18 réponses à ce sujet

[Tchos]

I really wasn't sure where to put this topic.  I thought of scripting, first, but the scripting part isn't really the focus of my musing here.  It's more of a gameplay preference topic, so I put it here.

Before I wrote this, I checked on the Vault to see if anyone had already created such a thing, but found no results.  I also found no discussion of it on this forum.  Perhaps there was something on the older forum.  But the gist is this:

I like material components.  I think they add a lot of flavour to being a spellcaster, and I like flavour, but NWN2 omits the material components for those spells that have them in the P&P rules.  The 3.5 rules are really pretty relaxed about them, too.  Most of the spells that require material components just allow you to carry a pouch that is assumed to have a sufficient supply of most components in it, but the more powerful spells specify some particular items that you need to have, and their cost.

As I noted elsewhere, Troika's Temple of Elemental Evil included this mechanic by deducting the cost of those components from your gold supply whenever you used the spell, much in the same way that Storm of Zehir's crafting does the same for the gems and essences you normally would have needed.  But much in the same way that I like material components, I preferred the vanilla OC's crafting system over SoZ's.

So, if anyone has added these material components into the spell requirements for NWN2, I wasn't able to find it.  Perhaps it was done in specific modules, and if so, I'd like to know which those were.

But I'm interested to know how others would feel about a module that added the P&P material component requirements to the relevant spells, along with a place to purchase those components.  In such a system, if you ran out of the component for a spell, you would not be able to cast that spell, even if you had rested.  Much like an archery-focused ranger who ran out of arrows would be at a disadvantage.  Such a module would also include the spell component pouch for most generic spells, and the ability to store the more expensive components in it, with no weight.

I just think it would bring more interest and flavour to spellcasting.  And in those modules that have sections where you may be captured and stripped of your belongings, a caster would be limited to those spells that only required verbal and/or somatic components.

This also applies to things like cleric holy symbols being necessary to turn undead and to use as a spell/divine focus for other spells, and similar items for other kinds of spellcasters.

[Happycrow]

If it were well done, I'd be all over it. But you're talking a lot of blueprints to do fully...

[kamal_]

While it would be nifty, it would be a bunch of work. For your module, because you intended to turn it around quickly, I don't think it would be worthwhile because of the time required.

If you want to see material components in a nwn module, the nwn1 module Almraiven
http://nwvault.ign.c....detail&id=5007
and it's sequel did it. That was a low level module though, so probably only the spells up to about 3rd level were likely altered for it.

[Tchos]

It would not be included in my current module.

Only a small percentage of spells have specifically-priced material components, and those are the only ones that would need to be made into separate blueprints. All the rest, which are there as flavour and which don't mention specific prices, are provided in unlimited supply in the Spell Component Pouch. I'm not sure how many there are exactly, but I think of the arcane spells included in NWN2, there would be only 5-10 spells at the most which would need to have specific spell components.  I would have to look up the spells that are included in NWN2.

Though it's true that to do it properly, all spells with material components would need to be altered to check for the presence of the pouch, because if the wizard/druid/priest/etc. loses the pouch or has it taken away, they should not be able to cast any spell that has a material component. Of course, spells with only verbal or somatic components are unchanged.

Probably the largest number of blueprints would come from the cleric holy symbols, if one were made for each of the gods included in NWN2, as it should be for full flavour. The symbols are all named and described in the books, though, so it's just a matter of transcribing the information. Making the icons would be the most time-consuming part of it.

Similarly, thieves are supposed to have a -2 modifier to their Open Lock and Disable Device skills if they don't have any thieves' tools, because that means they're improvising tools. The tools are not supposed to be destroyed on use, though.

I'll keep Almraiven and its sequel in mind, for next time I decide to fire up NWN1.

So far it sounds like two "yea" votes.

Modifié par Tchos, 05 novembre 2012 - 03:21 .

[kevL]

thrye,

I don't play caster much but when i do it's the kind of thing I expect ...


( until can't find a particular component, then i RAGE

[Arkalezth]

Flavour wise, it sounds good. Gameplay wise, I don't know; I already find memorizing spells annoying enough.

I guess it depends on the module, the frequency at which you cast spells, etc. I think it's a good idea, but the module should be adapted to it, IMO.

[Tchos]

kevL, I'd make sure the components are easy to locate. You'd just have to stock up!

Ark, it sounds like you wouldn't enjoy a module like this, if you find the existing spell system annoying. As far as I'm concerned, material components are how it's supposed to be, and what I'd really like is an override system that would let me use components in every module I play, to make it harder and improve the gameplay by restoring that strategic element to the spellcasting. I don't see it as something that should have a module built to make any special accommodations for the system aside from a vendor selling the components, since it's not a player convenience feature.

Also, I prefer the explanation that casters aren't just memorising spells and then forgetting them when they cast, but are actually preparing and pre-casting 95% of each spell beforehand -- doing rituals that would take far too long to do in battle, but leaving the last part of each one hanging, so that they can finish it quickly in battle. But once it's done, they have to prepare it again out of battle. I'm not sure if they explained it that much anywhere, but that's what I take from their use of the word "prepare" in the 3.x material, which replaced "memorise".

Modifié par Tchos, 05 novembre 2012 - 10:16 .

[Arkalezth]

Well, it depends. If the module is combat-heavy and vendors or relatively cheap components are unavailable (that includes a lot of modules), it could be a problem. It's not that I don't like the idea (I do, actually), but I thought I'd throw an opinion from a different point of view.

As for memorized spellcasting, I know some people like it, but I'm not a great fan of it personally. Spontaneous spellcasting is not that bad for my taste, but I would prefer something along the lines of Dragon Age (mana, cooldowns...).

All in all, back to the topic, I think it'd be a nice mod, despite the possible... let's call them "incompatibility issues". I can't say if I'd use it all the time, but I'd definitely give it a try if it was released.

Modifié par Arkalezth, 06 novembre 2012 - 12:22 .

[Tchos]

Please, don't take it as me discouraging dissenting opinions!  I want to hear and understand your points on it.  If you argue in favour of your position, it helps me understand where you're coming from.  That's the purpose of my own dialogue, too, and if I restate or rephrase something, it's just to try to clarify what it is that I'm suggesting.

I like mana systems, too.  You could say that the material components of a mana-based spellcasting system are mana potions and mana-boosting items.

One thing I still need to stress is that the relatively cheap components are unlimited in 3.x D&D as long as you have a pouch.  So what you're worried about there, for the combat-heavy modules, wouldn't actually be a problem except for certain spells.

I've just checked to see which spells (from the Arcane spell list) would actually be affected. 

There's only one 1st-level spell in the list that requires material components you would have to buy, and that's the Identify spell.  It costs the same as it would cost to have a shopkeeper identify it (100gp) by default, though a shopkeeper should technically charge more for the service.  If you play with characters with high Lore skills, you might not even use this.

2nd level also has only one such spell: Death Armour (50gp).  I haven't checked 3rd level or higher just yet.

There are other 1st and 2nd level spells that would require possessing a pouch, which is understood as a kit which contains all of the inexpensive odds and ends you need for most spells.  So none of those other spells require you to buy specific items to use them, as long as you have the pouch.

[Arkalezth]

No worries, I didn't interpret your posts as such; sometimes I just rant for the sake of it. What I mean is that, despite my comments, I think it's a good idea. I'm just not sure about how I'd enjoy it in practice. But if those spells are few, I guess guess there shouldn't be any problem.

As an example of my point, let's suppose that you have to fight an horde of weak enemies. Fireball could be a good spell to kill them in groups, so maybe you want to fill your book with that spell, but if it requires materials to be cast, it may be a bit expensive. A warrior, on the other hand, could do that quest without having to spend any money, as long as he had a weapon.

Of course, you could use other spells, but maybe those wouldn't be so effective. And I guess some players may find it complicated to decide what to memorize and how much money to spend on materials, if resting and money are restricted. It's cool if you like strategic spellcasting, but if you're not that good at managing a spellbook as it works in the vanilla game, this can make it worse. Again, I know only some spells would be affected, but still.

Anyway, I'm ranting again. Count me as a "yea" too. Some people might not use the mod, but it'd be good to have it as an option.

[Tchos]

I agree that warriors would get a cheaper experience in cases like that, but warriors would also have that same advantage over bow-wielding archers, who may have to buy their +2 arrows, or fire arrows, or whatever's needed to overcome a particular enemy's resistances. Good ol' D&D isn't balanced to make everyone equal, and as a player who prefers playing spellcasters, I like the whole "warriors are linear, wizards are quadratic" difference in the leveling experience.

So what I'm saying is that I'm aware of what you illustrate as the disadvantage, and the only difference is that I actually like being at that kind of disadvantage.

There's probably a spell in the list that creates exactly the kind of situation you use in your example, though it wouldn't actually be Fireball, because that spell's components are included in the pouch and wouldn't incur any extra costs. One that does, on the other hand, is Stoneskin, which requires 250 gp worth of granite and diamond dust for each cast, so under such a system I might change how often I use that spell.

As for resting, I would only use this kind of system with MotB-style resting, like in Baldur's Gate -- No forbidden resting, but some areas have a chance of interrupting your rest with wandering monsters.

[Luminus]

I will agree with Arkalezth. Personally, I am against vancian (memorization/preparation) based magic. Adding another layer of complexity to cast memorized spells is more of a chore. Though, I like challenges and complex systems so I might enjoy it, in practice.
For example, in Icewind Dale 2, I have both a Wizard and a Sorcerer. The Wizard has to spend tons of gold to buy all the various spells in the game. Then memorize the ones I think I will need. He always has some spells he is not using, because they are useless in some battles. For example 1 Fireball when we are in a narrow passage or cave.

One problem is that this doesn't work that well in computer games. A party, using a rough example, might take a whole day for five encounters. In a computer game, five encounters might take like one hour.
I am exaggerating but what I mean is that encounters come and end much faster in videogames.

This means that having to constantly buy materials or find gold to even use your spells, could be more trouble than it's worth. It's already a chore to track down and buy scrolls for your Wizard.

That is one reason I love Sorcerers, Warlocks and gishes.
You select the spell you want and cast it. No scrolls, memorization or in PnP, buying and guarding spellbooks.
Warlocks just improve automatically, no limit to their abilities. Even if they are weaker and fewer.
A gish just memorizes a few standard buffs and uses them. Like the Druid or Cleric.

If we are going to implement that level of PnP rules, then the spells should be changed to their PnP versions to make it worth it, as well.
For example, a caster with a Gate spell, in NwN2, summons a Cornugon. That's it. In PnP the Gate spell can summon a Solar or Balor and the Solar has his own Cleric spells, including Resurrection and Wish etc.
Also, casters have spells to fly. Druids can turn into flying animals or T-Rexes.

Just implementing the portion that penalizes the player for using spells, then the spells and abilities themselves should be improved to make it worth it.
Theoretically it's possible. For example when you click to summon the Gate spell, a menu opens that let's you choose a Solar or another summon. Then that summon turns into a controllable party member. So you can cast spells with it, manually.
If that thing is implemented, then by all means, have both material and xp compoments.

That is one reason the designers nerfed the spells in the games. Because summoning a Balor with a Vorpal Sword and explode on death was too good for a free spell.

[Tchos]

For the record, I actually draw the line to exclude XP components for my purposes. Not because I'm opposed to them -- I welcome that kind of slowing of the wizard's advancement in exchange for some extra power in the present. But if I implemented that into spells, I think I'd have to put them into crafting, too.

I thought about the spellbook, but I don't think it adds anything more to the game except for the ability to completely incapacitate wizards if you strip them of their possessions.

I understand your position, and I take it as a "nay".

Still, you consider certain things to be "penalties" or "chores", and I consider those same things to be "challenges" and "goals" that I enjoy. I don't like being handed spells on leveling up and just automatically knowing them. I want to gain spells gradually from finding or buying scrolls to learn. Like a fighter finally being able to afford a new magic weapon or suit of armour, it's an upgrade that I like to feel like I earned by working at it or searching for it, not as a gift for leveling up.

It is true that many of the spells are nerfed compared to the P&P versions. Possibly for the reason you posit, and/or possibly because even if they did cost gold and XP (which would be nearly negligible for a character at a high enough level to cast those spells, in my opinion), they're still so powerful that they'd allow the player to breeze through anything the creators designed, or else make them design encounters so tough that it would require a powerful wizard along with you in order to succeed.

I think some of the spells you mention have been modded in the ways you suggest. I've seen a few on the Vault, including one that restores the proper number of summons for certain spells, rather than restricting you to one. I do wish there were flying spells and better druid Wild Shape options, but that's way beyond my scope.

As for Vancian magic itself, well, that is indeed the purpose of the non-Vancian casters like the ones you describe (and others), to suit other playing preferences. I personally tend to use one of the other alternatives, such as crafting wands, scribing scrolls, and brewing potions to fill out my wizard's repertoire and compensate for unprepared spells, but that is, of course, a costly thing.

That said, in the official campaigns, and in most modules I've played, gold accumulates to absurd quantities. A wizard may need to spend a lot of gold, yes. But there is a lot of gold to spare, and the additional costs that would come from adding material component requirements are really are quite minimal at lower levels, where gold may be scarce.

[MokahTGS]

I'm not sure if you are aware of the Ultima Magic system that was made a while back. It uses reagents and mana as per the Ultima game rules.

[Tchos]

I was not aware of that. Thank you. I've seen several of the other Ultima Returns systems, but I seem to have missed that one. That would be a good example to use to see how they implemented it. I wouldn't use it directly as it is for my own work, since I want to use the specific components from the D&D rules, but I'd be interested in playing any modules that used their system. Did any get made?

I found an entry in the Community Script Library's hooked spells that checks clerics for the presence of a holy symbol, so that work's already done.

[MokahTGS]

 That system uses spell hooking to check for mana and reagents before the spell is cast.  It uses a 2DA to define the reagents needed, and those can be changed and added to however.

I'm personally going to use this system for Jabberwocky.

[Tchos]

Based on your suggestion, I've examined the code and 2DA for the mana/reagent system.  Stripping out the mana part was easy enough, and the remaining system seems to work perfectly.  However, expanding it and changing it looks to be complicated.

It's not sufficient to modify the 2DA alone to expand the reagents, because the scripts themselves check only for the ones that are currently in it, so each function would have to be modified, adding another argument (they're set up as GetHasReagents(object oCaster, int pearl, int moss, ... ) and so on), and the functions are collections of IF statements, which name each reagent explicitly.

In the 2DA itself, the reagent IDs are set up as columns, meaning I'd have to add another column for each new reagent, with entries all the way down the line for each spell, since it's set up with the spell IDs in the rows.

The underlying foundation is solid, though, and I think I might be able to redesign the system to work exclusively from the 2DA, without needing to alter the script functions once they're in place if you want to add more items later.  I could possibly use a structure like the one used for the MotB resting system, where you can specify any blueprint or group of blueprints without needing to add any new columns.

[Tchos]

I spoke too soon. I ran into the same trouble you did, Mokah. Did you find a way to actually abort the spell? It goes ahead and fires even if you don't have the reagents. I placed some enemies into the demo module, and found that the offensive spells don't actually do damage unless you have the reagents, but they still visually fire, and non-offensive spells like Light still have their effects.

[Tchos]

I've got it so that no actual effects occur at all, including ones like Light, but it still insists on playing the full animation and visual effects of casting the spell, including things like the Ice Storm's ball of ice falling out of the sky and hitting the target, even though it doesn't cause any damage and the enemy doesn't notice anything.

Ideally, it should work the same way that effects like Silence and Spell Failure work. If you're silenced, it doesn't start the animation at all, and explains why you can't cast. That's exactly what should happen here, so perhaps there's a way to create a new effect with a new message, and apply it whenever you try to cast something.

Spell Failure starts the animation and then stops it before actually throwing any magical projectiles, so it would work, though it's not quite as ideal as the Silence effect.