43 réponses à ce sujet

[WhiteTiger]

This topic has been created to share ideas how to make all classes equally attractive to the players.

 

We all know that there are better classes to play in the game NWN. And there are classes that are discarded or they will be harder to play. These do not have the best advantages to achieve success in the game.

 

PS: Our discussion isn't to make all them with the equal power force, but work on their strengths and weaknesses.

 

Weakest examples: Ranger, Paladin, Druid, Bard, Monk and Rogue

Strongest examples: Cleric and Fighter

 

Please, give us your suggestion.

[henesua]

In my view its a waste of time to focus solely on this balance issue between the classes in terms of "power". Ultimately efforts to bring about true power balance is a sisyphusian feat - meaning it is endless, not to mention thankless.

 

Rather than bother with that, I focused my efforts on making all classes equally interesting while playing to their archetypes in the setting. My goal is to make all classes equally attractive to players.

 

Some of this can be achieved by expanding or enhancing game mechanics. Examples: For fighting classes I reworked all of the weapons and armor so that each armor type has varying protection against physical damage types, and thus different weapon and armor combinations can have significantly different results in game. All of this is really adding to the meaningful choices a warrior type character can make. For the skilled classes I have increased the number of useful skills (this does wonders for barbarians and rangers). I gave all religious classes the ability to convert others to their religion, and then added a spell of atonement that requires both the atoner and atonee be of the same religion. Thus roleplaying relgion has some hooks into actual play.

 

Anyway thats how I think about adding new mechanics to the game. I try to create more things that a character can do in game, and spread these out to the strengths of each class so that a player has more to think about than just combat effectiveness.

[Terrorble]

apparently not what we were looking for

[WhiteTiger]

We use a system of set for each class, all of them have a secret place in the game and your objective is to find out where is it. 

There are missions to get the specific equipment class. There is also an area where anyone can join to craft arrows / bolts with the mined material around. These arrows are great.

 

Ideas to class changes that are on my project:

 

Druid:

- All druid and shifter shapes now also merges "items"

- Merged ability bonuses from items stacks together (aka if pc has ring +2str and belt +3str he gets +5 in polymorph (was +3 before))

- The "items" category now also merges bracers (not gloves - thats a difference)

 

Paladin:

- Holy sword spell now adds the 2d6 positive damage against evil and +5 enhancement bonus

 

Bard:

- Lingering song feat increases duration of the song by 10rounds instead of 5rounds

- Bard song and curse song for level 30 bard increased by +1 (AB,DMG,saves only)

 

PS: Thanks to ShadoOoW to scripting.

[Shadooow]

The best way to accomplish this is what henesua suggest, instead of balancing the spells/feats try adding new content that enhances the role of that class.

 

For example, what Ive done for both druid and ranger was to allow them use summons without experience penalty. Also you can "boost" ranger by better chances of finding some crafting placeables/items if you have some crafting skill - for example, in case of "loot craft" like Sinfar, you can increase the chance that the monster drops the craft loot if the killer is ranger. In case of a craft placeable that has inventory, you can increase a chance of how many items will be there based on the class. Etc. Ideas like this are definitely the best way how to balance classes.

 

Yet, you might feel you have to balance some feat or spell. In this case what I would recommend is to keep the DnD rules as much as possible. Many peoples doesn't like Heal/Harm and then they are introducing some weird balance ideas that makes almost no sense. What I suggest is to check the 3.5 rules, if the feat/spell/class isn't better there and implement it based on those rules.

 

Its exactly the changes like Terrobble proposed that immediately cause me to lose interest of that module/server and Im definitely not the only one. Things like "improved invisibility adds 10+(intelligence modifier)% concealment are in my opinion extremely stupid and makes no sense. 3.5 changes duration of the improved invisibility to round/level which is in my opinion way better solution then changing the % based on some weird formula. When the 3.5 definition doesn't suit me or its not possible to implement at all, then Im trying to balance it on my own but in a way that is consistent with the content of the DnD rules.

[Shadooow]

Btw, some of the ideas to improve classes I found on various persistent worlds.

 

1. Ambush resting system and the lessened chance to trigger ambush based on a character classes (ranger, druid, barbarian has lesser chance than others). (source The Three Towns (3T) which is gone now afaik)

 

2. Limited resting to certain places (and usually with requirements as food) - is common choice to balance the casters on roleplaying persistent worlds. However in gameplay this affect noncasters exactly the same and increase a need for healing. That way or another the impact on gameplay and balance is positive.

 

3. Tracking system to allow rangers track. (Havent seen in practice but its definitely out there)

 

4. Thieves guild, Druid grove, Arcane guild, Warrior guild,  various adventure guilds... class-only areas with vendors, quests etc. - is a great idea how to improve playing certain classes.

 

5. Class-specific items with restriction on an actual number of levels that cannot be used with UMD. Common technique how to improve some classes, however often produce unwanted results boosting classes to much and the items are already there and its hard to change them back. Actually, it should be well designed from the start as changing such items multiple times is always a bad practice. If you like this idea be sure you have enough experiences with item properties and item power to avoid this issue.

 

6. Class-specific crafting system. Aka, only ranger can skin creatures and tan/cure the hide.

 

7. Well designed monster type distribution can significally help playing a certain classes. Lots of undead gives big advantage to the paladins and clerics, lots of animals makes playing druid/ranger easier. Also plant creatures and oozes are creatures that druid has focus against but this is not standard rather than spell modification from my community patch project (which reflects the 3.5 rules). Neccessary to point out there isn't many plant and ooze creatures out there but you can workaround this with the barkskin method. Basically you choose suitable creature skin, apply barkskin visual effect and you have a "plant" creature.

 

8. Hidden rooms, treasuries. Great addition for the rogue class.

 

 

Other ways how to improve balance that I uses:

 

A. Instead of changing certain spells, change the spell list add some new spells: example: spike growth and barkskin to the ranger, remove curse to the paladin, gust of wind to druid.

 

B. Create new spells, I usually choosing such that are only available to one or two class as wizards/sorcerers/clerics doesn't need more choices imo. Example: Longstrider (druid/rang), Goodberry (druid), Magic stone (druid/cler), Shillelag (druid), Fire seeds (druid), Shout (bard) etc. The 3.5 SRD is great source for this.

 

C. Ditto with feats.

 

D. Ditto with skills, for example Survival is great skill that can be added which would improve the nature classes such as ranger, druid and barbarian.

 

However these changes usually needs hak packs, which might not be a possibility for everyone.

[WhiteTiger]

A guild to all class are the one of the first thing that all PW should have. This make all classes more attractive to players, but everything depends on the type of project that is being done. Particularly your suggestions quite fit in my project and some of them are already included.

In many projects there are classes that are ignored in the character setup. However, some classes are used for multiclass throughout the game. It takes work to make all of them attractive, suggestions help a lot for those who have no ideas.

[The Mad Poet]

I tried to follow pathfinders example on Avernostra. Arcane casters have a D6 HD instead of D4. Increased the HD for the Rogue and Bard to D8. Improved Paladin skill points to 4+Int. Added 2 more skills points per level to the bard. 

 

Only thing I want to do that I haven't figured out how is to remove Cleric's access to Heavy Armor and just give them light/medium proficiency like the druids.

 

Not a lot can be done for monk. D10 HD is too much for a 3/4 BAB class IMHO.

 

Fighters are fine as they are to me. Only thing I'd change is to give them Intimidate. That seems rather silly for fighters not to have.

 

I also removed arcane spell failure for light armor for all classes in the server. 

 

Personally I only find balance being an issue if PvP is a major part of your server. If everyone is cooperative for the most part and tend to adventure together balance is kinda less relevant. I mean don't you want the guy next to you to be as awesome as possible?

[henesua]

Personally I only find balance being an issue if PvP is a major part of your server. If everyone is cooperative for the most part and tend to adventure together balance is kinda less relevant. I mean don't you want the guy next to you to be as awesome as possible?

 

I disagree. Balance matters for a variety of reasons, but trying to approach it primarily from a power perspective misses the point of why anyone should attempt to balance the classes.

 

One reason why balance matters is that players are not spending much time thinking about how awesome are the other PCs next to them. What a player wants is to feel important, to contribute something, to have a moment to shine. If another player dominates everything in the game, you don't get much chance to do anything of value.

 

In a game where every class has something that it can bring to the table, then the choice between classes comes down to what you want your role to be, rather than figuring out what power build you need to put together to be relevant in the game.

[The Mad Poet]

I disagree. Balance matters for a variety of reasons, but trying to approach it primarily from a power perspective misses the point of why anyone should attempt to balance the classes.

 

One reason why balance matters is that players are not spending much time thinking about how awesome are the other PCs next to them. What a player wants is to feel important, to contribute something, to have a moment to shine. If another player dominates everything in the game, you don't get much chance to do anything of value.

 

In a game where every class has something that it can bring to the table, then the choice between classes comes down to what you want your role to be, rather than figuring out what power build you need to put together to be relevant in the game.

 

Seems stressful to worry about.

 

It's important to make sure no one class has a blinding 'PLAY ME AND ONLY ME' bulb floating above their name. But in the end two people can play the exact same character and have two very different results doing so.

 

If you've got nothing but players who stress about the minutae of their +1's and what their DPS is and you want a roleplay environment... well they probably shouldn't shop for apples at the meat market, ya know. 

[henesua]

Seems stressful to worry about.

 

It's important to make sure no one class has a blinding 'PLAY ME AND ONLY ME' bulb floating above their name. But in the end two people can play the exact same character and have two very different results doing so.

 

If you've got nothing but players who stress about the minutae of their +1's and what their DPS is and you want a roleplay environment... well they probably shouldn't shop for apples at the meat market, ya know. 

I have no idea what you are responding to. Whatever it is that stresses you out in my post remains unclear. Care to elucidate?

[WhiteTiger]

Yeah, there are classes that has a blinding bulb 'Play me and only me' floating above their name and I also agree that some classes need to feel important to the group and it can't change (the last class can't play without the group or alone).

 

1. How to remove Cleric's acess to Heavy Armor and just give them Light/Medium proficiency like the druids?

[Terrorble]

cls_feat_cler.2da line 12:  under the list columm, change the 3 (granted on level-up) to

 

**** if you don't want them to be able to choose it at all on a cleric level

0 if you want it selectable as a normal feat

1 if you want it selectable as a normal or bonus feat

2 only available as a bonus feat

 

drop the new cls_feat_cler.2da into your override folder and you're done.

 

*edit*

I think henesua's post below is saying that this type of 2da edit would require any players connecting to the server to also have the 2da in their override to work. Please correct me if that isn't it.

[henesua]

Keep in mind that Terrorble's solution has some limitations.

 

For other players to use it you should put it in a HAK.

If you are making this change in a multiplayer module, this change will not be in effect during character creation with HAK only. You will also need to direct players to put the 2DA in their override during character creation.

[WhiteTiger]

Exactly. It's multiplayer, however, we can't talk about downloads if we're talking about my project, which is a NO-HAK module. Some changes which might not be a possibility for everyone, as Shadooow said.

The idea seems to be usefull for HAK modules developers. Thanks for resolution. Henesua's say: "You also need to direct players to put the 2DA in their override during character creation.".

I thought that it was a requirement to enter in game.

[The Mad Poet]

I have no idea what you are responding to. Whatever it is that stresses you out in my post remains unclear. Care to elucidate?

 

Your post doesn't stress me out. Just worrying too much about balancing each class would be stressful... at least for me. 

 

I just believe that for the most part the system is fine. I'm sure someone can write up the individual percentages as to why this is better than that... and so on and so forth. And in a competitive environment that would be not only valid, but essential. However competition is rarely an issue in most RP servers that I've been on. For the most part the play is 99% cooperative.

 

It is definitely nice, as the point was made, to ensure that a server caters to each archetype (warrior, skill, arcane, divine, as I see them anyway) in some way. It's boring to play a rogue that fights undead all the time. A builder should make sure that there are traps or locks in those dungeons so that the rogue still has a role. Make sure some of the encounters on your server are undead so the cleric can use Turn Undead. Make sure there are some enemies with DR that the fighter has a hard time with so that the wiz/sor can blast them apart and be a useful part of the party.

 

I just don't feel like it is a GM, or a builders, responsibility to make everyone 'Feel' like their character is just as good as everyone else. Bioware (or WotC if you prefer) did a pretty decent job of balancing the classes. I can't get my dog to like her new food. I doubt I can change anyone feelings any easier.

 

If someone seriously is so distracted by another person being 'Cooler' than them that it distracts them from having fun and enjoying the game then I pity their self-esteem.

 

If someone is so powerful that they outshine everyone else in the party there might be something else at fault. Such as they are either much higher level than the other players and should probably have a PC that is around, or close to the parties level. Has equipment that is well above their usable level (thank you Bioware for level requirements for equipment). The encounters of the area are built where their character would have an advantage (cleric in a tomb, enchanter among giants, fighter among mooks). Or perhaps they have focused a lot on making their character VERY combat capable, where the other PC's have not focused on that. If the last one is the case... them the player is rewarded for the time and effort they put into making their character combat capable. Next time he's got to speak to the king... make him roll that 8 charisma. See what happens I bet no one bad mouths the bard's +33 Persuade when it keeps the fighter from ending up beheaded in the courtyard.

 

Just my approach to roleplaying. Storyteller. Not a grade school guidance counselor.  

 

 

And thanks for the heads up Terrorble!

[The Mad Poet]

Correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't NWNCX pull the 2da's from the server machine for character creation? It works for my class changes in Avernostra.

 

Of course that's irrelevant if your players don't have NWNCX... but it might be a solution.

[Shadooow]

*edit*

I think henesua's post below is saying that this type of 2da edit would require any players connecting to the server to also have the 2da in their override to work. Please correct me if that isn't it.

To be specific. Anyone without this 2da in his override would get that feat for free and if ELC is in effect it would make those characters invalid and didnt allowed to enter into game. In case you dont use ELC then player would be able to log in and wear the heavy armor anyway. Neither using hak makes a difference because haks arent loaded without NWNCX and you cannot rely on this.

 

Also relying on a override is absolutely bad idea. I mean why the hell are you guys making NO-HAK servers and then force players to download some 2da and put it into override? Not only that its exactly the same as downloading the hak, but it also messes game on other servers.

 

For servers without haks, it could been scripted in OnEquip event, unequipping any medium/heavy armor unless the cleric also possess some fighter type class. Bad solution but if you are making module without haks and without NWNX, its a price you will pay for that.

 

Best way to implement this is to use NWNX and remove the feat from the character upon entering.

 

The Mad Poet,

good point and I basically agree with you in the fact that the classes are balanced from certain point of the view, its not so simple.

 

This is not entirely true because NWN is based on a 3.0 version which was something like beta and some time later WotC created a patch for it - 3.5 edition. I found this edition to be extremely well designed and balanced and everything works very well there and its not overcomplicated with extra stuff unlike Pathfinder.

 

The other problem is that Bioware, who made this game often found things they couldn't implement per rules or that they misunderstood and they implemented it on their own way creating balance issues. The discipline and possibly taunt skill are one of the better ideas, but almost everything else proved to be badly designed: generalized bard song, monk UBAB, bard being able to take Pale Master, Parry or inclusion of stuff from the worst DnD commercial book "Players guide to the Faerun". Also, you cant just randomly pick what you will implement and what not without creating balance issues. Absence of the combat movements such as "Fight defensively", "Charge", "Grapple" and others made playing warriors extremely limited and boring as there is only one what you can do and that is click and wait.

[WhiteTiger]

"Best way to implement this is to use NWNX and remove the feat from the character upon entering.".

 

Yeah, it's NO-HAK module but we also have NWNX.

Are this configuration module-side? 

[The Mad Poet]

 

The Mad Poet,

good point and I basically agree with you in the fact that the classes are balanced from certain point of the view, its not so simple.

 

This is not entirely true because NWN is based on a 3.0 version which was something like beta and some time later WotC created a patch for it - 3.5 edition. I found this edition to be extremely well designed and balanced and everything works very well there and its not overcomplicated with extra stuff unlike Pathfinder.

 

The other problem is that Bioware, who made this game often found things they couldn't implement per rules or that they misunderstood and they implemented it on their own way creating balance issues. The discipline and possibly taunt skill are one of the better ideas, but almost everything else proved to be badly designed: generalized bard song, monk UBAB, bard being able to take Pale Master, Parry or inclusion of stuff from the worst DnD commercial book "Players guide to the Faerun". Also, you cant just randomly pick what you will implement and what not without creating balance issues. Absence of the combat movements such as "Fight defensively", "Charge", "Grapple" and others made playing warriors extremely limited and boring as there is only one what you can do and that is click and wait.

 

People have debated 3.0 and 3.5 to death over which was better... I'd hate to try to dig that battered corpse up. 

 

I personally prefer 3.0 edition over 3.5. I prefer Pathfinder's changes over 3.0. 3rd edition DnD had the absolutely worst rules involving anything in melee combat except 'Roll to Hit'. You could probably write a thesis on the headache that was 'Grapple'. Implementing them in NwN would likely give someone an aneurysm. 

 

And yeah... NWN does a good job of taking that PnP and putting it to digital. Just not a perfect one. 

 

 

"Best way to implement this is to use NWNX and remove the feat from the character upon entering.".

 

Yeah, it's NO-HAK but we also have NWNX.

Are this configuration module-side? 

 

I think nwnx_funcs is what you want. Has a RemoveFeat function. 

 

http://www.nwnx.org/...opic.php?t=1535

[Shadooow]

Sorry for my last post. I wrote that badly and it appears im contradicting myself.

 

So to clarify this: the classes in DnD/NWN has a role. In this sense they are all balanced already provided your module has a meaning and support for all roles. If it doesn't, then changing the class, its feats or its spells rarely help as it usually shift the role of that class somewhere else.

 

But one can compare classes on their power and features, and if you look at them this way you will find they aren't balanced. This point of view is usually redundant for certain play styles, but if you are making an action module, whether hack&slash or something else, or perhaps PvP module this becomes a valid point and some of the balancing might be needed.

 

 

People have debated 3.0 and 3.5 to death over which was better... I'd hate to try to dig that battered corpse up. 

 

I personally prefer 3.0 edition over 3.5. I prefer Pathfinder's changes over 3.0. 3rd edition DnD had the absolutely worst rules involving anything in melee combat except 'Roll to Hit'. You could probably write a thesis on the headache that was 'Grapple'. Implementing them in NwN would likely give someone an aneurysm.

I would really like to know why so many NWN peoples prefer 3.0. AFAIK this is not the case of PnP-ers as WotC no longer even support 3.0. Yes a lot of PnP players favors 2E and I understand why, also I understand why some peoples prefer Pathfinder, athought I havent found a delight in it myself. But I can't think of single rule, spell, feat neither class that is better in 3.0 than 3.5. Mean in terms of balance, 3.5 is overally downgraded in term of strength thats for sure.

[Aelis Eine]

Honestly, you can't because from the ground up the class system is unequal.

 

Some classes get a passive that scales indefinitely with a stat rather than with class level, e.g. Monk AC, Dark Blessing, Divine Grace, making it innately attractive to simply beeline for a class feat and forget about that class afterwards.

 

Some classes get a abilities that scale indefinitely with class level, e.g. Enchant Arrow, Epic Superior Weapon Focus, Sneak Attack, Caster Levels, making it innately attractive to invest heavily in that class compared to others that don't.

 

Some classes have very common counters to their main ability, e.g. Sneak Attack which is resisted by anything with Crit Imm, Sneak Imm, Uncanny Dodge, Defensive Awareness 2+ etc, while others have abilities that will always be useful, e.g. Epic Superior Weapon Focus, Divine Might.

 

Some classes get bonuses at very slow increments - compare Ranger FEs vs. Arcane Archer Enchant Arrow, Barbarian DR vs Dwarven Defender DR.

 

Some classes have abilities that are not just disadvantaged by being temporary, but also limited by game engine caps - Paladin buffs vs Epic Superior Weapon Focus, Barbarian Rage vs RDD Stats.

 

The skill system is innately broken - you can hoard skill points and have a level 2 Rogue/Level 38 Wizard be a better trapper and lockpick than a Rogue 40.

 

Some classes are incomplete - Rogues for example are limited in ways to set up Sneak Attacks by themselves and hampered by low AB.

 

The game also heavily revolves around instant win mechanics and stacking immunities to ignore instant win mechanics - HiPS Stealth vs. True Seeing, Instant Death vs Death Immunity/Crit Immunity (if Dev Crit)/Mantles (Implosion), Mind Spells vs Mind Spell Immunity, Time Stop vs Counterspell, Harm vs. Shadow Shield/Conceal/Negative Prot and so on.

 

Think hard about what you're going for - if you're doing a really RP-oriented server, just do a light touch approach and live and let live. Your dev time is better spent on things that improve quality of RP. If you're going for a more Action-oriented approach, one method is to adopt a light touch approach as well and compensate with skill-based content - see Magical Master's Siege of the Heavens for an example, where challenge is based more on not standing in bad stuff and doing the right thing at the right time than optimizing your stats. Alternatively, consider a ground-up redesign where every class follows the same rules, receives class features at the same interval, and preferably, does away with the instant win mechanic vs. immunity meta in favor of universal mechanics.

[henesua]

I would really like to know why so many NWN peoples prefer 3.0. AFAIK this is not the case of PnP-ers as WotC no longer even support 3.0. Yes a lot of PnP players favors 2E and I understand why, also I understand why some peoples prefer Pathfinder, athought I havent found a delight in it myself. But I can't think of single rule, spell, feat neither class that is better in 3.0 than 3.5. Mean in terms of balance, 3.5 is overally downgraded in term of strength thats for sure.

As a PnP DM for many years I loved 3.0, and found that 3.5 was a pointless revision with a number of changes that were a step backwards and expensive if you were foolish enough to buy more books describing the same game system you already had books for. As far as my experience goes, I was not an uber-geek, but I ran a number of games (like Amber Diceless (my favorite), Call of Cthulu, Star Frontiers ... but 3.0 was a mainstay since people love D&D) at gaming conventions as well as for my core group of friends which spanned two cities for awhile since I moved at the time, so my experience was at least broad. I miss those times.

 

In general my thoughts are that d20 was a brilliant design in its simplicity and interoperability. It was very clean and allowed for people with imagination to use the system to create all kinds of things. 3.0 D&D reflected this and its spare design allowed me to do a great number of things without having to fight the rules. 3.5 however just became bloated with a bunch of things other people had made and stuffed in more expensive rulebooks, and so all the cruft got in my way. For a computer game I can see the value of 3.5 as it made a lot of little tweaks that if you rigidly stick to the math of the game as written in all situations as a computer does it is an improvement. I never played table top that way, and to be honest I find a rigid play style unimaginative and boring - and would tell players that had that attitude to stick with videogames or to learn how to open their minds and play with me. As a DM I'd make any change on the fly as needed to suit the moment. If a player overused an ability that was too powerful I adjusted an encounter to compensate and stay interesting. For that reason I saw no value in 3.5. Almost all of its positive changes were little math changes more or less that don't really make a difference.

[Pstemarie]

I've been looking at adding fighting style feats, based off Ragz' Alternate Combat Animations that would provide bonuses for someone trained in them. Certain styles would be restricted to specific classes, while some of the other more generic styles would be open to all classes. Furthermore, certain classes would get greater benefits from certain styles.

 

I haven't worked out any specifics - the system is just a bunch of scribbled notes. The bonuses from the feats would either be added to the creature skin or added as a extraordinary bonus (so it can't be dispelled) when the feat is active. When you rest, you would revert back to the generic "fighting style" all PCs use (aka the normal phenotype) and the bonus would expire.

[The Mad Poet]

In general my thoughts are that d20 was a brilliant design in its simplicity and interoperability. It was very clean and allowed for people with imagination to use the system to create all kinds of things. 3.0 D&D reflected this and its spare design allowed me to do a great number of things without having to fight the rules. 3.5 however just became bloated with a bunch of things other people had made and stuffed in more expensive rulebooks, and so all the cruft got in my way. For a computer game I can see the value of 3.5 as it made a lot of little tweaks that if you rigidly stick to the math of the game as written in all situations as a computer does it is an improvement. I never played table top that way, and to be honest I find a rigid play style unimaginative and boring - and would tell players that had that attitude to stick with videogames or to learn how to open their minds and play with me. As a DM I'd make any change on the fly as needed to suit the moment. If a player overused an ability that was too powerful I adjusted an encounter to compensate and stay interesting. For that reason I saw no value in 3.5. Almost all of its positive changes were little math changes more or less that don't really make a difference.

 

Almost 100% in agreement. 3.5 just wasn't a large enough of a difference to be meaningful. 

 

I think my biggest pet peeve was weapon sizing. In 3.0 a greatsword was a large sized weapon. Medium creatures used large weapons in two hands. Simple. A large sized creature could use a large weapon, such as a greatsword, in one hand. Simple.

 

In 3.5 a large sized creatures longsword became a large weapon. If a Medium creature picked it up it was a large weapon, and could only be used in two hands at a -2 penalty for being a size category too large. Where as a greatsword was a large two handed weapon, and could be used without penalty. Even though they may, in many ways, be pretty much the same.

 

It was just too overly complicated for something that wasn't of such great importance.

 

I like in NwN that a human can hand his halfling friend a longsword that the halfling can use without penalty in two hands. In 3.5... the halfling gets a size penalty for not having a 'Small Sized Longsword'. Blah...

 

 

I've been looking at adding fighting style feats, based off Ragz' Alternate Combat Animations that would provide bonuses for someone trained in them. Certain styles would be restricted to specific classes, while some of the other more generic styles would be open to all classes. Furthermore, certain classes would get greater benefits from certain styles.

 

I haven't worked out any specifics - the system is just a bunch of scribbled notes. The bonuses from the feats would either be added to the creature skin or added as a extraordinary bonus (so it can't be dispelled) when the feat is active. When you rest, you would revert back to the generic "fighting style" all PCs use (aka the normal phenotype) and the bonus would expire.

 

Sounds promising. Like gaining an extra +2 dmg with two handed weapons when using the heavy style, or maybe a bonus to hit if using daggers with the assassin style. Am I on the right track?