Since it has an AC of 1 in the original, and in the original you couldn't stack protection items with it, I think it is fairly plausible that it was intended to be Ankheg's Plate +1.
Either the description needs to be changed to Ankheg's Plate + 1 and it needs to be flagged non magical, or they need to change the AC to 2.
I think it would be easier to change the description and re-set the flag to magical since it was set that way in vanilla.
On the big numbers, I hope they come back and do another pass on them by the time BG2:EE comes out and make it to where they aren't small images scaled up because that doesn't look too great. However, I think the fix is fine for the moment.
The key problem imho is not the font size, as the new size is more or less on par with the size used to display AC, Thac0, etc. The real problem is that the developers just scaled up a bitmap font, which makes the digits look absolutely horrible. The blown-up anti-aliasing of the original bitmap font is clearly visible. Tested on Windows of course as this is the only platform reached by the patch at the time of writing.
If you compare the font used for, say AC or HP, its jarring and pulls you out of the game. The other fonts are smooth versus the horrible zoomed in pixels of the inventory font
I hope you realise we actually agree! If the same bitmap font as before is used, then the font size is indeed too big as a bitmap font does not scale up. But if an outline font were used, then the digits would be nice-looking at their new size and we would not complain so vocally.
Since it has an AC of 1 in the original, and in the original you couldn't stack protection items with it, I think it is fairly plausible that it was intended to be Ankheg's Plate +1.
Either the description needs to be changed to Ankheg's Plate + 1 and it needs to be flagged non magical, or they need to change the AC to 2.
I think it would be easier to change the description and re-set the flag to magical since it was set that way in vanilla.
I wonder how many times this needs to be repeated!! Fortunately, it is easy to be one's own DM and apply the non-stacking rule by sheer will!
Since it has an AC of 1 in the original, and in the original you couldn't stack protection items with it, I think it is fairly plausible that it was intended to be Ankheg's Plate +1.
Either the description needs to be changed to Ankheg's Plate + 1 and it needs to be flagged non magical, or they need to change the AC to 2.
I think it would be easier to change the description and re-set the flag to magical since it was set that way in vanilla.
Actually, the Ankhead Plate Mail is accurately implemented. The Ankhead is Full Plate Mail armor ((AC 1) that can be purchased from Tarom) made from Ankhead thereby making it lighter and non-metallic. Therefore it should be AC 1, light, and wearable by classes that are blocked by metal armor. And its non-magical by nature.
Since it has an AC of 1 in the original, and in the original you couldn't stack protection items with it, I think it is fairly plausible that it was intended to be Ankheg's Plate +1.
Either the description needs to be changed to Ankheg's Plate + 1 and it needs to be flagged non magical, or they need to change the AC to 2.
I think it would be easier to change the description and re-set the flag to magical since it was set
Actually, the Ankhead Plate Mail is accurately implemented. The Ankhead is Full Plate Mail armor ((AC 1) that can be purchased from Tarom) made from Ankhead thereby making it lighter and non-metallic. Therefore it should be AC 1, light, and wearable by classes that are blocked by metal armor. And its non-magical by nature.
Actually you're wrong, the Ankheg armour is a type of Plate Mail, not Full Plate, you can tell as it has the same weapon type resistances to piercing, missile, crushing and slashing damage as ordinary plate, whereas Full Plate is much better vs. Piercing/Missile, for example. So the Ankheg armour should have an AC of 2, but be non-magical.
Ankheg Armor in PnP is 2 AC, according to enough people on here that I don't care to look it up, which is where this item came from. The fact that it originally was an AC1 and flagged magical makes it pretty clear what the intent was.
I normally don't care what PnP does as much as I care about the original intent, but you expect me to believe they took this item from PnP? And then on accident gave it one too many AC? And then on accident flagged it magical?
Ankheg Armor in PnP is 2 AC, according to enough people on here that I don't care to look it up, which is where this item came from. The fact that it originally was an AC1 and flagged magical makes it pretty clear what the intent was.
I normally don't care what PnP does as much as I care about the original intent, but you expect me to believe they took this item from PnP? And then on accident gave it one too many AC? And then on accident flagged it magical?
I'm okay with it either being AC 2 and non-magical or AC 1 and magical (so not usable with protection items), but in the latter case they should change the description to +1 Ankheg Plate Mail to be clear about this. I'd prefer the former, but the latter would be okay
I disagree. While it is a powerful combo, the Ankhead plate is non-magical in nature and therefore SHOULD be equipable with magic items. Its an animal hide, albeit very hard carapice-like hide.
To start my argument, the current implementation in the game is overpowered, bottom line. Ankheg + item of protection +1 is better than Practical Defense ... which is just wrong. Level 1 gear better than end game gear ...
As for your comment, Ankheg armor is non magical in nature in PnP, I agree. However, if it's going to be left in as non magical in nature then should also be AC2 then, which is basic non-magical Ankheg armor. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
BG had Ankheg as AC1 and excluded from wearing + protections, which following suit, leads me to believe the original intention was that it is Ankheg +1. (AC2 +1), like all other armors that could not wear magical protections.
If people do not like it being enchanted and would rather have the animal hide, normal Ankheg armor, then I'm fine with that but it needs to be changed back to AC 2 then.
If it stays AC1 it needs to be excluded.
The simplest solution is to just add it back to the excluded list and leave it as AC1, as it is enchanted Ankheg armor. I wouldn't mind them even adding +1 to the description.
To start my argument, the current implementation in the game is overpowered, bottom line. Ankheg + item of protection +1 is better than Practical Defense ... which is just wrong. Level 1 gear better than end game gear ...
Well, by the same token, Full Plate from Taerom + item of protection +1 (easily obtainable early) is also better than Practical Defense, so this applies either way. As far as original intent goes, I'm not nearly as confident as others as to what that intent was. Personally, I like to run front-liner heavy groups, so I like more options for having high-end AC.
To believe that the original intent was to be AC1 and non magical you would have to believe this:
They took this item from PnP And then decided to give it an extra AC than it has from where they got the idea from And then on accident flagged it magical
To believe that the original intent was to be AC2 +1 (AC1) and magical you would have to believe:
They forgot to add +1 to the description.
If the first series of events is more realistic to you than the second I have some seafront property in Kansas to sell you.
The best fix would be to return it to how it was in vanilla, and then add +1 to the item description.
To believe that the original intent was to be AC1 and non magical you would have to believe this:
They took this item from PnP And then decided to give it an extra AC than it has from where they got the idea from And then on accident flagged it magical
To believe that the original intent was to be AC2 +1 (AC1) and magical you would have to believe:
They forgot to add +1 to the description.
If the first series of events is more realistic to you than the second I have some seafront property in Kansas to sell you.
The best fix would be to return it to how it was in vanilla, and then add +1 to the item description.
I'd be okay with that , or making it AC2 and non-magical as previously stated - the latter would give more options as could stack with +2 rings...
To believe that the original intent was to be AC1 and non magical you would have to believe this:
They took this item from PnP And then decided to give it an extra AC than it has from where they got the idea from And then on accident flagged it magical
Alternately, they misread/misremembered the AC value from PnP and added it to the exclusion list for balance reasons.
OR
Decided to make it AC 1 because Taerom is just that awesome.
To believe that the original intent was to be AC2 +1 (AC1) and magical you would have to believe:
They forgot to add +1 to the description.
And forgot to add any mention of it being magical to the description. And forgot to explain how Taerom managed to put a magical enchantment on it in game.
If your defense hangs on Black Isle not messing up descriptions and having everything make perfect sense I have really bad news for you...
So yes, my scenario is so much more plausible than yours. None of the other armor has incorrect values, but descriptions were messed up everywhere throughout the entire game.
If your defense hangs on Black Isle not messing up descriptions and having everything make perfect sense I have really bad news for you...
So yes, my scenario is so much more plausible than yours. None of the other armor has incorrect values, but descriptions were messed up everywhere throughout the entire game.
All I'm saying is that both of our scenarios hinge on Black Isle having screwed something up. Either they wanted to make it magical and forgot to tell anybody anywhere, or they didn't want to make it magical and put in the wrong AC. It's not as though they didn't change dozens of PnP items without explanation (see: Dagger of Venom, Staff Mace, Short Sword of Backstabbing, Robe of the Archmagi...I could go on for hours).
Either way, I'd appreciate you not condescending to me because I don't think it's perfectly clear where the screw-up happened.
Some comments on the Ankheg shell tangent: * It wasn't changed in 2012 * This horse has been beaten to a bloody stain on the ground * You guys are starting to get nasty.
It was not my intent to be condescending, and you are correct that either way a screw up happened.
Given Black Isles history of messing up descriptions, and that a description mess up would also explain it perfectly from the PnP perspective, I thought this was a more plausible explanation. However, that doesn't mean another explanation is wrong. Nor was it my intent to silence other possibilities as much as I was being over the top in my phrasing to explain how high I thought the odds were in favor of one way as opposed to the other.
Either way, I do think this armor is quite a bit more powerful than full plate +rings/necklaces/cloaks because while the AC comes out the same, so many more classes can wear it (as they should be able to). Though I also think classes like thieves / stalker that can't wear armor heavier than studded leather (25lbs) should be able to wear Ankheg (25lbs).
It was not my intent to be condescending, and you are correct that either way a screw up happened.
Given Black Isles history of messing up descriptions, and that a description mess up would also explain it perfectly from the PnP perspective, I thought this was a more plausible explanation. However, that doesn't mean another explanation is wrong. Nor was it my intent to silence other possibilities as much as I was being over the top in my phrasing to explain how high I thought the odds were in favor of one way as opposed to the other.
Either way, I do think this armor is quite a bit more powerful than full plate +rings/necklaces/cloaks because while the AC comes out the same, so many more classes can wear it (as they should be able to). Though I also think classes like thieves / stalker that can't wear armor heavier than studded leather (25lbs) should be able to wear Ankheg (25lbs).
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe full plate is still superior due to better damage type AC modifications. I agree that which classes can and can't use it is currently kind of wonky. I'm not sure where to draw the lines, though, as Fallorain's Plate and the Practical Defense are both even lighter than Ankheg. It's not just about weight, but also range of motion (and composition, for Druids and Beastmasters).
I'd rather UI customization start taking place in the in game menu as opposed to a config file. I personally think you need to be able to scale those numbers, or they need to not be bitmaps that are blown up.
They've actually kind of grown on me, at first I was like, "WOAH TOO LARGE!!!," but then I started being able to read ammo / weight / stacks at a quicker glance than normal or even with peripheral vision.
It was not my intent to be condescending, and you are correct that either way a screw up happened.
Given Black Isles history of messing up descriptions, and that a description mess up would also explain it perfectly from the PnP perspective, I thought this was a more plausible explanation. However, that doesn't mean another explanation is wrong. Nor was it my intent to silence other possibilities as much as I was being over the top in my phrasing to explain how high I thought the odds were in favor of one way as opposed to the other.
Either way, I do think this armor is quite a bit more powerful than full plate +rings/necklaces/cloaks because while the AC comes out the same, so many more classes can wear it (as they should be able to). Though I also think classes like thieves / stalker that can't wear armor heavier than studded leather (25lbs) should be able to wear Ankheg (25lbs).
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe full plate is still superior due to better damage type AC modifications. I agree that which classes can and can't use it is currently kind of wonky. I'm not sure where to draw the lines, though, as Fallorain's Plate and the Practical Defense are both even lighter than Ankheg. It's not just about weight, but also range of motion (and composition, for Druids and Beastmasters).
Full Plate *is* better than Ankehg Plate vs. Slashing by 1 point vs Piercing by 3 points!
I think it odd that Archers are now allowed to use Ankheg, but not Beastmasters, though don't think Thieves should be allowed to use it (too unbalancing more than anything else), maybe Stalkers, though, as are a fighter-type class.
Comments
It is suppose to be non-magical with an AC of 2.
Since it has an AC of 1 in the original, and in the original you couldn't stack protection items with it, I think it is fairly plausible that it was intended to be Ankheg's Plate +1.
Either the description needs to be changed to Ankheg's Plate + 1 and it needs to be flagged non magical, or they need to change the AC to 2.
I think it would be easier to change the description and re-set the flag to magical since it was set that way in vanilla.
@Rohndil
On the big numbers, I hope they come back and do another pass on them by the time BG2:EE comes out and make it to where they aren't small images scaled up because that doesn't look too great. However, I think the fix is fine for the moment.
"Wizard Slayer and Beastmaster class have more weapon restrictions"
Well done, devs!
Until it is corrected, and from mtyler11's post below yours obviously it needs to be repeated again.
@mtyler11
Ankheg Armor in PnP is 2 AC, according to enough people on here that I don't care to look it up, which is where this item came from. The fact that it originally was an AC1 and flagged magical makes it pretty clear what the intent was.
I normally don't care what PnP does as much as I care about the original intent, but you expect me to believe they took this item from PnP? And then on accident gave it one too many AC? And then on accident flagged it magical?
As for your comment, Ankheg armor is non magical in nature in PnP, I agree. However, if it's going to be left in as non magical in nature then should also be AC2 then, which is basic non-magical Ankheg armor. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
BG had Ankheg as AC1 and excluded from wearing + protections, which following suit, leads me to believe the original intention was that it is Ankheg +1. (AC2 +1), like all other armors that could not wear magical protections.
If people do not like it being enchanted and would rather have the animal hide, normal Ankheg armor, then I'm fine with that but it needs to be changed back to AC 2 then.
If it stays AC1 it needs to be excluded.
The simplest solution is to just add it back to the excluded list and leave it as AC1, as it is enchanted Ankheg armor. I wouldn't mind them even adding +1 to the description.
Big surprise?
To believe that the original intent was to be AC1 and non magical you would have to believe this:
They took this item from PnP
And then decided to give it an extra AC than it has from where they got the idea from
And then on accident flagged it magical
To believe that the original intent was to be AC2 +1 (AC1) and magical you would have to believe:
They forgot to add +1 to the description.
If the first series of events is more realistic to you than the second I have some seafront property in Kansas to sell you.
The best fix would be to return it to how it was in vanilla, and then add +1 to the item description.
OR
Decided to make it AC 1 because Taerom is just that awesome. And forgot to add any mention of it being magical to the description. And forgot to explain how Taerom managed to put a magical enchantment on it in game.
So yes, my scenario is so much more plausible than yours. None of the other armor has incorrect values, but descriptions were messed up everywhere throughout the entire game.
Either way, I'd appreciate you not condescending to me because I don't think it's perfectly clear where the screw-up happened.
* It wasn't changed in 2012
* This horse has been beaten to a bloody stain on the ground
* You guys are starting to get nasty.
Time to let it go.
It was not my intent to be condescending, and you are correct that either way a screw up happened.
Given Black Isles history of messing up descriptions, and that a description mess up would also explain it perfectly from the PnP perspective, I thought this was a more plausible explanation. However, that doesn't mean another explanation is wrong. Nor was it my intent to silence other possibilities as much as I was being over the top in my phrasing to explain how high I thought the odds were in favor of one way as opposed to the other.
Either way, I do think this armor is quite a bit more powerful than full plate +rings/necklaces/cloaks because while the AC comes out the same, so many more classes can wear it (as they should be able to). Though I also think classes like thieves / stalker that can't wear armor heavier than studded leather (25lbs) should be able to wear Ankheg (25lbs).
That is correct. I was forgetting the hidden bonuses on full plate.
@TheMajor
I'd rather UI customization start taking place in the in game menu as opposed to a config file. I personally think you need to be able to scale those numbers, or they need to not be bitmaps that are blown up.
They've actually kind of grown on me, at first I was like, "WOAH TOO LARGE!!!," but then I started being able to read ammo / weight / stacks at a quicker glance than normal or even with peripheral vision.
vs. Slashing by 1 point
vs Piercing by 3 points!
I think it odd that Archers are now allowed to use Ankheg, but not Beastmasters, though don't think Thieves should be allowed to use it (too unbalancing more than anything else), maybe Stalkers, though, as are a fighter-type class.