50 réponses à ce sujet

[Westan Willows]

I must agree with MagicalMaster.

1) I don't know how to turn on/off
2) I just want to play the mod not have to turn this on or that off.

[WebShaman]

If the PRC added a new "Shaman" class which had the following features...

d10 HP due to being a barbarian's kin but slightly less tough
Full BAB progression
Light Armor proficiency
Level 9 arcane spontaneous spellcasting that ignores spell failure from light armor and shields

Would you still say it's never bad?

You're basically getting a lightly armored sorcerer who can ignore spell failure with twice the BAB and about twice the HP.

I am not aware of such a Class or PrC being in the PRC, first of all. There is a version of the Shaman that can do spontaneous casting, much like the Sorcerer, except with Divine spells, but it doesn't have 1/1 BAB or D10 HP.

Even if that were the case, however. Yeah, I would welcome the extra content. Doesn't mean I have to use it, does it? But someone, somewhere, did the work to create this. That adds to the game.

I repeat : that adds to the game.

And yeah, I find that a good thing.

Back to Westan here - you don't have to turn anything on or off - the PRC comes pre-switched. You CAN turn things on or off, if you wish. It is giving you options, for your enjoyment, instead of railroading you into doing something in a preconceived way, by someone else.

I (and the PRC team from Olde) understand that you just wish to play. That is why the PRC comes with an injector. You press button, point it at the mod, and it installs itself. If there are haks, it even has a neat little organizer built-in that tries to make everything "work nice". It is not perfect, but it is better than any other hak system currently available for NWN that I am aware of.

Not even CEP or Q uses this type of thing for their content that I am aware of.

In any event, all I wanted to do was to inform you that you have a CHOICE of extra content here, because you asked about Sorcerer?RDD options.

[MagicalMaster]

WebShaman wrote...

I am not aware of such a Class or PrC being in the PRC, first of all. There is a version of the Shaman that can do spontaneous casting, much like the Sorcerer, except with Divine spells, but it doesn't have 1/1 BAB or D10 HP.

It doesn't exist, I made it up out of thin air.  I took a sorcerer and gave it some armor/shield proficiency which it could use while casting, upped its HP, and doubled its BAB (I technically didn't mention it having a familiar but assume it does).

WebShaman wrote...

Even if that were the case, however. Yeah, I would welcome the extra content. Doesn't mean I have to use it, does it? But someone, somewhere, did the work to create this. That adds to the game.

That's the thing, though, I disagree that it adds to the game.  In fact, I think it subtracts from the game.  At a minimum it renders the sorcerer class obselete and pointless.  It also introduces power creep that makes other classes much weaker relatively speaking.

And it is eliminating part of the whole POINT of arcane spellcasting -- that your physical attacks are much worse, you can't wear armor without special training and considerable effort, and you have the lowest hit die of all classes.

Or, in other words, RPGs are about interesting choices and introducing something obviously superior reduces those interesting choices.  If the PRC added a martial medium slashing weapon which had 1d12 damage and 19-20/x3 you've just removed a lot of weapons from play as there's no reason to pick them over the new weapon.  Even though it's something someone somewhere did work to create.

[WebShaman]

Well, the best part of NWN is that your opinion is moot, whereas mine still applies.

You may rant all you want about what you thinks "subtracts" from the game, but as long as NWN is an open platform where one can add content to it, that doesn't change things, does it?

Your opinion of things is rather subjective. You see things from your perspective only, it would seem. I am sure there are Players who would enjoy playing such a character as you describe, that can go toe-to-toe with sword and cast magic.

Oh, of course! That already exists.

The Eldritch Knight.

It was even officially introduced into NWN2 as a PrC.

And guess what?

It doesn't render the Sorcerer Class obsolete and pointless. But I get the feeling I am speaking to deaf ears.

In any event, I am really glad that you are powerless to enforce your view of things on others in the game. Even with your Mod - I open it, change it to my liking, however I wish to do so. Not that I have played it yet...but if I do, it will be with the PRC installed, of course (along with a host of other goodies, like the OHS).

Oh, and again I see things like "if the PRC added" - it doesn't. You really are picking at straws here.

But let us see...I can basically take any weapon in the game, and make it magical, blah blah blah. As long as these benefits outweight the benefits from other weapons, soon PGers will have builds centered around this weapon. It is a fact of RPG life.

Variety is the spice of life. You seem to like blandness.

I like spice.

[MagicalMaster]

WebShaman wrote...

You may rant all you want about what you thinks "subtracts" from the game, but as long as NWN is an open platform where one can add content to it, that doesn't change things, does it?

Ranting, Web?

My original response in this thread was quite simply:

"Keep in mind PRC adds a whole bunch of brokenly overpowered stuff. Maybe people find it interesting but it's not even remotely close to balanced (not that standard NWN is but PRC makes it much worse). PRC also doesn't play well with some modules from what I recall."

You're the one who responded to those three sentences with a dozen -- you could have simply said something like:

"Yes, the PRC has some powerful stuff but I still find it fun and suggest fiddling around with it and seeing if you like it."

And that would have been it.  You're the one who felt the need to turn this into a full blown discussion about the PRC.

WebShaman wrote...

Your opinion of things is rather subjective. You see things from your perspective only, it would seem. I am sure there are Players who would enjoy playing such a character as you describe, that can go toe-to-toe with sword and cast magic.

I see things from a DESIGNER perspective, Web, while you see it from a PLAYER perspective.  I'm sure many players would like to take the strengths of two classes and combine them while at least mostly discarding the weaknesses of both classes.  Oddly enough, EVERYONE tends to think their favorite class is too weak and needs buffs while the other classes are too strong.

WebShaman wrote...

In any event, I am really glad that you are powerless to enforce your view of things on others in the game. Even with your Mod - I open it, change it to my liking, however I wish to do so. Not that I have played it yet...but if I do, it will be with the PRC installed, of course (along with a host of other goodies, like the OHS).

I typically don't use this phrase but I feel a need to do so here: LOL.  Have fun with the OHS, I suspect it'll end rather badly (given the fact that the module is designed to be done with zero henchmen and the nature of the fights in the module).  Should be interesting to hear about, I suppose.

And of course you're free to use the PRC if you want...just as you're free to use DebugMode to increase every stat of your character by 10.  Probably about the same effect of some of the classes in there.  Use the PRC if you wish but just remember it was NOT designed or tuned around the PRC.

WebShaman wrote...

Oh, and again I see things like "if the PRC added" - it doesn't. You really are picking at straws here.

Well, you've already happily informed us in the other thread that the PRC adds a base class with better archery abilities than an Arcane Archer.  Shockingly enough, should you use that class in Siege of the Heavens you'll find it massively easier than intended -- and it's already relatively easier than intended given how  powerful Arcane Archer is by default.

WebShaman wrote...

But let us see...I can basically take any weapon in the game, and make it magical, blah blah blah. As long as these benefits outweight the benefits from other weapons, soon PGers will have builds centered around this weapon. It is a fact of RPG life.

Sure, and at the same time people will object and say that you should be free to choose either a longsword or battleaxe based on personal desire instead of the fact that the best weapons in a mod are longswords.  That's an indication of poor design.

In a well designed module with magical enhancement equality the weapon I mentioned, if added, would always be used.

WebShaman wrote...

Variety is the spice of life. You seem to like blandness.

I like spice.

Quite the reverse, Webshaman.

Let me ask you a question: if you had a choice between doing 5% more damage per hit, 5% chance to do double damage, or attack 5% more often which would you want?  You'd be able to choose what you think is most interesting.

Now what if I offered you a choice between 30% more damage, 5% more damage, 5% chance to do double damage, or attack 5% more often?  You'd be stupid NOT to always pick the 30% bonus because it's clearly better.  We've removed three choices.

Or here's another simple question: which of the following has more variety?

Game 1: 10 roughly equally balanced classes which are all viable

Game 2: 50 classes with 3 of them clearly being much better than the other 47

I'm guessing you'd say game 2, despite the fact it only has three REAL choices and game 1 has ten.

Modifié par MagicalMaster, 09 février 2014 - 08:36 .

[WebShaman]

Again, you try to put the whole shibang in my court, but the purposeful inclusion of the language in your post was designed to get a reply.

So yeah, we are both guilty.

It is just that you seem to forget that there are innocents that get affected by your negativity. Those that might have had more fun (you know, enjoyment, the reason we play games?) using the PRC. Why did you feel the need to throw the big scare words out there regarding it?

You think I only consider things from a Players view? Think again.

The PRC is for players, sure (and Devs that wish to incorporate it, as I and others have). But positively supporting something that was created, we support the Devs that developed it.

It is just like I am not here "dumping" on your Mod (nor would I). I support developers where possible, for I also develope stuff as well (which you seem to be forgetting).

I just haven't forgotten that everything developed is for the sole purpose of being used. And when we come to games, well, it is for enjoyment of the players.

I have always been against narrowing options - because giving options reaches out to a broader player base. It allows more to have fun.

Now, to your questions.

I will take all three, thank you. Why are you offering me either 1, 2, or 3? I want all 3!

But seriously, as you know, it really depends on environment, doesn't it? In one case, 5% more damage may be better, but for the next, 5% more attack could be more advantageous. And so on.

Now, you load the question with what seems like an obvious choice, but perhaps a certain encounter has such a high damage output, that I can't survive many hits in melee with the 30% more damage melee weapon...so I actually need the attack 5% more often at range, to kite and decrease the chance of taking damage.

Again, environmental differences require different tactics, resources, etc. We all know that Devs in games tend to pack the "ultimate" weapon, armor, item somewhere in the game (meaning the "best" stuff), normally towards the end.  Does that mean that everything else in the game is not "viable" or that I will not be using it?  Of course not!  Because I don't yet have access to item X yet.  I only have access to item A, B, and C.

You know, there is an interesting example of such in Baldur's Gate II Shadows of Amn.  One can invest in a Rogue, use some Master Thievery Potions (which stack) and steal blind all the merchants.  Then one can sell stolen stuff to a certain fence, rinse, repeat.

Basically, you get all the items that can be bought, plus unlimited wealth.

It still does not make the game easy.  And certainly not boring.  Rather, it ALLEVIATES THE NEED TO GRIND, GRIND, GRIND!

As to the question about variety - it really depends on the environment. Perhaps whoever designed the environment for Game 2 didn't provide appropriate material to make the other 47 classes "viable", in your words. As you know, any class can be made viable depending on the environment.

Let us get down to the meat of the issue. Devs have limited resources, zots. Communities that produce CC have much more. So which one can actually produce enjoyable environments and content that will make all 50 of those classes viable?

It is not that Devs don't WANT to do this, it is just a question of time, resources, etc. So they cut corners, cut content, and shape things according to the zots that they have, rather than the zots that they do not.

Consider your Mod for a minute. What if you had an entire team devoted to building it? One that was professional and working for you? Do you think that it would be better, more fun, more enjoyable? Think of all the things that you could include and incorporate that you couldn't due to zots.

Now, you say your Mod would be "too easy" if I used the PRC and OHS (as it is not designed for more than one character).

I say that is not necessarily so. What if I use one of those "less viable" characters, and make up for lacking requirements by including help?

You see, this is often the problem - one doesn't totally understand a thing, but pontificates about it. The PRC is not "full" of overpowered this or that. There are some overpowered things (Lich), if you will, but most of it is well-balanced, much more balanced than vanilla NWN.

Modifié par WebShaman, 10 février 2014 - 09:03 .

[Sandrax]

If the OP wants a primary caster that for whatever reason simply MUST have RDD, this is my recommendation:

Lawful Good, 29 sorc / 10 RDD / (optional 1 paladin for saves, OR 1 bard to fill up on Tumble/Discipline at the very end)

Important feats:
Still casting
automatic still casting I
automatic still casting II
automatic still casting III

Put on platemail and a tower shield. You are still a caster. automatic still catsing will negate the armor casting penalties entirely. You'll get +4 AC for being an RDD, so it'll stack nicely with your heavy armor and tower, and if you choose the bard you'll get even more AC for tumble. If you take enough INT so you can fill up on discipline as well, that will help deal with knockdown spammers as will the added strength from being RDD. Epic Skill Focus Discipline helps too, especially if they have really high AB.

You'll be immune to fire, get cool wings, and you won't need to take Bull's Strength to carry all that loot you picked up!

Granted, this is not what I would call a superior alpha caster build. Hardly.
I'm just trying to satisfy the OP's constraints but still make a powerful build within those restraints.

[MagicalMaster]

[quote]WebShaman wrote...

Again, you try to put the whole shibang in my court, but the purposeful inclusion of the language in your post was designed to get a reply.[/quote]
Despite what you might think, it definitely WASN'T designed to get a reply.  I figured you'd mention the PRC, I'd mention a warning about it, and we'd move on.  Again, you'll note I NEVER said to NOT use it and even mentioned some people find it interesting.

If I wanted to say something like "Yeah, don't use the PRC, basically everything in it is just incredibly unbalanced and it's just really stupid" in order to provoke a reply I could have.

[quote]WebShaman wrote...

It is just that you seem to forget that there are innocents that get affected by your negativity. Those that might have had more fun (you know, enjoyment, the reason we play games?) using the PRC. Why did you feel the need to throw the big scare words out there regarding it?[/quote]
Because using it in non-PRC modules will give you a very different experience than what was intended.

Imagine we're talking about the EMS from Aielund and you were recommending he use it in override form for all modules.  Would you be upset if I cautioned players about using it in every module?

Or, in other words, I tend to very strongly think you should play through a module as intended by the author first.  Then, if you want to fiddle with it or bring in new classes/feats or change the spell system feel free.  But get the intended experience first.

[quote]WebShaman wrote...

You think I only consider things from a Players view? Think again.[/quote]
The attitude of "Throw anything you want into the game, it only makes it better!" is definitely not a designer point of view.

You also talked about how players would want to play a character with full BAB, d10 HP, full arcane spellcasting, and ignores spell failure for shields and light armor and mention the Eldritch Knight.

Hint: the Eldritch Knight does not have that and for good reason.  For a level 20 build, an Eldritch Knight cannot get above 17 BAB (with something like 4 fighter/6 wizard/10 EK and those 3 BAB are lost early on) and doing so results in a level 16 caster.  At the other extreme they cannot get above level 19 caster and have 15 BAB.  They also have to deal with spell failure and get d6 HP.

So since you seemed to suggest you're perfectly fine with a brokenly overpowered class (which the EK is not but my hypothetical one most certainly is) then why WOULD I think you're considering things from a design point of view instead of a player point of view (meaning "I want the most powerful thing possible!")?

[quote]WebShaman wrote...

It is just like I am not here "dumping" on your Mod (nor would I).[/quote]
Might I point out the rather obvious fact that Siege of the Heavens (or any of the other work that I've done) doesn't affect any other module?  PRC affects Siege if installed, Siege doesn't affect PRC at all.

And if this was a module recommendation thread, the OP mentioned he wanted a story focused mod with lots of RP choices, and I suggested he play Siege it would be perfectly valid for you to point out that Siege was a powergamer's action module with not a ton of story and no real RP choices.  In fact, you NOT pointing that out would hurt the OP since he'd waste his time and energy on it when it's not what he wants.

[quote]WebShaman wrote...

I just haven't forgotten that everything developed is for the sole purpose of being used. And when we come to games, well, it is for enjoyment of the players.[/quote]
I quite agree.  Which also means that if something winds up being potentially detrimental to a player's enjoyment that we should say something.  Again, I never said "OH GODS DON'T USE PRC!"  I said "Keep in mind it has some overpowered stuff, but some players do enjoy it."

[quote]WebShaman wrote...

I will take all three, thank you. Why are you offering me either 1, 2, or 3? I want all 3![/quote]
For the same reasons you can only take three classes, 40 levels, a limited amount of skills, etc.  The whole point is that you CAN'T have everything and games with choices explicitly set up situations where you have to pick one option of several -- and choosing one excludes the others.  Imagine that wizards specializing in a school increased the effects of those spells by 25%.  Would you be upset that you could only specialize in one school?

[quote]WebShaman wrote...

But seriously, as you know, it really depends on environment, doesn't it? In one case, 5% more damage may be better, but for the next, 5% more attack could be more advantageous. And so on.[/quote]
They all average out (I didn't say 5% more attack, I said 5% more attack SPEED (which isn't in NWN but is in many RPGs and other games)) to a 5% bonus.  If you want consistency you can go for the raw damage, if you like RNG you can go for the chance for double damage, if you like a faster pace of gameplay you can go for attack speed.

Unless you have something like damage reduction/resistance in play (and in flat amounts rather than temporary like stoneskin) they're all equal.

[quote]WebShaman wrote...

Now, you load the question with what seems like an obvious choice, but perhaps a certain encounter has such a high damage output, that I can't survive many hits in melee with the 30% more damage melee weapon...so I actually need the attack 5% more often at range, to kite and decrease the chance of taking damage.[/quote]
I never said anything about tying it to a specific weapon, did I?  You'd still have the 30% damage bonus at ranged (or, if you want to tie it to a certain weapon, you'd have NONE of the bonuses at range).

[quote]WebShaman wrote...

Again, environmental differences require different tactics, resources, etc. We all know that Devs in games tend to pack the "ultimate" weapon, armor, item somewhere in the game (meaning the "best" stuff), normally towards the end.  Does that mean that everything else in the game is not "viable" or that I will not be using it?  Of course not!  Because I don't yet have access to item X yet.  I only have access to item A, B, and C.[/quote]
Care to explain how this relates to anything I said?

The point was that all weapons should be available at all levels of quality, be they mundane or +4 keen or +15 flaming vorpal.

[quote]WebShaman wrote...

As to the question about variety - it really depends on the environment. Perhaps whoever designed the environment for Game 2 didn't provide appropriate material to make the other 47 classes "viable", in your words.[/quote]
Or perhaps the 3 other classes simply have certain features that make them markedly superior?

[quote]WebShaman wrote...

Consider your Mod for a minute. What if you had an entire team devoted to building it? One that was professional and working for you? Do you think that it would be better, more fun, more enjoyable?[/quote]
Let's see.

First, it'd have been done already (versus still working on the second half).

Second, some of the aesthetics would be better (as I'm not particularly good with them).

And...that's all I can think of off-hand.  I mean, if I could design the engine from scratch that would be a different story but this is assuming a module for the NWN engine, right?  And one of my specific goals was to require no custom content and limit custom changes as much as possible.

Possibly some dialogue improvements?  I'm not even sure, it's not like dialogue is a focus or anything.

[quote]WebShaman wrote...

Now, you say your Mod would be "too easy" if I used the PRC and OHS (as it is not designed for more than one character).

I say that is not necessarily so. What if I use one of those "less viable" characters, and make up for lacking requirements by including help?[/quote]
Technically I didn't say the OHS would make it too easy, I said I'd be amused to find out how it worked out since henchmen were never planned or assumed and I think it'll end miserably.

Bringing in some of the stuff from the PRC would definitely make it much easier than intended, though (if the overpowered stuff is used).  And some of it would flat out break the mod's balance -- destroying the weapons of bosses with an epic spell, for example, would leave them doing far, far less damage and quite possibly being unable to break past the 20/+3 reduction of Ethereal Visage.  Or using the PRC version of Heal in one of the previous versions of the module (which actually would have made it impossible to WIN for most players, something I mentioned in the other thread in reference to Shadow).

And what "less viable" character(s) are you even thinking of?

[quote]WebShaman wrote...

You see, this is often the problem - one doesn't totally understand a thing, but pontificates about it. The PRC is not "full" of overpowered this or that. There are some overpowered things (Lich), if you will, but most of it is well-balanced, much more balanced than vanilla NWN. [/quote]
You know, using the word full in quotes indicates *I* said that...which I most certainly did not.  The only times I've used the word "full" in this thread are "full BAB" and "full blown discussion."

Kindly don't claim I said something that I never said.

I originally said that the PRC had "a whole bunch" of overpowered stuff and that's quite different (as in a full glass of water means water takes up all of the room in the glass).

And there's more than just the Lich (which, interestingly enough, wouldn't be that powerful in Siege) -- and why are you expecting the average player to be able to determine which are overpowered and which are not?

I'll also leave you with a quote:

"A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away."

- Antoine de Saint-Exupery

[WebShaman]

Considering that in the past I have always attempted to hold the PRC in a good light, despite the repeated bashings it got (and the OP reputation because of such), and you pretty much are aware of that, I would say if you really thought that I would just let it go, that that was pretty naive.

The PRC was pounded on by much of the Community - much of it unfairly. That the PRC brought many new and interesting tools and utilities to the Community was a moot point - bash that OP piece of crud!

A few (like myself) decided to defend it - and I hope that at least a few peeps out there got to enjoy using it because of this.

Hint: the Eldritch Knight does not have that and for good reason. For a level 20 build, an Eldritch Knight cannot get above 17 BAB (with something like 4 fighter/6 wizard/10 EK and those 3 BAB are lost early on) and doing so results in a level 16 caster. At the other extreme they cannot get above level 19 caster and have 15 BAB. They also have to deal with spell failure and get d6 HP.

Yes, but I can offset this by taking feats (Practiced Spellcaster, for example). For the loss of BAB, I can use spells to offset it (Tenser's Transformation, the PnP version, for example).

It is pretty much what you were talking about - minus the D10 hps (which the TT pretty much takes care of as well).

"Full" put in quotes is to put it in context - meaning, when you say

a whole bunch

- that it is a subjective meaning, but one which leads one to believe that most of something is whatever is being considered Full or A WHOLE BUNCH. I hope that clears that up.

BTW - when I want to actually quote someone, I use the Quote tags.

Now, wouldn't it have been much easier for you to just have ignored the PRC commenting altogether? You know, along the lines of "nothing nice to say, don't say anything"? Was it really necessary for you to comment on it?

To the Classes thing : you are beating a dead horse, and you know it. If one has gone through the trouble of designing 50 Classes, but only 3 are viable, then that is bad design, both structurally and environmentally.

Because I can make ANY Class viable with the right environment. So can you. So can just about anyone that does design.

As for the weapon thing, again you dodge, with some exception voiding, to prove your point. Do you even realize how that looks and reads? I have rarely (meaning never) been in an environment where there was not exceptions of some sort - either the creatures are different, or the tasks, etc. I haven't ever played in an environment where everything was exactly the same.

Thus, dependingly, 1,2, or 3 may or may not be more or less useful, dependingly. Although I would like to have all 3. Why are you trying to limit me to just one? *shrugs* I will just use all 3.

As for the 30% thing - ok, so it can be any weapon. Got it. But my character only uses spells. I think I will take door number 4, which gives me other benefits than combat ones. What I am saying here is that one can make a pretty powerful thing, but it doesn't mean it is always going to be the best choice.

As for the OP stuff - it is like a record with a scratch in it. You do know what über is, I know you do. It used to be a playstyle, with über 2das. Basically mostly PvP, but some sorts did use them on PWs and in Mods.

And I say, so what? If that is what they want, let them play. As long as they are not ruining the fun of others, it adds to the game. Would it totally ruin the fun of your Mod? Maybe for you - but for that person who wants to, why is that a bad thing?

I am still really puzzled at your narrow view of what is fun in the game. Why do you wish to limit what might be fun for others, based on some notion that you have?

You see, after running PWs for years, I basically came to realize that people have fun in different ways, often in ways that I don't. That doesn't mean that they shouldn't have fun - on the contrary, it means that I don't have to play that way.

You go about it in a different fashion. You don't think something would be fun (based on...what? Your opinion), so it is not ok for others to have fun doing that something?

I consider that somewhat strange.

Now, I probably wouldn't be playing Mr. Über Build, because I like playing things according to what is fun for me, and I don't think that would be much fun (I might try it to find out, however). BUT! there are probably others out there that might have fun playing it.

So, increased fun, bigger crowd, better for all of us.

Less fun, smaller crowd, worse for all of us.

Hmmm...I choose the first choice.

It is kinda strange, because you went out of your way to bring your ideas to fruition, your Mod. A Mod is a lot of work (I know), and alot gets poured into it. Such a thing adds to the game, and I not only recognize it, I applaud such.

I might not actually like the content, but someone might - and if they are having fun, then that makes the game all that much better, IMHO.

Aaaand then you pull out the "play the X the way the Designer meant it to be played, at least the first time" card.

How many times have I heard that tired, old line?

Bleh.

Absolutely not!

That is not fun for me. I like my characters to be fully characterized, with the look that I like. Which, no Designer to date has implemented (with the possible exception of AD - nice stuff, AD!!!). Of course, I played on AD's world, so...that is beyond the point.

I am absolutely 100% positive that you have not put such in your Mod. So, I will change it before ever having played it. It will certainly look and feel differently than you had in mind, but that is because I like it that way. And I will play it with the OHS, because I like to RP with my party members. I am an old school party pooper.

I enjoy playing with a party, and not really solo. Of course, in NWN online, you get the ultimate in party type play, but that is not what I am talking about here. Ideally, NWN would give you ala BG full control (much like NWN2) of all party members, but that is unfortunately not possible. The OHS comes closest to emulating that.

I don't know if you played NWN2, but I was one of the minority who actually really liked SoZ (Storm of Zehir). It was basically a nice sandbox adventure, with a party.

And I really liked that!

I didn't get railroaded too much (hate that), got to basically go where I wanted to (love that!), and get waxed when the encounter was too tough (which is cool). All that with a party of my choosing (absolutely love that).

Yeah, I played that thing to death. It was about the only thing I liked about NWN2, come to think of it.

But enough, I diverge.

About the quote - that normally pertains to working with stone, I believe. Which in itself is ironic. Set in stone...yeah. Well, you have your perceptions of how fun is to be had, and I have mine. Just glad we are not able to force them on anyone. Not that I would want to.

[rogueknight333]

WebShaman wrote...
...someone, somewhere, did the work to create this. That adds to the game.

WebShaman wrote...
As for Mods, unbalance, yadda yadda yadda. The ONLY place where this matters in in Multiplayer (Online)...

In the first (single-player) module I made for NWN, I may have spent more time testing and adjusting to deal with balance issues than I devoted to any other single task. I am curious, since you make such an issue of respecting people's work, whether you think these efforts were a complete waste?

Another thing I am curious about: if I designed a SP module with a script that sometimes added 1000 HP and +10 AB and AC to mobs completely randomly, with total disregard to the level and capability of the PCs they were facing, do you think that would be a reasonable design decision?

WebShaman wrote...
Because I can make ANY Class viable with the right environment. So can you. So can just about anyone that does design.

Whose side are you arguing here? This is exactly why using third party add-ons to alter the environment (so it might no longer actually be the "right environment") is potentially problematical.

WebShaman wrote...
Why do you wish to limit what might be fun for others...

"Might" being an important word there. Different people obviously find different things fun. If someone does not really understand what a particular add-on actually does, they will have a hard time making a considered judgment of whether it is adding to or detracting from their fun. This is particular likely to be an issue in the case of new players who do not know even the vanilla game all that well (and your remarks occured in the context of threads addressing the questions of just such players). If a new player adds a ton of add-ons to his game, then starts playing and finds he does not like feature X, he may not know what is causing it (i.e., is it part of vanilla NWN or something one of the add-ons introduced?) and thus not know what he can do about it.

WebShaman wrote...

The PRC was pounded on by much of the Community - much of it unfairly...A few (like myself) decided to defend it...

For record, I do not intend anything I said above to be taken as criticism of the PRC, just of the rather peculiar things you are saying in purported defense of it.

Modifié par rogueknight333, 11 février 2014 - 04:31 .

[WebShaman]

I can understand what direction you are coming from, rogueknight333, because I designed and made Mods for Online, otherwise known as PWs. Believe me, a Mod designer does not know what work is, until they have done a PW - from start to finish.

I know all about trying to "balance" vanilla D&D, as well as including add-ons such as the PRC. I can only begin to imagine what FunkySwerve and Co. from Higher Ground have had to do to get some resemblance of balance in their PW encounters.

Personally, I am not a great supporter of the word "balance". I have found that pursuing it with the likes of NWN is an almost hopeless task. I prefer the word challenge.

When one finally throws balance out, and welcomes in challenge, then one can begin to sculpt things to particulars. To what class(es) should this encounter be challenging? What skills, abilities, etc should this particular part of the environment require, to be completed? I no longer attempt to make each and every part of the environment balanced for all classes, races, things, etc.

I found that it actually worked better.

The reason is this :

Not only is the game itself inherently unbalanced, but playstyles differ as well!

You have your RPers, your RPlite, your PGers, etc. If I try to factor all this in as well into the balance equation, it is going to end up an exercise in fustration. This is why PWs are divided up into catagories, and to a lesser extent, Mods as well.

So.

I applaud the efforts that you have gone to, the work that you have put into your baby. You should not direct the question at me, however. I am just one in the audience. You need to direct the question square and soley at yourself. Do you consider whether or not these efforts were a complete waste?

This is all that really matters. I may critique, may make this or that comment, suggestion, whatever. In the end, however, as the designer, you (and only you) are the one that has to ask that question of yourself.

I can tell you this much (coming from the design side) - a PW is a work in progress, never really finished. And it is rare to see anyone running one alone, mainly due to the horrid amount of work and involvement that such a project brings with it. At some point, one does really need to ask themselves if all the work is worth it.

And then, oh, somewhere down the road, you get that treasured little tidbit of feedback from someone, or experience, and it makes everything that one has gone through worthwhile.

So I rather suspect you already have the answer to your question.

As for your rather departure from the expected (for that is what you are describing) - well, isn't that often how Bosses are done? Beefed up m0bs, with immunities up the whazooo and whatnot? HPs, AC, and AB far from any "normal" possibility (meaning that no one puny adventurer could ever hope to achieve even a fraction of such), with abilities, etc off the scale?

But I get your point.

I think that each and every type of environment sets a certain sort of expectancy, and when it is not maintained, then it becomes rather unbelievable, which of course shatters immersion. But that is a part of design philosophy, really.

Like if this particular quest, etc is in a graveyard, we are going to expect all those types of things one finds in a graveyard - undead, creepy encounters, and so forth. When that expectation is not met, immersion suffers because the brain is screaming WTF!!?? Why are there grasslands inside of the graveyard? And...wemics? Superpowered wemics??!! How in all that is holy did they get in there? In the middle of the town?

I can give you a really, really good example of this - NWN2 MotB. This joke of an adventure totally took immersion and threw it out the window with the bathwater!

Did you know that you can find full plate + 5 in barrels in Rashemen? If this got out, every joe that could walk would be heading for Rashemen...well, until they learned about the Epic Level Gnolls, that is!

That is right, you heard me. EPIC LEVEL GNOLLS. Why haven't they taken over Faerun yet? No idea. Can you imagine Cormyr having to face an army of epic level gnolls?

It was ridiculous to the point of ridiculousness itself!

I hope that has answered your question about if I think that would be a reasonable design decision?

And when you ask me on who's side I am arguing, that is easy to answer - on the side of fun. It is not the designer's responsibility to "account" for what someone may add to the game. If you go down that path...it leads to darkness. You make your environment, try to maintain believability, challenge for what you have decided should be challenging, etc, and that is basically it.

Trying to account for what all those different playstyles, add-ons, console buffs, whatever will drive one batty. And get you nowhere.

Let those who want to have fun, have fun.

Now, you make a good point about what a particular add-on does not being known.

I can assure you that the PRC is very well documented - have you even seen the documentation for it? Comes with the package, and it is in website form, so that one can click through all the material and read it. It is far better documented than most other add-ons, that I can assure you.

Still, you have a good point about feature X. I would wager it would then be best to address the forum about it.

Modifié par WebShaman, 11 février 2014 - 07:43 .

[MagicalMaster]

[quote]WebShaman wrote...

I would say if you really thought that I would just let it go, that that was pretty naive.[/quote]
I figured you might say something like "Well, that's your opinion, but I still find it fun and balanced enough that I still recommend it."  Didn't expect you to respond to three sentences with 12.

[quote]WebShaman wrote...

Yes, but I can offset this by taking feats (Practiced Spellcaster, for example). For the loss of BAB, I can use spells to offset it (Tenser's Transformation, the PnP version, for example).[/quote]
Are you TRYING to convince me that it is in fact actually overpowered?  Because I was trying to give PRC the benefit of the doubt.

[quote]WebShaman wrote...

BTW - when I want to actually quote someone, I use the Quote tags.[/quote]
Fair enough, but in the common English vernacular putting quotes around something indicates someone specifically said it.  And unless you mention it being said by someone else it's assumed to mean that it was said the person you're talking to.

[quote]WebShaman wrote...

Now, wouldn't it have been much easier for you to just have ignored the PRC commenting altogether? You know, along the lines of "nothing nice to say, don't say anything"? Was it really necessary for you to comment on it?[/quote]I'll echo what rogueknight333 said and bring up my earlier example of when you would absolutely be justified in commenting on Siege..  NOT saying anything is doing others a disservice in some cases.

[quote]WebShaman wrote...

To the Classes thing : you are beating a dead horse, and you know it. If one has gone through the trouble of designing 50 Classes, but only 3 are viable, then that is bad design, both structurally and environmentally.[/quote]
Yet that happens all the time in various games, no?

[quote]WebShaman wrote...
As for the weapon thing, again you dodge, with some exception voiding, to prove your point.[/quote]
Pray tell how I am dodging?  I've said that if you have +3 longswords available, you should also have +3 battleaxes, warhammers, etc.  If you have +5 keen flaming battleaxes available, you should have equivalent weapons for longswords, warhammers, etc.If the best of every weapon is +4 and keen except one particular longsword that's +5, keen, and 1d6 Divine damage...that's bad design.[quote]WebShaman wrote...

Thus, dependingly, 1,2, or 3 may or may not be more or less useful, dependingly. Although I would like to have all 3. Why are you trying to limit me to just one? *shrugs* I will just use all 3.[/quote]Because I am FORCING you to only pick one of the three.  Just like you can only have three classes in NWN.  Just like you have a limited number of skill points.  Just like you can't take weapon focus in every weapon.  Stop intentionally being dense.You only get to pick 1 out of the three just like you can't have Perfect Health, Epic Dodge, AND Devastating Critical.  Game designers impose limitations through various means.

[quote]WebShaman wrote...

As for the 30% thing - ok, so it can be any weapon. Got it. But my character only uses spells. I think I will take door number 4, which gives me other benefits than combat ones. What I am saying here is that one can make a pretty powerful thing, but it doesn't mean it is always going to be the best choice.[/quote]If you're trying to get me to think you're suddenly an idiot, you're doing a VERY good job.  It's a general bonus that applies to spells, melee, healing, or whatever else you can think of.  You're trying to dodge and evade my point rather than meet it head on and it is EXTREMELY dishonest.

[quote]WebShaman wrote...

I am still really puzzled at your narrow view of what is fun in the game. Why do you wish to limit what might be fun for others, based on some notion that you have?[/quote]
This is such a clear example of begging the question: http://en.wikipedia....ng_the_question

I want people to be AWARE of what the PRC does and how it will evidently typically disrupt balance.  I don't want people to have LESS fun because they use the PRC without knowing its effect.

[quote]WebShaman wrote...

I am absolutely 100% positive that you have not put such in your Mod. So, I will change it before ever having played it. It will certainly look and feel differently than you had in mind, but that is because I like it that way.[/quote]
I remember an amusing thing in another mod I made.  Part of it involved a cave in a volcano with lava around with -- barren, desolate, devoid of natural life.  Unless you used an override which spruced up the look of tilesets (Chico's I think?) which added ferns and glass and other stuff and completely destroyed the look of the area.

[quote]WebShaman wrote...

And I will play it with the OHS, because I like to RP with my party members. I am an old school party pooper.[/quote]
*shrug* It's designed and balanced around one human player (plus animal companion for druids/rangers).  If you bring in extra party members it'll almost certainly leave you cursing at your companions and will also make the module much easier than intended when you're not cursing.And if you had played an earlier version before I made a special potion that Undead Shifters could use then the PRC's version of Heal would have made the module unbeatable.

[quote]WebShaman wrote...

I don't know if you played NWN2, but I was one of the minority who actually really liked SoZ (Storm of Zehir). It was basically a nice sandbox adventure, with a party.[/quote]
I got about 10-15 minutes into NWN2 and quit in disgust.  Never been back.

[quote]WebShaman wrote...

About the quote - that normally pertains to working with stone, I believe.[/quote]
You would be wrong.  It's from an author.  His point was that anything not essential should be cut or it's simply bloat.  Simplify as much as possible to give meaning.  3 classes that are very different is better than 10 which are effectively identical.

[quote]WebShaman wrote...

I applaud the efforts that you have gone to, the work that you have put into your baby. You should not direct the question at me, however.[/quote]
But he did, so perhaps you should answer both questions.

[quote]WebShaman wrote...

As for your rather departure from the expected (for that is what you are describing) - well, isn't that often how Bosses are done? Beefed up m0bs, with immunities up the whazooo and whatnot? HPs, AC, and AB far from any "normal" possibility (meaning that no one puny adventurer could ever hope to achieve even a fraction of such), with abilities, etc off the scale?

But I get your point.[/quote]
No, it seems you didn't get his point.  At all.

If you're a level 3 character, were fighting level 1 rats, and suddenly one of the rats had 1000 extra HP, 10 more AB, and 10 more AC absolutely randomly, would that be a reasonable design decision?  It is something ADDED to the game, no?

[quote]WebShaman wrote...

When that expectation is not met, immersion suffers because the brain is screaming WTF!!?? Why are there grasslands inside of the graveyard?[/quote]

Like if you're supposed to be in a desolate volcano and suddenly find grass and ferns everywhere right next to lava because you're using a third party add-on?  That would be weird, right?

[quote]WebShaman wrote...

That is right, you heard me. EPIC LEVEL GNOLLS. Why haven't they taken over Faerun yet? No idea. Can you imagine Cormyr having to face an army of epic level gnolls?[/quote]
Would this be a bad time to mention that rogueknight333 has like level 13ish goblins in Swordflight 2?  And a hobgoblin that can take on an entire group of level 13ish PCs solo?  Rogueknight333 must be an idiot, right?

[quote]WebShaman wrote...

Trying to account for what all those different playstyles, add-ons, console buffs, whatever will drive one batty. And get you nowhere. [/quote]
You're correct (we can't account for both legitimate players and someone who uses the console to set every stat to 100).

SO WE DON'T.

And we encourage people to play through once WITHOUT add-ons or "console buffs" precisely to avoid this issue.

Modifié par MagicalMaster, 12 février 2014 - 03:35 .

[rogueknight333]

MagicalMaster wrote...

No, it seems you didn't get his point.  At all.

Well, it appears he is at least making some progress towards doing so, so perhaps he should not be discouraged. The main point I was making was that balance (or challenge if you prefer - but a reasonable challenge does depend on at least some level of balance) is important, even in SP. If you are sending 1st level PCs against epic level mobs they cannot possibly defeat, that is poor balance and poor design, and that is only one issue. There are other problems like redundant and superfluous content needlessly complicating the game, setting traps for noobish players who do not know what is brokenly over- or underpowered and what is not, interfering with role-playing when a player finds that the class that best fits the RP concept he likes is too broken to be fun to play, and so forth. Certainly achieving full balance is a counsel of perfection unlikely to be completely realized. If a player tries hard enough to break your game, he will most likely find a way to do it. All the more reason why players might be well advised to not do that and play as intended. If they foolishly ignore this advice, they can expect to deprive themselves of fun they might otherwise have had. People who do this are often said to be cheating themselves, but if you do not like that terminology you can say instead that they are acting foolishly - it amounts to the same thing.

Much more I could say on these topics but I do not really have time ATM, so for now I will mostly let my first post stand.

MagicalMaster wrote...

WebShaman wrote...

That is right, you heard me. EPIC LEVEL GNOLLS. Why haven't they taken over Faerun yet? No idea. Can you imagine Cormyr having to face an army of epic level gnolls?

Would this be a bad time to mention that rogueknight333 has like level 13ish goblins in Swordflight 2?  And a hobgoblin that can take on an entire group of level 13ish PCs solo?  Rogueknight333 must be an idiot, right?

I did make something of a point about those not being typical goblins. I actually agree that those MotB epic gnolls were a bit strange: no explanation how they got to be so powerful, or why, being so powerful, they would so unambitiously remain content to fulfill the role of low-level minions. And the over-powered loot in barrels on the street was even weirder. Everything was just arbitrarily scaled up to the PCs level, regardless of whether it made any sense (which was an understandable design decision, since of course one does want to have appropriately scaled encounters and loot, but obviously not the most ideal one).

[Westan Willows]

Sandrax wrote...


If the OP wants a primary caster that for whatever reason simply MUST have RDD, this is my recommendation:

Lawful Good, 29 sorc / 10 RDD / (optional 1 paladin for saves, OR 1 bard to fill up on Tumble/Discipline at the very end)

Important feats:
Still casting
automatic still casting I
automatic still casting II
automatic still casting III

Put on platemail and a tower shield. You are still a caster. automatic still catsing will negate the armor casting penalties entirely. You'll get +4 AC for being an RDD, so it'll stack nicely with your heavy armor and tower, and if you choose the bard you'll get even more AC for tumble. If you take enough INT so you can fill up on discipline as well, that will help deal with knockdown spammers as will the added strength from being RDD. Epic Skill Focus Discipline helps too, especially if they have really high AB.

You'll be immune to fire, get cool wings, and you won't need to take Bull's Strength to carry all that loot you picked up!

Granted, this is not what I would call a superior alpha caster build. Hardly.
I'm just trying to satisfy the OP's constraints but still make a powerful build within those restraints.

My Sorc, Allen wants RDD so he doesn't need Bull's Strength. He will take the auto still casting so he can wear some armor, but he is still a checken and will avoide melee combat as much as he can..

[WebShaman]

[quote]MagicalMaster wrote...

Are you TRYING to convince me that it is in fact actually overpowered?  Because I was trying to give PRC the benefit of the doubt.[/quote]

As for the Eldritch Knight - it is what it is, from the PnP source material from which it came.  It got incorporated into NWN2, btw.  And no, contrary to what you may think, it is still not "broken" - having to take feats to offset weaknesses means that one cannot use those feat slots for other, perhaps more useful ones.

But that is all build stuff, and we are not really talking about all that here, are we?

[quote]Fair enough, but in the common English vernacular putting quotes around something indicates someone specifically said it.  And unless you mention it being said by someone else it's assumed to mean that it was said the person you're talking to.[/quote]

Actually, I have mentioned this before, but as you bring it up, I guess you were not aware of it.

[quote]I'll echo what rogueknight333 said and bring up my earlier example of when you would absolutely be justified in commenting on Siege..  NOT saying anything is doing others a disservice in some cases.[/quote]

Sometimes not saying anything is the correct thing to do. 

[quote]Yet that happens all the time in various games, no?[/quote]

I normally wouldn't answer this, as it is...yeah.  It still doesn't make things correct, just because it happens all the time, does it?  I know you know that.  Can't imagine the reason you would take the time to type that.

[quote]Pray tell how I am dodging?  I've said that if you have +3 longswords available, you should also have +3 battleaxes, warhammers, etc.  If you have +5 keen flaming battleaxes available, you should have equivalent weapons for longswords, warhammers, etc.If the best of every weapon is +4 and keen except one particular longsword that's +5, keen, and 1d6 Divine damage...that's bad design.[/quote]

I said you were voiding the exception (you know, the one you brought up, and then threw out?  That is exception voiding).

That is bad design?  No it isn't, not necessarily.  It really depends on how it is done, what the environmental conditions are, and at what point in the game such a thing is introduced.  Many game designs include this sort of device, btw, and it is a valid one.  That is why there are often builds built around a particular item for a particular environment, for example.

[quote]Because I am FORCING you to only pick one of the three.  Just like you can only have three classes in NWN.  Just like you have a limited number of skill points.  Just like you can't take weapon focus in every weapon.  Stop intentionally being dense.You only get to pick 1 out of the three just like you can't have Perfect Health, Epic Dodge, AND Devastating Critical.  Game designers impose limitations through various means.[/quote]

First of all (and this you really don't seem to get), YOU don't force me to do anything.  That was the whole point all along.  It does seem that you are starting to slowly grasp my meaning, however.

Yes, I can have my cake and eat it too.  We are in a closed SP environment ala NWN solo.  Where I can change my game to be almost anything (and even surpass the hardcoded limits, to some extent).  I may not be able to break the 3rd class limit, but it can be somewhat simulated, be it the case.

[quote]If you're trying to get me to think you're suddenly an idiot, you're doing a VERY good job.  It's a general bonus that applies to spells, melee, healing, or whatever else you can think of.  You're trying to dodge and evade my point rather than meet it head on and it is EXTREMELY dishonest.[/quote]

Well, well.

Lay off the name calling - that is against the rules.  We can remain civil and still have a discussion, can't we?

I really didn't think that you would stoop that low.  Kind of surprising, really.

And no, it is not being dishonest, it is demonstrating a point, one you seem not to be grasping.

[quote]This is such a clear example of begging the question: http://en.wikipedia....ng_the_question[/quote]

Yes, I am begging the question, I have been doing so with those with tendencies like yours since NWN came out.  I never really understood why you seem so hell-bent on trying to limit the fun others have by trying to force them to play by your rules.

[quote]I want people to be AWARE of what the PRC does and how it will evidently typically disrupt balance.  I don't want people to have LESS fun because they use the PRC without knowing its effect.[/quote]

It is not up to you to decide what is fun or not for others, don't you see that?  Instead, leaving the opportunity for others to do so, is perhaps the more prudent route.  How do you know that they will have less fun?  You don't.

You could have said that your Mod was not designed with the PRC in mind (along with any other add-ons).  That pretty much covers everything, without being negative.

[quote]
*shrug* It's designed and balanced around one human player (plus animal companion for druids/rangers).  If you bring in extra party members it'll almost certainly leave you cursing at your companions and will also make the module much easier than intended when you're not cursing.And if you had played an earlier version before I made a special potion that Undead Shifters could use then the PRC's version of Heal would have made the module unbeatable.[/quote]

*sigh*

First of all, yeah, sometimes I do curse at my companions, but that is normally in an RP sense, when they do something I didn't see coming.  But I really doubt that I am going to curse at them because of some design situation.  Tbh, it hasn't happened yet.

As for the PRC's version of Heal - ??  Which one?  You do know that with the switches, there are variable versions.  The normal vanilla version, the PnP version...etc.  And btw - I think the PnP Shifter in the PRC would probably fall onto the OP side of your playbook...it is rather powerful, no doubt about it.

[quote]You would be wrong.  It's from an author.  His point was that anything not essential should be cut or it's simply bloat.  Simplify as much as possible to give meaning.  3 classes that are very different is better than 10 which are effectively identical.[/quote]

Then I would be wrong.  I can live with that. The simile is the same, by the way.  When creating a sculpture, one does the same thing, you know.  Anything not essential should be cut away.  Simplify as much as possible without LOSING meaning.

[quote]But he did, so perhaps you should answer both questions.[/quote]

I did (in a roundabout fashion) and he understood the answers.

[quote]No, it seems you didn't get his point.  At all.

If you're a level 3 character, were fighting level 1 rats, and suddenly one of the rats had 1000 extra HP, 10 more AB, and 10 more AC absolutely randomly, would that be a reasonable design decision?  It is something ADDED to the game, no?[/quote]

I understood what he meant, no need to worry.  But Bosses are a lot like that, aren't they?  It is one of the rats that has 1000 extra HP, 10 more AB, and 10 more AC. 

I remember one Mod, it was pretty good.  It really did have random abilites, etc for m0bs (as well as Bosses).  It was a lot of fun because one was always being forced to guess, and no one tactic worked 100% of the time.

I do understand that he is trying to make a point about "balance", believability, and immersion.  I also know that it is a pretty overblown example. 

[quote]Like if you're supposed to be in a desolate volcano and suddenly find grass and ferns everywhere right next to lava because you're using a third party add-on?  That would be weird, right?[/quote]

Sure.  No doubt about it. 


[quote]Would this be a bad time to mention that rogueknight333 has like level 13ish goblins in Swordflight 2?  And a hobgoblin that can take on an entire group of level 13ish PCs solo?  Rogueknight333 must be an idiot, right?[/quote]

First of all, can the insults.  It is really unbecoming of you.  Continue, and I will report you.  I will never agree that Rogueknight333 is any kind of durogatory word.

Second, I don't know the particulars of the goblins or hobgoblin that you mention, so I really cannot comment on it.  If such is done in a reasonable manner, then it can be quite enjoyable, without breaking immersion or believability. 

The example that I gave is a glaring eye-sore in NWN2's MotB that was harshly critiqued, and it would seem that Rogueknight333 is also aware of this.

[quote]You're correct (we can't account for both legitimate players and someone who uses the console to set every stat to 100).

SO WE DON'T.

And we encourage people to play through once WITHOUT add-ons or "console buffs" precisely to avoid this issue.[/quote]

Ah, again here we go.  "Legitimate" players and someone else.  Separating players into groups.  A nasty little bit of business here.

I can understand that you would encourage people to play through your Mod once without changing it.  I also have no problem with you (or anyone else, for that matter) for doing this.  It is when you cross the line, from being benign to belligerent that stands the hairs on my neck up.

You seem to think you have rights that you do not possess, and thus, have some sort of authority to impose them on others.  When you use words like "legitimate players", this makes me suspect that there is more here than just a few words of warning being used.  It seems to go much deeper, to something much, much uglier...control.

I hope I am wrong.

[WebShaman]

I wanted to address this from rogueknight333 :

If you are sending 1st level PCs against epic level mobs they cannot possibly defeat, that is poor balance and poor design, and that is only one issue.

Except this is not necessarily true! Case in point - most PW environments will allow a 1st level PC access to most areas - and of course the encounters are often horribly overpowered for a 1st level character and they die gruesome deaths.

Hehe...I remember quite clearly on one PW where I was on the Staff, there was a random encounter with a Dragon. It was in an area where there were normally lower level m0bs, but there were signs that a dragon was about...certain carcasses, tracks, and such, if one cared to look. Many the adventurer got chewed up by that Dragon, and many were the moans of despair on the forum.

Word of advice - run! It is a Dragon, fer cryin' out loud!

I also know of more than one adventure where this is also the case - much like adventure in a sandbox - where everything is accessable from the gitgo. This means that they should avoid those areas until they are powerful enough to do them, doesn't it? Often there will be certain warnings to this regard.

So sometimes there are good reasons for this type of encounter.

I do understand what you are trying to say here - that if the hapless PC was forced into this encounter without a chance of avoiding it, yeah, that is bad design.

[MagicalMaster]

WebShaman wrote...

First of all, can the insults.  It is really unbecoming of you.  Continue, and I will report you.  I will never agree that Rogueknight333 is any kind of durogatory word.

Feel free.  Thankfully, Bioware's moderators are intelligent enough to realize that I don't actually think rogueknight333 is an idiot and that it was instead a point about how your argument was terrible.

WebShaman wrote...

Well, well.

Lay off the name calling - that is against the rules.  We can remain civil and still have a discussion, can't we?

I really didn't think that you would stoop that low.  Kind of surprising, really.

And no, it is not being dishonest, it is demonstrating a point, one you seem not to be grasping.

Except we're not having a discussion.  Pretty much every time I make a point you go into evasion mode rather than acknowledge it or refute it.  So it is most certainly being dishonest.  I mean, I quite literally had someone message me and put forth the "hypothesis" (their words, not mine) that

"perhaps he [Webshaman] has taken a dislike to you and is now saying crazy stuff for the express purpose of driving you insane or barking mad, or something."

Case in point below...

WebShaman wrote...

First of all (and this you really don't seem to get), YOU don't force me to do anything.  That was the whole point all along.  It does seem that you are starting to slowly grasp my meaning, however.

Yes, I can have my cake and eat it too.  We are in a closed SP environment ala NWN solo.  Where I can change my game to be almost anything (and even surpass the hardcoded limits, to some extent).  I may not be able to break the 3rd class limit, but it can be somewhat simulated, be it the case.

I never ONCE said anything about the environment or SP versus MP or weapons versus spells or ranged versus melee or ANYTHING.

I gave you the simple example of a general game design principle that adding more does in fact NOT always improve a game, contrary to your claim.  So let's try this again.

Given a choice between 5% damage, 5% faster attack, or 5% chance to do double damage, which would you prefer?  Since they're basically equal you can pick whichever is the most interesting or fun to you.

Now let's say I add in a fourth choice of 30% damage.  But since this choice is clearly superior to the others, we have effectively gone from three choices to one.  We have REMOVED choice.

If you are not capable of acknowledging that SIMPLE point then this is completely and utterly pointless.

Modifié par MagicalMaster, 13 février 2014 - 12:48 .

[rogueknight333]

Cool, everyone agrees I am not an idiot. I must say that is a nice point on which to reach consensus. Myself, I was wondering if getting involved in this dispute does not refute that particular claim. Anyway...

WebShaman wrote...

First of all, can the insults...I will never agree that Rogueknight333 is any kind of durogatory word.

Obviously he was being sarcastic. But thank you, I am glad you do not wish me to be insulted and to discuss whatever disagreements we may have in a civil fashion (especially as I am sure there have been moments in my life when I would have quite deserved derogation). I am not clear, however, why you are unable to extend the same courtesy to others. You were the one who started the insults, accusing Magical Master of trolling, ranting and so forth. Yet we are both saying essentially the same things: balance and adherence to expected rules matters, even in SP, and third party add-ons can cause balance, compatibility and other issues that players thinking of using them should be made aware of so they can make an informed decision about whether, and in what circumstances, using them serves their particular priorities as a player. Why does he rate insults for saying these things while I do not? Some of his remarks may have been more intemperate than mine, but what else would you expect when you start insulting someone?

If someone dismissed the prospect of using the PRC (or some other enhancement package you like) out of hand, without even bothering to learn a single thing about it, would you not suggest that they were being foolish and depriving themselves of something that might add to their fun? By the same token, how is it not foolish to take a carefully crafted module environment designed to be fun, and then carelessly alter it without even taking the trouble to understand what you are doing, thereby replacing a fun experience with who-knows-what? You may be gaining something with the alteration, but you are also losing something here: the specific environment the author designed (and you yourself have emphasized the importance of a carefully crafted environment for balance and immersion).

WebShaman wrote...
...I also know of more than one adventure where this is also the case - much like adventure in a sandbox - where everything is accessable from the gitgo. This means that they should avoid those areas until they are powerful enough to do them...

Certainly this happens in non-linear sandbox-style adventures, but this is precisely because in that context these encounters are avoidable. Likewise in a situation where fleeing is a possible and expected strategy. Obviously these instances were not what I meant. I would suggest that your habit of frequently changing the subject to special cases like this is one of the reasons why Magical Master is getting annoyed with your apparent evasiveness.

Modifié par rogueknight333, 13 février 2014 - 05:00 .

[WebShaman]

Trolling when it is trolling is not an insult; In this particular case I said that in a particular part of the discussion he was trolling and that he knew it. That does not mean that he is a troll, only that the technique being used was. This is not a personal insult. Ranting is not name-calling, but a description for a type of activity (and in this case, quite true). When one is throwing out insults, and other...things, then I would tend to call that ranting. Passionate, unthought-out replies.

Calling someone an idiot and then insinuating that another is an idiot is, however, against the forum rules.

Rules of Conduct (from down below, under the Terms of Service).

making personal attacks

Calling someone an idiot is clearly a personal attack.

vulgar language, abusiveness

And insinuating that I would think that another person is an idiot I find abusive.

As MM is NOT in any way penitant, nor does he seem to realize that he has violated the Rules of Conduct (calling me an idiot is certainly not in jest, and it is not sarcasm, either) pretty much ends this for me. And insinuating that I would think that you, rogueknight333, are also an idiot is hardly what I call good fun.

It is in very poor taste.

Instead of reporting him for this (which I should), I am instead withdrawing from this discussion with him. I do not expect to have any further dealings with MM - I do not enjoy dealing with abusive people who engage in personal attacks. As this is a forum where I come to have fun, I do not consider it "fun" to be attacked and abused, especially not in the course of a discussion.

As MM also states that he does not consider this a discussion, then there is little point in continuing -. I would be typing to blind eyes.

You, rogueknight333, seem to be much more disposed to be civil, and much more interested in discussing things. If you choose, we can continue the discussion - I would not be against that. But I will not be replying to MM anymore.

[WebShaman]

If someone dismissed the prospect of using the PRC (or some other
enhancement package you like) out of hand, without even bothering to
learn a single thing about it, would you not suggest that they were
being foolish and depriving themselves of something that might add to
their fun?

This happens all the time - and happened in this thread - though going to the extreme of saying not bothering to learn a single thing about it I would not say.  Peeps have been conditioned to think that the PRC is automatically OP.  Since there are those who are negatively disposed to those who use "OP" CC, many jump on the bandwagon and sing along.

By the same token, how is it not foolish to take a carefully
crafted module environment designed to be fun, and then carelessly alter
it without even taking the trouble to understand what you are doing,
thereby replacing a fun experience with who-knows-what?

First of all, this assumes that it is foolish, careless, and that the person in question does not understand what they are doing.  This is not always the case.  It is much better to leave these types of absolutes out of the discussion.

You may be
gaining something with the alteration, but you are also losing something
here: the specific environment the author designed (and you yourself
have emphasized the importance of a carefully crafted environment for
balance and immersion).

Now, this is a good point - yes, I would agree that something is being lost.  Doubtlessly.  But you see, most of the changes I am talking about just adds to a Mod, instead of the opposite.  Better graphics, more class choices, more spell choices, colored eyes, more sortiment of heads, different looks how I want them to be (and not the pre-conceived notions of what someone else does), my own party, and so on. 

If a Designer (Author, whatever one wishes to label one with) went through the trouble to do this (and I believe that AD does with his PW, for example), then I hardly have need of add-ons.  But most do not - why I am not sure.  Too much work, whatever.  The resources exist, but all-to-many Designers don't even bother to include colorable eyes, better hands, feet, better graphical improvements, etc!  They go through all the trouble to tweak this, and twerk that, but this aspect is blah.

And so it has to be compensated for.

So there are going to be compromises here, ones that I think are worth it.  Yes, one might loose a bit of something, occassionally.  Very true, and I am not going to try to deny that.  But one also gets a lot more, and that is IMHO telling, and worth it.

Let us consider the PRC and the Original OC (which, if I recall correctly, is the environment that the OP will be playing in, or is playing in).

The PRC has a special injector and "fix" for the OC (due to the training rooms).  It doesn't really introduce anything too game-breaking;  If one takes one of the more powerful races, one is of course heavily penalized by the loss of one class slot (monster levels) and dependingly, a pretty heafty XP penalty.  One can get around this, of course, by using the switches.

About the only place where this is "unbalanced" (using a term here that others do) is in that Psionics, Active Feats, etc will not be used by the AI.  In the case of Psionics, that is not so tragic - there are no real Psionic using creatures in the OC (or we would have Psionics in Vanilla NWN).  And many of the active feats are not used by creatures in the OC, so that is no real problem.

And with the OHS, one can then have ALL the henchmen, and then one doesn't have to replay the OC again and again to get to know each one.

So I fail really to see how including such add-ons results in something being lost.  On the contrary, something is being added, at least in the case of the OC.

So let me ask a question, if I might : what is someone loosing when they add the PRC, OHS, and cosmetic add-ons to the OC?

[MagicalMaster]

WebShaman wrote...

Trolling when it is trolling is not an insult; In this particular case I said that in a particular part of the discussion he was trolling and that he knew it.

If I recall correctly, you accused me of trolling when I said having Spot/Listen would suffice to counter HiPS rather than needing True Seeing.

It requires Keen Sense, yes, but since we're talking about players using it on NPCs giving the NPCs Keen Sense is quite easy.  And I assumed, perhaps incorrectly, that clearly anything you didn't want to be HiPSed would have Keen Sense.  Obvious thing to do.

In other words, I wasn't trolling, I was correct -- and you were wrong.

WebShaman wrote...

Ranting is not name-calling, but a description for a type of activity (and in this case, quite true). When one is throwing out insults, and other...things, then I would tend to call that ranting.

Kindly point out where I threw out an insult in this post.  That's the one you accused me of ranting in.

WebShaman wrote...

As MM is NOT in any way penitant, nor does he seem to realize that he has violated the Rules of Conduct (calling me an idiot is certainly not in jest, and it is not sarcasm, either) pretty much ends this for me.

The hilarious thing here is that I was clearly indicating I did *NOT* think you were an idiot.  To quote myself:

"If you're trying to get me to think you're suddenly an idiot, you're doing a VERY good job."

If I'm wondering if you're trying to make me think you're suddenly an idiot, clearly I *DON'T* think you're actually an idiot currently.

WebShaman wrote...

As MM also states that he does not consider this a discussion, then there is little point in continuing -. I would be typing to blind eyes.

I said I don't consider it a discussion because YOU are refusing to participate in an actual discussion.  Like you're doing *right now* by refusing to acknowledge my point in the previous post.  You're *still* evading points and trying to shift the topic to irrelevant and incorrect things.

But, since you won't be responding to me any further, at least this sets the record straight for anyone who might be confused (though I doubt anyone else is).

Also, I'll note that you evaded YET AGAIN and didn't respond to this part of rogueknight333's post:

rogueknight333 wrote...

WebShaman wrote...

...I also know of more than one adventure where this is also the case - much like adventure in a sandbox - where everything is accessable from the gitgo. This means that they should avoid those areas until they are powerful enough to do them...

Certainly this happens in non-linear sandbox-style adventures, but this is precisely because in that context these encounters are avoidable. Likewise in a situation where fleeing is a possible and expected strategy. Obviously these instances were not what I meant. I would suggest that your habit of frequently changing the subject to special cases like this is one of thebreasons why Magical Master is getting annoyed with your apparent evasiveness.

Modifié par MagicalMaster, 13 février 2014 - 09:08 .

[rogueknight333]

It might indeed be good not to say more, at least until tempers cool, but a few (possibly final) comments:

WebShaman wrote...
First of all, this assumes that it is foolish, careless, and that the person in question does not understand what they are doing.  This is not always the case.  It is much better to leave these types of absolutes out of the discussion.

You are the one who introduced absolutes into the discussion, insisting that throwing everything but the kitchen sink into one's override folder will always add to the game, and not merely disagreeing with but attacking the character of those who suggested otherwise. No one is saying that these sorts of enhancement packages are always bad or never worth it.  Nor is anyone assuming that everyone using them does not understand what he is doing, simply that some people might be in that situation, especially new and inexperienced players, which is particularly relevant in that you started this discussion in thread addressing the questions of just such players (which I again suggest is important context to why you might have gotten more negative reactions than perhaps you were expecting). I, and other authors, have in fact received bug reports and complaints that on investigation turned out to be the result of something a player was using in his override. Problems demonstably do occur.

WebShaman wrote...
So let me ask a question, if I might : what is someone loosing when they add the PRC, OHS, and cosmetic add-ons to the OC?

I am probably a terrible person to ask, since I have not played or much thought about the OC in many years (why would I with all the great stuff the community has produced to play instead?), and my memory of it has doubtless become imperfect. In the specific case of the OC, perhaps not much would be lost, since I imagine much content uses the OC as a baseline and is likely to be fully compatible with it, and it was not that well-balanced to begin with. I also would not consider purely cosmetic add-ons to be in exactly the same category as those affecting actual gameplay (though even these are not incapable of causing problems, when, for example, an author is trying to create a very specific aesthetic, or they prove to have compatibility issues with the author's own haks and modifications). As I already suggested, I do think new players would benefit from first gaining a good understanding of vanilla NWN before they start massively tweaking it. Remember that not everyone playing this game is a D&D veteran, and many new players find even the standard classes and character building possibilities bewilderingly complex. As a method of teaching swimming, throwing people into the deep end of the pool is not universally recommended. 

[WebShaman]

You are the one who introduced absolutes into the discussion, insisting that throwing everything but the kitchen sink into one's override folder will always add to the game

No, I did not say that. You are exaggerating. And no, I am not the one who introduced absolutes into the discussion, either. You seem to be getting emotional here. I suggested in that last remark that we leave such absolutes out of the discussion, because it is a type of hyperbole, and is unnecessary.

and not merely disagreeing with but attacking the character of those who suggested otherwise.

I have in no way, shape, or form attacked anyone's character here. I have pointed to particular texts and voiced my opinion of what the texts represented. I have never called anyone dishonest (an attack on one's character), or an idiot (a personal attack, against the Rules of Conduct), or made innuendos of such. You are confusing someone else's posts with mine, it would seem.

I have agreed with points that were valid (IMHO) and I have disagreed with those that I do not consider valid. In that, I have remained very honest in the texts that I have typed. I have attempted at all turns to provide an environment where one can have a civil discussion.

No one is saying that these sorts of enhancement packages are always bad or never worth it.

Good, then we have made progress here.

Nor is anyone assuming that everyone using them does not understand what he is doing, simply that some people might be in that situation, especially new and inexperienced players, which is particularly relevant in that you started this discussion in thread addressing the questions of just such players

It is exactly these Players that need to be made aware that there is much more content that can be used out there. That is doing the Playerbase a service. As I also mentioned, it would have been fine to have just said "so-and-so was not made with the PRC in mind", instead of bashing it with the OP label.

(which I again suggest is important context to why you might have gotten more negative reactions than perhaps you were expecting).

I was actually expecting a lot worse to come - the PRC especially has a very negative image, particularly due to a few individuals who believe in some "great balance" thing, that the PRC directly threatens, or something along those lines. And I have had many run-ins with the same peeps many times over on this particular subject, though mostly on the legacy forum (which no longer exists, unfortunately).

It is nothing new, and the treatment is nothing new. What is new is that I have no interest in being the butt of someone's vitriol anymore. NWN is now old, not supported anymore, and all that we have is CC now. And I come here to have fun, reminisce, and to see what sort of new CC is underway.

I, and other authors, have in fact received bug reports and complaints that on investigation turned out to be the result of something a player was using in his override. Problems demonstably do occur.

Oh, certainly! There have always been problems introduced by things in the Override. We often had such problems on PWs that we needed to get to the bottom of.

Also, adding new Haks can introduce unseen problems as well - but as an Author you are probably well acquainted with that.

You seem to not be aware that I am also an Author (though most of my work is in the MP area - Online, though I do have various other tidbits uploaded on the Vault) - at least that is the impression I get here.

The difference is that I am not obsessed with balance anymore. I went through that phase earlier, much as you (and others, most likely) seem to be in. I found out to my chagrin at the time, that in NWN you cannot achieve balance. It is just not possible.

There are so many Classes, with so many different factors, that it just is not possible under the solo Character system that Bioware tried to implement.

The real problem is that D&D was never conceptualized to be played with just one character. It is a rule system that is centered around the idea of a Party - a group of characters that fulfill different roles.

D&D is also not a DPS game, despite what some may wish it to be. It is a platform, a stage, where adventures are spun and played out on. Ideally with a DM acting as the the conduit between the fantasy world and the players.

NWN did retain this spirit in the online portion of the game, of course. That is where one has the best adventures IMHO. But for some reason they decided not to include the party system that up until that time had been a huge success for them ala BG and Co.

This threw the game and the rule system into an unbalance that is really (again, my opinion here, but also my experience) not possible to undo for the solo character.

How, for example, is one to balance a game where one has 1/2 BaB Classes, 3/4 BaB Classes,and 1/1 BaB Classes? Then we add the "weak" Classes into the equation at one end, and the "strong" Classes at the other.

It doesn't add up. Either everything is too easy, or it is too hard. Then factor in different playing styles, and everything goes to the hells in a handbasket.

"My solo X should be able to do this! Why is this made so that only Y can do it?" and so forth.

If one had instead 6 different Classes (or mixes thereof) one really doesn't have this problem anymore.

So I pretty much abandoned Mod making for SP play. Instead, I went where D&D is really played - Online. PWs were alot of fun, and then making them even moreso. And so on.

Please pardon the side-trip, but I felt it was a bit necessary to explain my position. I can say with absolute certainty that I have never played a SP Mod that was perfectly balanced for all Classes and all playstyles. I have played SP Mods that narrowed the choice down to a few, and then balanced things from there, with major rule changes, etc. But that is not what I am talking about here.

The best SP Mods that I have played were never really interested in balance. Instead, they told great stories.

Since I normally am only interested in the story, then it doesn't really matter much what I add to a Mod, graphics, class, spells, etc-wise.

As I already suggested, I do think new players would benefit from first gaining a good understanding of vanilla NWN before they start massively tweaking it. Remember that not everyone playing this game is a D&D veteran, and many new players find even the standard classes and character building possibilities bewilderingly complex. As a method of teaching swimming, throwing people into the deep end of the pool is not universally recommended.

On this we find ourselves in agreeance! But if I may, it is also a nice thing to be informed of alternatives, is it not?

[Pstemarie]

@ Webshaman and his notes about solo vs. multiplayer / online.

A good friend of mine worked for three years trying to put together a solo module that could accommodate a variety of classes. He grouped the classes together - warriors (fighter, paladin, ranger, monk), arcane casters (sorceror, wizard), divine casters (cleric, druid), and rogues (rogue, bard) then set about creating encounters that were specifically tailored for each category. His desire was to have the PC enter a trigger and the OnEnter event would then determine the type of encounter to spawn based on the character's class. It all sounded good in theory, but it became a nightmare for him because it called for a TON of coding that was beyond his skills, not to mention the multiple templates for bosses that needed to be maintained. It was also excessively difficult for him to scale progression because non-creature encounters had to be adaptable to challenge all categories. In the end he wrote it off as impossible and hung up the toolset.

Modifié par Pstemarie, 14 février 2014 - 03:46 .

[MagicalMaster]

WebShaman wrote...

No, I did not say that. You are exaggerating. And no, I am not the one who introduced absolutes into the discussion, either.

WebShaman wrote...

It ADDS to the game.  In my book, that is never  bad.

WebShaman wrote...

Even if that were the case, however. Yeah, I would welcome the extra content. Doesn't mean I have to use it, does it? But someone, somewhere, did the work to create this. That adds to the game.

I repeat : that adds to the game.

And yeah, I find that a good thing.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WebShaman wrote...

You seem to be getting emotional here. I suggested in that last remark that we leave such absolutes out of the discussion, because it is a type of hyperbole, and is unnecessary.

WebShaman wrote...

The difference is that I am not obsessed with balance anymore. I went through that phase earlier, much as you (and others, most likely) seem to be in. I found out to my chagrin at the time, that in NWN you cannot achieve balance. It is just not possible.

WebShaman wrote...

It doesn't add up. Either everything is too easy, or it is too hard. Then factor in different playing styles, and everything goes to the hells in a handbasket.

WebShaman wrote...

I can say with absolute certainty that I have never played a SP Mod that was perfectly balanced for all Classes and all playstyles. I have played SP Mods that narrowed the choice down to a few, and then balanced things from there, with major rule changes, etc. But that is not what I am talking about here.

Modifié par MagicalMaster, 14 février 2014 - 05:03 .