824 réponses à ce sujet

[Luminus]

To me, K's pack is more about the variety of spells, rebalancing some classes (Druids, Blackguards etc) and fixing a TON of stuff.

On some PWs I play without K's pack, there's no balance either as EDM/RDD builds are more common than dwarves. Or Stormlords.
K's pack at the very least adds variety and makes some classes better as well as fixing lots of bugs (Pale Master progression, Warlock vanilla blast, Hellfire Warlock not progressing basic blast etc.)

But Vampiric Feast is not about builds. It's a win button. Click: either 50% health gone or instakill.

I'm saying that if they don't want the challenge of their module trivialized, it should be considered. Especially against Irenicus.

Of course you can exercise self-restraint, but I'm saying that it's an instant challenge destroyer, usable by almost every epic caster (if not all).
And the console is considered a Debug Tool and blatant cheat, not a part of a campaign.

There are many people that don't know much about NwN2's rules (you can find those posting on the Nexus). For those discovering Vampiric Feast as they play, it will destroy their challenge.

And you will see posts, once SOAR is released like this: "Lol Irenicus/Yagashura/Draconis/Amelyssan was easy. Just spammed Vampiric Feast with my casters until they had 10% of health and then killed them."

It's really not an issue for me as I like to keep my Druids in Hide Armor and pick deity-appropriate Domains for example. I already exercise self-control and roleplay.

You could alternatively make the bosses immune to Vampiric Feast with a property if it's possible by the toolset. That way you have the best of both worlds and a compromise.

[Tchos]

I'm of the opinion that if you're an epic level caster, then the epic level spells should reflect that amount of power.  I'm all for an equally high-powered enemy having some defense against such a spell, but only if it's an actual defense that the game allows, not just because the fight could be too easy otherwise.  I'm also all about letting the player decide where the challenge should be, and not imposing my own ideas of challenge on them.

[Luminus]

Well, there's no defense against Vampiric Feast. It works on everyone and everything, no matter their level, Spell Resistance or immunities.
It's only one use per day but for example with multiple epic casters in your party, it can destroy bosses in a single round.

Now, if the creators have no issue with that, I'm really fine. But if they want to prevent their epic bosses to be triviliazed, it should be changed somehow.

Either disabling the spell or making bosses immune to it.
There are plenty of Epic Spells or abilities that are powerful, but Vampiric Feast is widely considered a really broken spell that has no counter.

Here's the description: http://nwn2.wikia.co.../Vampiric_Feast

Remember the Rapture of the Father "spell" that Irenicus used in cutscenes to insta-kill characters but he never used in the actual fights because it's a cutscene tool?
Vampiric Feast is slightly weaker than that. But multiple characters = multiple uses.

Another solution is to make it not bypass Immunities to Death Magic (as it shouldn't probably) so bosses could be become immune to it.

Anyway, that was my opinion on the matter. It's really up to the creators, but it's good to let them know about it.

[kamal_]

If they are given the wizard package, enemy casters with enough hit dice will use Vampiric Feast on you...

[Kaldor Silverwand]

I don't care for developers spending their limited time trying to control how people play a game. Makes more sense to spend their time on the game itself.

 

It is easy enough to have the boss battles handled differently on hard mode and Shallina already indicated she may do that.

 

As for enforcing a level cap, I think that is a silly waste of developer time. Simply state what levels the game is designed for. If someone plays beyond that then they have no valid reason to complain.  Maybe they want a cakewalk.  If a person personally thinks level should be capped at x then just don't level up after that, but don't make that decision for everyone who plays.

 

You cannot possibly please everyone with set rules, so the best thing to do is allow people to play the way they want.

 

Regards

[Luminus]

If they are given the wizard package, enemy casters with enough hit dice will use Vampiric Feast on you...

That's another solution. But the difference like I said is being able to do it multiple times, each by multiple casters. Then it becomes a broken spell.

[Luminus]

As for enforcing a level cap, I think that is a silly waste of developer time. Simply state what levels the game is designed for. If someone plays beyond that then they have no valid reason to complain.  Maybe they want a cakewalk.  If a person personally thinks level should be capped at x then just don't level up after that, but don't make that decision for everyone who plays.

 

You cannot possibly please everyone with set rules, so the best thing to do is allow people to play the way they want.

 

Regards

A level cap existed in BGR and the original Baldur's Gate. It exists to keep people from overleveling and trivializing what the designers wanted to be a challenge.

In counter-argument, if you don't like the level cap, change it by opening the toolset and editing the campaign.

It's like making a campaign and giving the player 10 million gold, max XP and a +10 20d6 weapon at level 1 and saying: "If you don't like them, don't buy everything, don't level up and don't use the weapon."

That's a bad design decision in my book and I don't know many modules or games that do that.

The rules and design of a game are there to provide a challenge. So a level cap and changing some other stuff that triviliaze the challenge are to be considered.

[Tchos]

Well, there's no defense against Vampiric Feast. It works on everyone and everything, no matter their level, Spell Resistance or immunities.
It's only one use per day but for example with multiple epic casters in your party, it can destroy bosses in a single round.

Now, if the creators have no issue with that, I'm really fine. But if they want to prevent their epic bosses to be triviliazed, it should be changed somehow.

Either disabling the spell or making bosses immune to it.

 

That's why I phrased my statement the way I did.  Only give them a defense if such a defense exists, not "just because".  If a PC has a spell powerful enough to trivialise the boss fight, then that is what it should do.

[Luminus]

I disagree. Bad design from the developers, is no excuse if it can be changed or prevented.
If a spell exists that has no counter, that's bad design.

Now, it's up to the module makers:
If they have no issue with having a spell that destroys the challenge of their game, it's alright.
But if they do, they should know about it and perhaps change it.

Like Shallina said, it might be nerfed, so I assume it's the latter situation.

[Tchos]

Why is it bad design for a spell to have no counter?

[Luminus]

Why is it bad design for a spell to have no counter?

Because you cannot defend against it making it basically a cheat if used on you.
And because the enemies cannot defend against it, destroying the challenge of the encounter.

If you create a game that is supposed to be challenging but have things that destroy the challenge (Time Stop + Mindflayer combo in BG2), then that's bad design.

[Tchos]

That's just rephrasing what I asked in my question, and I don't see it as a cheat, even if it's used on me.  I expect instant-death spells to occasionally work.  I believe whether something is "bad" design is going to have to be a matter of opinion here.

[Luminus]

Instant death spells have counters with Death Ward or Shadow Shield for example, or Spell Resistance.

Hellball can be countered by Energy Immunity for the different elements.
Damnation simply dazes you if you fail the save and if you're immune to mind spells, even that.
Entropic Husk also fails if you make the save.
Mass Fowl, same. And also if you're taller somehow.
Epic Gate, you can just kill the summons.

Vampiric Feast ignores Death Ward and general immunities to death magic. Has no Spell Resistance, is an AoE so no targetting is needed and even if you succeed the save, puts you at 50% HP.

Basically that minimum 50% health reduction has no counter. Used a second time brings them to 25% of HP. A third at ~12% Health.

This is the difference between Vampiric Feast and anything else. At minimum it does 50% HP bypassing everything. This is why VF trivializes anything if used by multiple casters.

Once again, personally I'm fine, I know how not to abuse it. If it's not changed, it's still fine.
But it is something to keep in mind for epic challenges in campaigns, especially this one.

[Luminus]

Exactly. If they live.

But at ~10% health, it can be killed with Power Word: Kill for example or some other spell or just melee. An enemy with 1000 HP and 3 VFs thrown at it, is brought to about 120 HP in one round.
And most epic monsters or mages don't have that much HP.

And the AI needs to act really fast or cast a Vampiric Feast of it's own, which is not a given.

What I'm saying is: "hey, this is a bit too much, you might want to consider it."

[andysks]

I happen to make a run on the EE as we talk, and I killed Finkrag yesterday. My party was quite low for it, but when for him anyway. I read on the strategy guides all about cloudkill when out of range, and limited wish/time stop etc. Even though I don't consider these cheats, but rather just clever ways people found to kill the dragon, I didn't use these tactics because I wanted to challenge myself. Same goes for VF. If I use it, it's up to me. If I want the challenge... I won't. And if people say "Irenicus too easy, just throw VF on him", then let them do it. On their next run, because such games are meant for multiple runs, maybe they decide to not use it. And if they use it again... just let it be.

 

A 20+ caster... should have a spell like that. We're talking epic levels. His power is... well, epic. Further than that, it's up to the player to decide.

[Luminus]

I am recommending some things early on because they're creating the blueprints first, then the areas and scripting. SOAR is already in the works.
Throwing some ideas early on to keep in mind is better than doing it too late.

Like I said, I am really fine either way. I am not arguing it anymore as it's not that important in the grand scheme of SOAR but I wanted to get my thoughts out on it.
It was something I noticed on many Persistent Worlds as there aren't many epic modules around and that's when VF comes into play.

What about part 3 of my original post about the classes?
People agree that Aerie should be a Mystic Theurge for example? And your thoughts on the implementation of the other NPCs?

[andysks]

Heh, I think you do have a valid point when it comes to VF. I mean, I can see why one would think of it like that.

Anyway,

The Mystic Theurge, I never knew it, but reading about it makes sense for her to be one. If it can be implemented I would endorse such a thing.

I don't know if they plan on some EE content, or if they are allowed, or... whatever, but Hexxat would be awesome to have. If not, Yoshimo will do.

Maybe buff Cernd a little bit. I know this would not be going by the book, but he is useless as he is.

[Tchos]

I don't know much about Mystic Theurge, but it sounds logical for Aerie from what you describe.

[Luminus]

The Mystic Theurge is basically the Prestige Class to simulate the ADnD's Cleric/Mage multiclass.
Here's the NwN2 wiki entry about the class: http://nwn2.wikia.co.../Mystic_theurge
With Aerie, she was an Avariel Cleric/Mage, so that would be a Cleric/Wizard/Mystic Theurge.

The PrC exists in the files but was never implemented properly because if you take it as any spontaneous caster (Spirit Shaman/Favored Soul/Sorcerer) it doesn't advance those classes unless you take a level in them. Then you get all the missing spells.

But with a Cleric/Wizard it works just fine. Reeron's pack implemented it I think and did some changes but those are not needed.
Though perhaps they can implement some parts of it?
It is found here. http://neverwinterva...nd-improvements

Basically when you advance the Mystic Theurge you get Cleric casting fully since there are no spells to select and you get Wizard spellslots and caster levels but no extra spells per level. (I might be wrong on that one and maybe you DO get extra Wizard spells)
You can still Scribe them from scrolls just fine though.

I think they said in a previous thread that they don't want to implement EE's stuff and let other people do it. I really don't mind either way.

About Cernd, in 3.5E and NwN2 with Kaedrin's pack, pure Druids are awesome and very very powerful.
But there's nothing equivalent to the Shapeshifter kit and if something like that is implemented, it has to be all custom. But how this will be done without altering the Druid class in general I don't know.

Even if they don't do anything special with him, a Human Druid with 18 starting Wisdom is VERY powerful.
Ironic how that worked out huh?

UPDATE: I installed Reeron's pack and did a test Aerie using the Sun Elf race. It works normally but you don't get extra Wizard spells but the spell slots and caster level is fine.

Here's how a Mystic Theurge Aerie would be at level 10. http://oi62.tinypic.com/10dytci.jpg

Alternatively, she could be a Favored Soul (like Quayle in BGR) of Aerdrie Faenya, because Elves cannot pick Baervan Wildwanderer as a deity.
Funnily enough, Favored Souls get wings in PnP at level 17.

[Kaldor Silverwand]

A level cap existed in BGR and the original Baldur's Gate. It exists to keep people from overleveling and trivializing what the designers wanted to be a challenge.
In counter-argument, if you don't like the level cap, change it by opening the toolset and editing the campaign.
It's like making a campaign and giving the player 10 million gold, max XP and a +10 20d6 weapon at level 1 and saying: "If you don't like them, don't buy everything, don't level up and don't use the weapon."
That's a bad design decision in my book and I don't know many modules or games that do that.
The rules and design of a game are there to provide a challenge. So a level cap and changing some other stuff that triviliaze the challenge are to be considered.

The level cap existed in BG because it limited the amount of class and spell development they would have to do. That is a practical decision. Not the same circumstance as enforcing a level cap when the spells already exist in the game.

BG has a gem worth quite a bit in Candlekeep at the beginning of the game that allows you to buy everything you could need.

The issue you raise with VF is only significant if you have a party of epic level casters. That alone would be a significant challenge and if someone has played the game with a caster heavy party and managed to get to the end then my view is that they earned that ending.

[Shallina]

the lvl 10 cap was put for 3 reasons :

 

1 to not trivialise the game. If you out lvl to much the content it removes the challenge and the fun.

2 to be sure all character would end at the lvl cap. Without a lvl cap there is absolutly no point in ECL characters which is bad, beceause most of them are super cool.

3 to ensure continuity with the next mod, if you start at lvl 15 in SOAR, it doesn 't leave much room for improvment of your character while the game is bigger than BGR.

 

originally I wanted 10BGR  20SOAR 30TOBR but when you look at the content, the big chunk of content is in SOAR. SO we have decided to go to lvl 22-23 at the end of SOAR if you do everything, there won' t be a lvl cap, we have designed the xp reward so we can adjust a lever on the XP earned by the player very easily.

 

If VF has no save it could be a problem, I' ll check on it, it' s actually super fast and easy to put a save on the spell (could put  limitations similar as wave of the Banshee or weird for exemple).

 

It 's true that Aerie real class is a mystic theurg, and since the beginning it 's a class I' d really like to have in game, but at the moment I'm working on one exterior area not even scripting it and it's super challenging and time consumming. My aim, is to do a playable module, not a playable custom class.

 

At the moment the Mystic theurg is out of scope, the fully scripted lvl up GUI is also out of scope, I started to work on it on BGR, to have only the availlable class of each NPC showing in the UI while lvling up, and I made it !  But after I saw that everything was hard coded, I couldn 't replug it to the rest of the lvling GUI. So I opted for the class selection in conversations.

 

Which mean in order for it to work, I have to redo all the lvling screens and all the control and rules assossiated with them, and not only the class selections screens, It 's perfectly possible and know how to do it, but it 's a really big work, and I put a line on it. BGR had to be finished. If Drew and I did everything we wanted in BGR, it probably wouldn 't be finished yet.

 

It was really funny to see all the fuss about the chicken becomming a pig when it has absolutly 0 gameplay impact, and is so much minor in front of all the rest which was done.

 

If I were to do custom contents for characters it would be "spells", to put more 3nd spells in game. It' s super easy to do next to the mystic theurg, and I could do one for each module of the campaign. But I haven' t even looked at the list of 3 ed spell that could make a nice addition to the game. (2 or 3 hours of work for the script, and 2 or 3 hours of work for the VFX).

.