Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories

Planescape: Torment: Enhanced Edition has been released! Visit www.planescape.com to purchase and check for details. Planescape: Torment: Enhanced Edition Official Soundtrack is available.
Soundtracks for BG:EE, SoD, BG2:EE, IWD:EE are now available in the Beamdog store.
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

New Class, Alchemist

Since you added the blackguard I figured you might as well implement another class. The Alchemist, similar to a bard that is a jack of all trades master of none.

Solely the purpose of the alchemist is a supporting role, you can create fire breath potions or even lantern oil from icewind dale for example and other weaker healing salves using the priest tech tree in a similar way. (having slots and spells that represent the different potions).

At higher levels the alchemist can create potions of fire giant strength and invisibility potions even magic immunity. This would also make having a cleric not required for healing and having the whole "ideology religion" aspect influence your parties decisions.

Intelligence would be the primary stat, and if possible have instead of 4 or 5 weapon slots for the traditional fighter class it could be 5 inventory quick slots and 1 weapon slot.
[Deleted User]

Comments

  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 3,675
    edited January 2013
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • ZanathKariashiZanathKariashi Member Posts: 2,867
    Alchemy is a skill/proficiency, not class. If they implement non-combat proficiencies, it would be in the Wizard pool, with cheap access to mages, sorcerers, and bards, and expensive access to other classes.

    Currently, Bards and thieves already get that ability as a HLA.

    I'd much rather they implement the Non-combat proficiency system, complete with the associated crafting system, since it would VASTLY expand the game's potential, and add a more in depth dimension for roleplaying potential then currently exists, for modders to take advantage of.
    [Deleted User]
  • kingthrallkingthrall Member Posts: 76

    Alchemy is a skill/proficiency, not class. If they implement non-combat proficiencies, it would be in the Wizard pool, with cheap access to mages, sorcerers, and bards, and expensive access to other classes.

    Currently, Bards and thieves already get that ability as a HLA.

    I'd much rather they implement the Non-combat proficiency system, complete with the associated crafting system, since it would VASTLY expand the game's potential, and add a more in depth dimension for roleplaying potential then currently exists, for modders to take advantage of.

    Alchemy and Alchemist are two different words look them up in the dictionary..

    Who said raw materials were required to be placed in the game. We don't see a lot of spell making in the game either just scrolls... This is not Arcanum or even Eldar scrolls game, its Baldurs gate and keeping it simple does not do the game injustice just as the rules have been kept the same.

    A non-combat system would never exist for the simple reason that its far too much work not only to implement but to squeeze into the old D&D rules. If I remember off the top of my head (dont play D&D) the 2nd edition never had the passive skill stuff compared to 3rd edition like icewind dale.

    Back to subject, I am suggesting no proficiencies in Alchemy through a skill tree, I am suggesting a class that creates potions instead of using divine spells in the book for easy access nothing more. Or use Both Mage + Priest books to separate passive and aggressive potions. Almost like a sorcerer levels up and gains more spells, so do does the alchemist receive a new set of potions and a high lore similar to that of a bard.

    proficiencies for the alchemist would be spent on any weapon that is not exotic but at the maximum of 2. However the main offensive skill for the alchemist would be throwing potions even if it were created a separate set of offensive potions with various strengths and set into the dart skill proficiency. The thing about potions in badlurs gate is that unlike spells or arrows potions rarely miss in comparison which offsets the whole notion of having a skill set solely for .

    I mean you have to think of what is possible with baldurs gate to implement and mine would be possible but adding a whole passive skill set to the game is kind of fantasy (pun not intended)

    P.S Zanath if your going to use abbreviations at least in your first comment write what they mean. HLA I have no idea what this means assuming the H stands for Healing?
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
    kingthrallDarkcloud
  • kingthrallkingthrall Member Posts: 76
    Bhaaldog said:

    P.S Zanath if your going to use abbreviations at least in your first comment write what they mean. HLA I have no idea what this means assuming the H stands for Healing?

    HLA stands for High Level Ability e.g. whirlwind attack. That is a standard abbreviation for all BG veterans.
    lol BG Veterans I laughed at this because true Veterans are ones that don't go publicly talking about it making up abbreviations and are just playing like me.

    the ability the bard receives is at level 24 hardly worth arguing with that much of a level gap on having conflicts with an alchemist since the bard uses magic and nearly every item in the game. It actually further proves that the class could easily be implemented into the game.

    Also since we are talking High level abilities the alchemist could be able to create potions with double their potential a minor healing could heal 18 points and a potion of heroism could be +10 on saving throws.
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
    kingthrall
  • kingthrallkingthrall Member Posts: 76
    True but then I wouldn't be a true veteran if I was not grumpy and always complaining to someone.
  • ZanathKariashiZanathKariashi Member Posts: 2,867
    edited January 2013
    Actually, 80% of the proficiency section of the 2nd editon rule book (which BG is based on) is dedicated to the non-combat proficiency system. And it's actually pretty simple.

    You say, I want to make a potion (Requires a laboratory, a magic shop and/or somewhere like the adventure mart would be a good place to restrict usage.). Then it brings up a list of potions and the gold and xp cost creating the potion needs (this takes the place of actually tracking down components. Created potions are usually cost 50% of the base potion price in gold, and 1/25 the base cost in XP), as well as the success modifier the potion has based on it's relative power, and takes so many hours or days to brew depending on the specific potion. (Alchemy has a base -4 int modifier (Every proficiency point spent after the first gives you a +1 int bonus to alchemy checks and a 5% chance of creating an additional potion per attempt). Then you roll a d20 and if it the result is equal or less then your modified intelligence score, you successfully create of the potion. The gold and xp is spent at the beginning of the attempt and is lost regardless of success or failure.

    Potions that require spellcasting require someone in the party to have the spell memorized (this function is already in game, as seen during the side quest in ToB where the game can check to see if anyone has a raise dead/resurrection memorized, or if someone possess a Rod of Ressurection) or a scroll of it and someone capable of casting it, at the time of the creation attempt.

    Wands, Staves, and other magic items are handled similarly, but they also require the spell Enchant Item (6th level, serves no other purpose but to prepare items for being enchanted), in addition to any other spells required for it's creation (A Wand of Lightning would need Enchant Item and someone to have lightning bolt memorized. While a +3 longsword would just require Enchant Item and and a 12th level caster). Items that have non-charge based spell effects (1/day things) or constant spell effects (Non-detection) also need permanency (8th level (Can also be used to cast a unlimited duration Detect Invisibility, Protection from Evil, detect evil, or infravision. Casting the spell directly, not as part of item creation, permanently reduces the caster's con by 1 per spell) memorized at the time of creation.

    Potion creation requires magic in DnD, aside from minor herbal remedies and non-magical antidotes that only give like a +1 bonus to saves to fight against specific poisons or diseases. Alchemy requires magic in DnD.
    Post edited by ZanathKariashi on
    [Deleted User]
  • XavioriaXavioria Member Posts: 866
    I absolutely love this idea. I don't see the need for raw materials either, as high level abilities give you the chance to scribe scrolls or make potions! I think it would be awesome if the alchemist also got some sort of bonus when using potions (they last longer or do more damage)! This would be a great way to go through baldur's gate and have potions on your side more often and for cheaper.

    Also, I think a good limiting factor would be to just limit the amount of times per day that the alchemist could make potions per level would be good. And there was a bard class in Song and Silence called a "Chorister" (credit to G3) that had priest spells in its arsenal, which made it a truly unique type of bard!

    I think this is a great idea :)
    [Deleted User]
  • kingthrallkingthrall Member Posts: 76
    Xavioria said:

    I absolutely love this idea. I don't see the need for raw materials either, as high level abilities give you the chance to scribe scrolls or make potions! I think it would be awesome if the alchemist also got some sort of bonus when using potions (they last longer or do more damage)! This would be a great way to go through baldur's gate and have potions on your side more often and for cheaper.

    Also, I think a good limiting factor would be to just limit the amount of times per day that the alchemist could make potions per level would be good. And there was a bard class in Song and Silence called a "Chorister" (credit to G3) that had priest spells in its arsenal, which made it a truly unique type of bard!

    I think this is a great idea :)

    This is what I meant by using the priest or Wizard book's slots for potions memorized instead of spells and having them listed similar to that of a cleric whereby you select for instance a potion of stone form, maybe a antidote for example. Level 1 would have 2 memory slots available and so forth.

    Another High level ability that could be implemented would be a +3 proficiency in any weapon.

    Zanath, no offense meant. I love the idea but I really detest the idea of crafting benches for the game of baldurs gate. Its going into oblivion/skyrim territory with crafting. Not only this but if your going for the whole lore-friendly thing making wizards write their own spells should also be implemented as I would like to see it done properly the whole way including blacksmithing. It would just make the game so tedious and boring spending 20 minutes selecting what to make through dialog instead of just having a quick cast and be done with it.

    It just seems like way too much trouble than its worth to make a new system like that and if Beamdog wanted to do something along these lines then they should of used Icewind dales interface as a base instead of T.O.B.
  • ZanathKariashiZanathKariashi Member Posts: 2,867
    edited January 2013
    Actually, it's going into DnD territory. The book literally says that any crafting requires a magical laboratory or other appropriate workshop for whatever crafting you're attempting, because it takes hours, days or even weeks, depending on the complexity of the item.

    And yeah, I'd love for the full implementation of the DnD crafting system. Scrolls (with variable caster level), potions (with variable caster level), even mundane Blacksmithing (which would be required for making magical weapons/Armor as you need mastercrafted base items before you begin the enchanting).


    Though really, I'd much rather they do a comprehensive rebalancing to the Kits and mechanics currently in game, before they go crazy adding new stuff. The overpowered (Berserkers, Barbarians (only really needs all it's rage immunities replaced with a +4 bonus to all saves and it would be correct), Swashbucklers, Inquisitors and undead hunters need their abilities reevaluated and brought closer to their PnP incarnation), the mostly correct kits getting a few fine tuning tweaks (Too many to list right here) the under powered (Wizard Slayers and Shapeshifters brought closer to their PnP version and/or given their PROPER stats), and tidying up mechanics (R/C spellcasting exploits, Proficiency system exploits (as well as proper proficiency access for classes) PnP accurate Bard/Skald Songs, proper High level spell casting progression for Wizards, priests and Bards), complete overhaul of the HLA (removing the ones that don't exist or stray way too far from their original function). PnP accurate Specialist Mages, with proper opposed schools and penalty/benefits (Including the addition of the Shadow magic spell line for the Illusion school (would be pretty easy to implement since it just duplicates weaker versions of existing evocation and conjuration spells))
    [Deleted User]
  • kingthrallkingthrall Member Posts: 76

    Actually, it's going into DnD territory. The book literally says that any crafting requires a magical laboratory or other appropriate workshop for whatever crafting you're attempting, because it takes hours, days or even weeks, depending on the complexity of the item.

    And yeah, I'd love for the full implementation of the DnD crafting system. Scrolls (with variable caster level), potions (with variable caster level), even mundane Blacksmithing (which would be required for making magical weapons/Armor as you need mastercrafted base items before you begin the enchanting).


    Though really, I'd much rather they do a comprehensive rebalancing to the Kits and mechanics currently in game, before they go crazy adding new stuff. The overpowered (Berserkers, Barbarians (only really needs all it's rage immunities replaced with a +4 bonus to all saves and it would be correct), Swashbucklers, Inquisitors and undead hunters need their abilities reevaluated and brought closer to their PnP incarnation), the mostly correct kits getting a few fine tuning tweaks (Too many to list right here) the under powered (Wizard Slayers and Shapeshifters brought closer to their PnP version and/or given their PROPER stats), and tidying up mechanics (R/C spellcasting exploits, Proficiency system exploits (as well as proper proficiency access for classes) PnP accurate Bard/Skald Songs, proper High level spell casting progression for Wizards, priests and Bards), complete overhaul of the HLA (removing the ones that don't exist or stray way too far from their original function). PnP accurate Specialist Mages, with proper opposed schools and penalty/benefits (Including the addition of the Shadow magic spell line for the Illusion school (would be pretty easy to implement since it just duplicates weaker versions of existing evocation and conjuration spells))

    See I totally think you hit the nail on the head but the funny thing is I woudnt say this is a feature request. It should have already been released in the game or patched automatic. This is the whole purpose of an "overhaul". I would of said Cavalier/Archer were O.P barbarian is just over-rated I think anyway.
    [Deleted User]
  • ZanathKariashiZanathKariashi Member Posts: 2,867
    edited January 2013
    Nah, the Cavalier is actually almost PnP accurate (well actually the PnP version is even stronger in some ways, but the overall feel and power level is correct, since BG doesn't have mounted combat (they traded mounted combat bonuses for hit/damage vs demons/dragons...which I think is pretty fair)). (Except it's also supposed to be a Fighter AND Paladin kit. The only difference is that the Fighter version can only place ** in a weapon, and the paladin version can't specialize at all) (Obviously the other stuff such as spell casting is specific to the paladin version, while the fighter version has no alignment restrictions. Technically a Cavalier that falls should only loses their paladin perks (spell casting, extra save bonus, turning, paladin-only aiblities), none of their other class benefits (Remove Fear is actually a Rallying Cry that isn't magical).

    The Archer is almost accurate, except he's only supposed to gain his damage bonus with bows, can only place *** in bows (* in everything else), gains an extra attack while equipped with a bow (which bows in PnP cannot normally benefit from any extra attacks), can root themselves in position for 3 rounds to gain an additional attack, and cannot benefit from extra attacks with melee weapons. (And it's a Fighter AND Ranger kit)

    And that's another thing that needs fixed. Fighter kits cannot go above specialization (**), *** or higher is the perk of a unkitted, single class Fighter only (The only exception is the Kensai which achieves *** in a single Sword-like weapon type, which is required to be used in their main hand for all their abilities to function). This means a Multiclass can only specialize, a Fighter>X dual can't specialize further at all (but could go up to GM if they did so before swapping classes), and a X>Fighter dual can only specialize instead of GM. Ranger and paladin kits cannot specialize at all (the base ranger/paladin gets basic specialization, but has to give it up as part of the penalty for the extra benefits a kit provides), unless their kit says otherwise, and the Archer is the only one that does.

    In PnP the Undead Hunter and Inquisitor are almost identical in abilities. Both get dispel (but they're only equal to their class level, not double, the the Undead Hunter's comes every 5 levels instead of 3 like the Inquisitor does.). inquisitors are 90% resistant to charm/domination spells and have a permanently active Detect Illusion ability with 80% base chance per round and +1% per level to a maximum of 95%. And in addition to all their current penalties, they cannot specialize.

    Undead Hunters are completely immune to hold and turn undead equal to their class level, rather then 2 less, but otherwise have the same list of disadvantages as a Inquisitor + they're not immune to disease. They're also supposed to get a +3 Holy Sword at level 6, but...I prefer BG's +3 hit/damage vs undead to that (though it does say the DM can choose not to give them the sword if it would upset the game balance, since Holy Swords in the hands of a paladin are potentially game breaking.)

    (Holy Swords wielded by paladins all dispel magic on hit equal to the paladin's level, set magic resistance to 50%, and complete immunity to spells cast by evil casters who are lower level then the paladin, + any special qualities the sword has. Purifiers deal extra damage equal to their enhancement bonus vs undead and grant +2 saves, and boost a paladin's level by 2 for turning attempts. Avengers deal extra damage equal to their enhancement bonus vs specific types of evil, Redeemers force evil foes to save or run in fear on hit, Invigorators increase the amount a paladin heals with spells or lay on hands by 50%, Divine Protectors hits as +4, deal no extra damage, but gives an armor bonus equal to 1/4 of the paladin's level and can be used once per day to stun all evil enemies within 30ft if they fail a save vs spells at -2. When wielded by a non-paladin a holy sword is merely +2, with no other abilities)
    [Deleted User]mjs
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • kingthrallkingthrall Member Posts: 76
    edited January 2013
    well I wasn't going by statistical or lorewise strength. I was saying by sheer gameplay standards the cavalier is by far the most overpowered class in the game (for bg1). In comparison to the inquisitor and undead hunter for instance. The Ranger also is "quite accurate" made me laugh from the pun you said. Firing a stack of 20 piercing arrows in 10 seconds is almost a game breaker.

    I am playing a American Indian (Kensai) at the moment and though +4 in single style axes would of been great it is not necessary. Most classes are playable, some need a buff but I wound't go tampering with it too much. This is not starcraft or world of warcraft where characters compete and kill each other with the constant need to balance out all aspects with counters.

    As I said earlier these class changes and balances should of been implemented with the game from the start. It is meant to be an "enhanced edition" and should of gone through all the classes and class kits from the start.
Sign In or Register to comment.