless Orion is in your party (he's the "living key" to it), and you can't get to Len's Lab without going through the Shrines room.[/quote]
Right, right, the blood on the door and Light Shrine.

[quote]AndarianTD wrote...

But they will consistently get exactly two stat bonus points, smoothing gameplay, and avoiding what, to me, has always been a frustrating aspect of using them. This allowed me to rely consistently on a constant benefit to be gained by using potions and spells in designing the DCs of various locks, traps, and other skill and talent puzzles, but without changing the average behavior of the spells. This was an important design consideration for me, especially considering the importance of using mind-enhancing magics to boost your talent. The fact that I was able to tell you confidently that the two potions in Orion's equipment pile will, along with the Adventurer's Guide, allow you to revive him, is an example of this.[/quote]
If you simply made it a flat +4 (which is technically a 14% average improvement), what part of this would not be true (ignoring the bolded part due to the 14% improvement).

I mean, I noticed it BECAUSE I was fishing for fours and fives on an odd stat number.  I cast Bull's multiple times and was really annoyed that I never got any result BUT three all the time.

[quote]AndarianTD wrote...

That was my point. Your objection was that the order of using the spell and an item matters. If the item is irrelevant, than it doesn't.[/quote]
My initial objection was that if you had the wrong item equipped (like if you swapped out gloves of dex +1 for gloves of appraise when speaking to a merchant) when you cast the spell, you'd get a smaller bonus in total for no reason I have yet to see.  Why should casting the spell and then equipping the item give 2 bonus modifier while equipping the item and then casting the spell give 3 bonus modifier?  If we're speaking of "average behavior" then shouldn't both of those scenarios also average to the same bonus?

You then came up with another scenario which "fixed" the earlier problem by making it so the gloves of dex +1 were completely worthless because they never made a difference -- which is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

[quote]AndarianTD wrote...

Now, if your real objection is that you want the order not to matter, and that you want to get that exra point, that's a different story. My objection to that is that it changes the average stat increase of the spells, increasing it from 3.5 to 4. That case where you're expecting the extra point is precisely the one where I'm trying to deny it to you in order to keep that from happening.[/quote]
There is no extra point!  That's what I've been trying to say this whole time!

If I have 15 dex and am wearing a +1 dex bracer for 16 dex total, your method will give me 20 dex for a +5 modifier.  You are COMPLETELY fine with this and EXPECT this.  I SHOULD get +2 modifier from the spell.

If I have 15 dex and possess a +1 dex bracer but do not have it equipped, casting the spell will give me 18 dex and then eqiupping the item will then raise it to 19 giving me a +4 modifier.  In other words, since I would have 16 dex with the item (+3 modifier) YOUR SPELL ONLY WOUND UP GIVING ME +1 MODIFIER!  I only went from 16 dex (when the bracer is equpped) to 19 dex!  I only got a bonus modifier of 1 from the spell total!  This is NOT what you said you wanted.

Giving +4 will never result in MORE than a +2 modifier increase.  But your method can result in LESS than a +2 modifier increase from the spell itself which is what you wanted to avoid!

[AndarianTD]

MagicalMaster wrote...

Well, do you think that maybe since I have never ever ever needed to use that at any point in any module prior to Sanctum that maybe it's not as common of a practice as you might think?  And maybe worth mentioning specifically in the dscription/ReadMe at a minimum since you're expecting players to practice some unusual behavior?

Based on your feedback and a couple of other folks who've had trouble with this, yes, definitely. It'll go in the README in the next update.

AndarianTD wrote...

There are a number of other locks in the ruins that she also can't open without a lockpick, or a skill or stat boost.

Which?  I'm not claiming you're lying but I honestly don't remember them.

Offhand, there's the large chest in the "storage room" in upper ruins west (next to the ants), and at least two of the metal crates in the Secure Area East.

If you simply made it a flat +4 (which is technically a 14% average improvement), what part of this would not be true (ignoring the bolded part due to the 14% improvement).

I mean, I noticed it BECAUSE I was fishing for fours and fives on an odd stat number.  I cast Bull's multiple times and was really annoyed that I never got any result BUT three all the time.

In addition to wanting predictable bonuses, that's another reason I did that: to at least partially address the metagaming penchant to "save the game and keep re-trying until you get a high roll." (I re-wrote the Appraise skill with a similar intent, and in addition to because it's just plain bugged, period.) I'm not casting stones, since I've given in to the temptation plenty of times myself. But technically it is cheating, and not something you're supposed to expect to be able to do.

Should I have warned players who might do this in the README? Perhaps, since as you pointed out it is likely to be frustrating to metagamers. I'll do so in the next update. But again, my intent was to make the spell function relatively transparently given normal usage, to the point where players didn't actually need to know about it. I'm pretty sure you're the first player who's actually even noticed and mentioned it to me.

Sanctum's designed more for "role-playing" than "roll-playing," if you know the distinction, and most of my players tend to be from the former category. They tend not to metagame and second-guess game mechanics quite as much as you (or perhaps I), might do. If the roll's in the middle of the range they're expecting, they'll just accept it and carry on (which was my intent). They may not even notice that I've smoothed out the rough edges of gameplay so that they get what they need to keep playing through the module effectively, without becoming too overpowered.

Regarding the distribution of points for the spells: as I explained, the only way (at least that I'm aware of) to always get the extra point we're talking about (say 15 dex, +1 dex item, +4 Cat's Grace spell going to 20) is to always give +4 from the spell. That will increase the average point gain from 3.5 to 4.0. I obviously can't know, at the time you cast the spell with the item off, that you have or may equip the item later. I can only base its effects on the situation at the time you cast it -- and in particular, whether you're wearing the ring or not at the time.

In your comments, you describe the case where you equip the item after the spell (with the total going to 19) as one where "you'd get a smaller bonus in total for no reason I have yet to see." But my point is that I look at it from the opposite perspective. It's not that you're getting a smaller bonus in that case; it's that you're getting a larger bonus in the other case (where you equip the item first). The whole approach of your criticism is to want to be able to expect the larger bonus (as you can when you metagame and "roll-fish"), and then (with respect) to complain when you don't get it.

As I said earlier, I get (though I don't necessarily agree with) the criticism that it's perhaps odd that your total bonus should be different depending on the order in which you cast the spell, and equip a stat-boosting item with an odd bonus. But from my perspective the straightforward way to fix that is to eliminate those variations in order from the distribution in the first place. That would mean basing the spell on whether your base stat is even or odd, rather than your adjusted stat, so that it doesn't matter what order you do them in.

Modifié par AndarianTD, 24 décembre 2013 - 03:21 .

[MagicalMaster]

AndarianTD wrote...

Offhand, there's the large chest in the "storage room" in upper ruins west (next to the ants), and at least two of the metal crates in the Secure Area East.

I'll keep an eye out for those with the fighter character playthrough.  Definitely don't remember them.  I thought the stuff in Secure Area East got unlocked when you pressed a button or something similar.

AndarianTD wrote...

In addition to wanting predictable bonuses, that's another reason I did that: to at least partially address the metagaming penchant to "save the game and keep re-trying until you get a high roll." (I re-wrote the Appraise skill with a similar intent, and in addition to because it's just plain bugged, period.) I'm not casting stones, since I've given in to the temptation plenty of times myself. But technically it is cheating, and not something you're supposed to expect to be able to do.

What in the world are you talking about?  I'm a sorcerer -- I can cast it 6+ times a day.  There's no reloading going on here.

I didn't even realize Appraise was changed (I've never reloaded over that though I do check multiple merchants if they're available) -- perhaps describe what you did with it?

AndarianTD wrote...

Regarding the distribution of points for the spells: as I explained, the only way (at least that I'm aware of) to always get the extra point we're talking about

I seriously don't get what you mean by "extra point" and why you keep saying that.  If you had 16 dex base, you'd get 4 points.  If you had 15 dex base and +1 dex item, you'd get 4 points.  Maybe I'm oblivious to something here but by default the spell could range from +1 modifier to +3 modifier.  Your version can range from +1 modifier to +2 modifier.  Giving it +4 makes it always +2 modifier, no exceptions.

In other words, you always expect players to get +2 modifier...but in your implementation, they might not get it at times!

AndarianTD wrote...

But my point is that I look at it from the opposite perspective. It's not that you're getting a smaller bonus in that case; it's that you're getting a larger bonus in the other case (where you equip the item first).

So imagine you're a strength character with 18 strength and possess an item with +1 strength.  You're also worried about carrying capacity.  Your optimal behavior is to UNEQUIP the item (leaving you at 18 strength), drink the potion or have it cast on you (bringing you to 22 strength), and then equip the item for 23 strength (and thus more carrying capacity).

In such a situation, you get a smaller bonus when you equip the item first and a larger bonus if you unequip it!  You're adding this meta-gaming aspect to figuring out whether it's better to have an item equipped first or not to affect the spell.

AndarianTD wrote...

But from my perspective the straightforward way to fix that is to eliminate those variations in order from the distribution in the first place. That would mean basing the spell on whether your base stat is even or odd, rather than your adjusted stat, so that it doesn't matter what order you do them in.

Which would require you to sacrifice your "The spell always gives +2 modifier" desire which caused you to change the spell in the first place.  Someone with 15 dex and +1 dex item equipped would only get a +1 dex modifier bonus from Cat's grace.

[AndarianTD]

For those interested, Dawn of Chaos: Prologue to the Sanctum of the Archmage Saga is now available as an Amazon Kindle book.

For information about Dawn of Chaos and the upcoming Sanctum of the Archmage novels, please see the following links to my blog:

 

Dawn of Chaos
Sanctum of the Archmage: The Novels

[AndarianTD]

Here are some updates on the Sanctum of the Archmage Saga.

 

From the Sanctum Blog: Work on the Game Modules is Suspended Indefinitely

 

Since there’s not a great deal of work left to do on the Sanctum 2 v4.2 remake, I do expect to be able to release it early next year. That will probably be just after I publish the first of the Sanctum novels, The End of the Beginning ...

 

[The modules] remain in my mind as projects that I want to find time to get back to, when and if I can. At this point in my life, however, I simply have no choice but to put other priorities ahead of them. And at the present time, those have to be the demands of my career ... and publishing Sanctum of the Archmage as a series of novels.

 

From the Sanctum 1 Module page on the Neverwinter Vault:

 

The first full length novel ... tells the story of the Fall of Lannamon, which Robin, Orion and Diana describe briefly in the modules. I'm hoping to finish that book and the remake of the second NWN mod and release them at the same time, hopefully sometime early next year (*fingers crossed*).

 

From The Sanctum Blog: November 2014 Update:

 

I’ve completed the first nine chapters (plus the prologue and the appendix), and am partway through chapter 10 (out of 16). The book is now at 65,000 words, or about 185 “paperback equivalent pages." Based on my revised outline, this puts it at about 64% complete. The final projected length should be about 100,000 words and just shy of 300 pages.

[MagicalMaster]

Not to be a pest, but any word on when (if?) the remake of Chapter 2 will be released?  You mentioned early this year as a hopeful goal.

[AndarianTD]

Not to be a pest, but any word on when (if?) the remake of Chapter 2 will be released?  You mentioned early this year as a hopeful goal.

 

Thanks for asking, MagicalMaster! I think the schedule is more or less in line with what I wrote in my last post from November. Work obligations forced me to put work on the novel and the module on hold, but that should be done now. I'm expecting to finish them over the next few months and should probably be able to release both sometime this spring.

[MagicalMaster]

Great to hear, looking forward to it.

[MagicalMaster]

Andarian, something I was wondering: what exactly did the difficulty settings in Sanctum do?  They set a localint to indicate the difficulty which presumably other scripts drew from...was it simply finding better items on easier difficulties, was it less monsters, was it easier monsters, etc?

[AndarianTD]

Andarian, something I was wondering: what exactly did the difficulty settings in Sanctum do?  They set a localint to indicate the difficulty which presumably other scripts drew from...was it simply finding better items on easier difficulties, was it less monsters, was it easier monsters, etc?

 

Most areas that contain difficult combat (especially in the ruins) specify an onEnter script named "sa_adjust_combat." The first time the PC enters, it iterates through all objects in the area (especially creatures and encounters), checking for certain variables that have been set on them. Depending on the variables found, it will do things like delete the creature/encounter, "weaken" it with permanent stat lowerings and/or HP damage, or scale the encounter difficulty. If you look over sa_adjust_combat and the scripts it calls you should get the idea.

 

The approach does allow the player some flexibility in adjusting the combat difficulty during the game (using the Adventurer's Guide), but it's not perfect. It works for areas the PC hasn't entered yet, but those settings become permanent once the player does enter them for the first time.

[MagicalMaster]

Depending on the variables found, it will do things like delete the creature/encounter, "weaken" it with permanent stat lowerings and/or HP damage, or scale the encounter difficulty. If you look over sa_adjust_combat and the scripts it calls you should get the idea.

 

Interesting, thanks.  I always played on Very Hard and never adjusted it so I never had any issues with the "permanent" settings (which I suppose is a good thing because trying to "tone it down" wouldn't have worked if I was stuck) but wondered what was going on behind the scenes.  Trying to figure out a good way to increase/decrease difficulty is always tricky.