Howdy, Stranger!

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

Categories

Axis & Allies 1942 Online is now available in Early Access! Buy it on Steam. The FAQ is available.
New Premium Module: Tyrants of the Moonsea! Read More
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

Kensai Signature Weapon & Grand mastery

2»

Comments

  • TJ_HookerTJ_Hooker Member Posts: 2,438
    edited February 2013
    No. Leave it as it is.
    Nifft said:

    First point: you brought up PnP DMs, then you "find it hard to accept" any argument which relied on bringing up PnP DMs. Thus you've denounced your own arguments.

    He didn't denounce his own argument. He said that based on his experience, no DM would allow this, therefore trying to argue in favour of it by refering to how things work in an actual P&P, DM'd game doesn't make sense.
    Nifft said:

    Second point: through history, there have been many fighting styles which relied on multiple weapons, or which applied equally to different weapons: off the top of my head, something like Florentine fencing. That kind of military history isn't really my thing, but if it is someone's thing, he can model that by using the Kensai with those two kinds of weapons. I don't see any reason to take away his candy.

    This isn't relevent. I haven't seen anyone say that the kensai is based on a real world historical fighting style. The kensai has it's own description from P&P, and according to that description his training involves exclusive dedication to a single weapon.
    Nifft said:

    What conclusive, logical proof do you have that Kensai benefits should NOT work on other weapons? Base your answer in historical precedent, as I've done.

    Again, completely irrelevent. The kensai is a completely made up class for a fictional game. All the proof you would need in order to show how the kit ought to work is the kit description. Their is absolutely no reason why they would have to abide by some historical precedent.

    Just like @AHF, I'm not advocating changing how the kit works in BG (and personally would prefer it if they don't). For whatever reason I just felt compelled to weigh in.

    Edit: I forgot to mention that what I said here is largely based on single, rather large assumption. Namely that in D&D lore it clearly states somewhere that kensais focus their training exclusively on a single weapon, as it doesn't flat out say this in the ingame description (although it is implied IMO). I don't play P&P, so I'm trusting what some of other people, who seem to know their stuff when it comes to D&D, have been saying about the kit.

    AHF
  • Key_StrokesKey_Strokes Member Posts: 36
    Yes. Grand mastery only in a single weapon of choice
    toanwrath said:

    Rajick said:

    Just make it so you choose a weapon like rangers choose an enemy monster and give an added bonus to that weapon when using it.

    Actually, that is an excellent idea IMO. I still think they should also get a slight slight AC bump, but this with the limited mastery is cool.
    Aye, that is actually a very solid idea and the two could easily be integrated, with AC bonuses only conferred when using the favored weapon and justified due to their level of proficiency turning it into both an offensive and defensive instrument.

  • The user and all related content has been deleted.

    Deetoanwrath
  • ZaorZaor Member Posts: 69
    Yes. Grand mastery only in a single weapon of choice
    This really wouldn't be a restrictive change.

    I don't see how it would really affect the powergamey-crowd. The most efficient way is typically to have one weapon + one style. Personally, I feel this is an aesthetic roleplaying choice if anything. I mean, consider when you could even have a third dot in a second weapon...Unless there is someone out there who, despite not leveling two-weapon-fighting, levels two weapons alternating one dot at a time, the 3rd dot in a second weapon won't matter until your 8th proficiency point (Assuming you don't have a style!). In actual terms, that means the earliest power-gaming time you can get that is level -12-. Typically, this would be accompanied by at least 2 points in some style as well, pushing it back even further to level -18-. Honestly, if you are quibbling over points at level 18...

    Now, to the point of dual-wielding 2 different weapons. It will ALWAYS be better to get the first 2 points in dual wield than 2 points of a proficiency if you are dual-wielding. Always. Always. The thac0 difference is crazy. Now, the difference between the third dual wield and mastery (the third proficiency) is 1 damage. So, again, looking at when it is actually possible to get that, assuming a grandmastery in weapon 1, you're still at 9 proficiency points by the time you get 5 in one, 2 in the other, and 2 in dual wield. That's level 15. Level 18 is when that 1 damage (On the offhand that only has 1 APR...2 with Improved H) would potentially be lost if this change were implemented. I refer you to HLAs (Coughwhirlwind). Personally, if I am power-gaming, either my offhand thac0/damage doesn't matter because I just want the effect or I am using 2 of the same weapon alla scimitars or clubs.

    Now, to the point that there might exist a player who wants to get 2 grand-mastery weapons as soon as possible in, let's say, Halberds for main combat and Maces for Mace of Disruption/Various-halberd-immune-things. The power-gaming choice is always going to be to get a grandmastery as fast as possible. Otherwise, you are missing out on apr for the lame ground between mastery and high-mastery. Personally, it doesn't make much power-gaming sense to get beyond 2 dots in a weapon that is only situational unless you have dots that just won't do better elsewhere. Again, styles make me happy. This is the weakest point though, admittedly. There could exist a powergamer that enjoys 3 dots of a backup weapon rather than x2 chance to crit.

    A dual-class (away from) Kensai, the most popular power-game choice, would never have the proficiency points or inclination to care about this issue. At all. Seriously.

    Tl:dr
    Okay, so, gist is, pre-t0b, there is very little difference from a power-gaming perspective. Meanwhile, there is a very strong case from a kit-flavor and roleplaying aspect. Personally, it would enhance some of the fun of the Kensai for me because it feels more like a real kit with a true-specialty. True flavor. Not nearly as bland. Similarly, it would be cool as they were saying if the kensai-bonuses only applied to the weapon-of-choice but that is a different matter I feel that isn't as clearly cut.

    If you're wanting to play a samurai, play a fighter and call yourself a samurai with your katana/scimitar combo or whatever floats your boat. I would just point out that the Kensai is not that, flavor wise. If you want to play a sword-saint, master of a single sword...

    With all that said, to each his own game.

  • OzzyBotkinsOzzyBotkins Member Posts: 396
    No. Leave it as it is.
    Tough choice on this one
    I am not really that fond of the Kensi kit
    never played it
    so either way is fine with me , even though I voted leave as is

  • GallowglassGallowglass Member Posts: 3,356
    No. Leave it as it is.
    I voted No, but hesitantly. I think there are some pretty strong arguments here for a differently-designed restriction than the proposal in the poll question.

  • mjsmjs Member Posts: 742
    No. Leave it as it is.
    i say leave it as it is, because it's easy enough to self-regulate your suggestion without having to impose it on those who don't want it

  • AHFAHF Member Posts: 1,376
    edited February 2013
    Yes. Grand mastery only in a single weapon of choice
    Nifft said:

    AHF said:

    Nifft said:

    AHF said:

    Nifft said:

    AHF said:

    Or not allowing players to cheese the DM.

    In a single-player game with this kind of console and mod capability, the player is the GM.
    Once you start talking about PnP DM concepts as a way of justifying this, I find that much harder to accept than simply saying people enjoy it and want to keep it.
    I'll note that you were the one who brought PnP DM concepts into this discussion, and leave it at that.
    ??

    (In the PnP world, this kind of thinking -- the idea that people must be stopped from "doing it wrong" even though they seem to be having fun -- is called either "one true way-ism" or "badwrongfun".)

    In a single-player game with this kind of console and mod capability, the player is the GM.


    Your version of the PnP world is apparently very different than my experience where you could reference the "PnP world" as a justification for a Kensai getting their bonus on very different weapons in which they aren't proficient (e.g., Kensai with GM in shortword gets the kensai-specific bonus on thrown weapons and flails, among other non-proficient weapons). My experience with the PnP world always involved a DM that wouldn't let people illogically abuse game mechanics -- especially when the starting point is as narrowly defined as a class which is intended to gain certain advantages through highly focused specialization in a single weapon. In order for me to connect the defense of the Kensai mechanic with the "PnP world" or a "DM", there would have to be some logically creative rationale for the Kensai bonus applying across all types of melee weapons and applying to certain ranged weapons otherwise this would be precisely the type of situation that wouldn't fly in the PnP world.

    Again, I am fine with the rationale of "I enjoy this so go mod the game if you think there is a better way but don't take away my Kensai bonus applying to every weapon usable by a Kensai no matter how different from the weapon my character has chosen to focus on" but I can't wrap my head around the idea that this would fly in the "PnP world" without some type of creative rationale that no one has tried to articulate yet in this thread.
    First point: you brought up PnP DMs, then you "find it hard to accept" any argument which relied on bringing up PnP DMs. Thus you've denounced your own arguments.

    Second point: through history, there have been many fighting styles which relied on multiple weapons, or which applied equally to different weapons: off the top of my head, something like Florentine fencing. That kind of military history isn't really my thing, but if it is someone's thing, he can model that by using the Kensai with those two kinds of weapons. I don't see any reason to take away his candy.

    What conclusive, logical proof do you have that Kensai benefits should NOT work on other weapons? Base your answer in historical precedent, as I've done.
    I'm really not trying to attack you in any way personally so let me apologize if you feel that way. I am not trying to imply that you are illogical or anything of the sort.

    In response to your posts:

    (1) I don't have trouble accepting any argument relying on PnP DMs. I find it hard to believe any legit PnP DM would approve giving Kensai bonuses to all melee weapons, including weapons in which the Kensai is not proficient. Thus, any argument relying on the PnP world seems to fall flat when I don't believe any reasonable PnP DM would allow this. This is actually essential to what I am trying to communicate. I think back to the DMs when I played PnP, and I cannot see one of them allowing a Kensai specialized in the short sword to gain special bonuses with a war hammer. To me, the PnP world argument is one that weighs against the BG mechanic.

    (2) I don't claim to have conclusive proof of anything on this thread. That said, I'll give you a few arguments for my view: one PnP related, one historical precedent and one pure logic:

    (a) the Kensai in PnP is dedicated to mastery of a single weapon:
    The player is allowed to choose the Kensai character's special weapon. In most cases, it is the Kensai's aim to become the perfect master of his weapon. For the man and weapon to become one, acting on a single thought, is the ultimate goal of a Kensai. The player must select one weapon or unarmed fighting style for his Kensai character. The character automatically receives a proficiency (but not specialization) in that weapon or style without expending any proficiency slots. He begins the game with three proficiency slots. Only one of these can be used for a second weapon proficiency.
    The PnP game then gives bonuses only when using that one special weapon:
    Through training with his particular weapon and his mental practice, the Kensai learns to focus his kai power.

    This lets him cause maximum damage with a single attack when using his specialized weapon.

    In addition to the above abilities, the Kensai gain the following powers when they reach the appropriate level: At 2d level he causes one additional point of damage when using his specialty weapon.
    etc.

    (b) Historically, people who have not developed basic competency with a type of weapon do not gain special abilities with it by virtue of their expertise in a very different type of weapon. Fencers do not gain master proficiency with flails or war hammers through their study of sword fighting. Using the Florentine fencing example, according to fencing websites Florentine fencing is a relatively recent creation in the world of fencing and is used to describe essentially dual wielding - i.e., "a fencing style where a secondary weapon or other instrument is used in the off hand." It does not involve training on using quarterstaves, halberds, maces, etc.

    Of course there have historically been people who have embarked on learning a broad range of combat styles and techniques but this is antithetical to the game construct that is the Kensai. Learning a broad range of weapons is the opposite of focusing intently on developing skills with a single chose weapon, i.e., the purpose of the Kensai class.

    (c) The Kensai in BG is "specially trained to be one with her weapon." It is this special training that is the source of the special Kensai bonuses. Other fights don't train with this focused intensity on a particular weapon and so they don't get the bonus. When the Kensai is not even proficient in...say...war hammers why would she gain bonuses related to special training that tunes her to her weapon in a way that other fighters are not? I don't see any logic behind the idea that a Kensai is so specially attuned to a war hammer -- a weapon in which she has not even developed basic proficiency -- that she should gain the Kensai special training bonuses whereas a character with grand mastery in war hammers does not gain this bonus because he presumably lacks the Kensai's special bond to the war hammer.

    * * *

    My bottomline is that I respect that some people really like the game mechanic of using the advantages of the Kensai's special training for all melee weapons and some thrown weapons. I get why they would ask that it not be nerfed. I can't understand, however, how the special training to become one with the Kensai's weapon would provide the exact same bonuses to very different weapons in which the Kensai has not even developed basic proficiency. So for me any justification that relies on how this BG mechanic would fly in the PnP world or in any framework in which people are giving this some genuine critical thought would have to rely on some argument that doesn't come to my mind and hasn't been articulated yet on this thread.

    Just my $.02. Others are free to disagree as my opinions aren't the be-all, end-all by any means.

    TJ_Hooker
  • KsarfeksKsarfeks Member Posts: 8
    No. Leave it as it is.
    I would leave it as it is, because: 1) anyone can restrict themselves; 2) whenever someone gets to GM for the second weapon, he is probably too powerful for it to matter much.

    I would also leave alone the thing with class bonuses to specific weapons, because nobody will use weapons on a kensai which he is not proficient with (unless it some very specific encounter) and is in general too much hassle to implement.

  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,363
    edited February 2013
    Yes. Grand mastery only in a single weapon of choice
    It would be very hard to implement as described in the poll, but there is a simple, easy way to do it: restrict Kensai to GM in long swords, katanas, and scimitars (and wakizashi, if they have a different prof than katanas... but I think they're the same). The kit is called "sword saint" after all. No proficiency pips in any other weapons.

    Furthermore, as mentioned above, the thac0/damage bonuses are actually much more problematic than the proficiencies... they should really only apply to swords as well.

    These changes would be in keeping with the actual description of the kit - in fact, even more than the current implementation - but wouldn't nerf things too much. The powergaming set would still have their godlike characters wielding Belm and Celestial Fury or whatever. It just wouldn't be taken too far with ridiculous things like off-hand war hammers or flails or other such nonsense.

    And, the "just restrict yourself" argument doesn't fly. Why not let clerics use swords, or thieves use helmets? Why not eliminate all item restrictions? You could always just restrain yourself! But, no. A game is a set of restrictions, by its nature. Think of the first generation of 3D games: a few like Mario 64 were great, but many were just bland imitations. Good 2D games were much better. An interesting combination of rules and restrictions is what makes a game fun; threads like this are meant to ask how the restrictions in the game can be tuned to make it more fun.

  • TJ_HookerTJ_Hooker Member Posts: 2,438
    No. Leave it as it is.

    And, the "just restrict yourself" argument doesn't fly. Why not let clerics use swords, or thieves use helmets? Why not eliminate all item restrictions? You could always just restrain yourself! But, no. A game is a set of restrictions, by its nature. Think of the first generation of 3D games: a few like Mario 64 were great, but many were just bland imitations. Good 2D games were much better. An interesting combination of rules and restrictions is what makes a game fun; threads like this are meant to ask how the restrictions in the game can be tuned to make it more fun.

    I would agree with you if this were about a new game. The thing is these rules have been in place for over ten years, and many people have gotten used to them.

    In my mind, when I suggest that others should simply restrict themselves, I'm not saying that because I think that placing arbitrary restrictions on how they play will be the best or most fun option for them. I say it because that option is way easier than the option that would be available for people that prefer it the old way, if it were to change. They would then need to mod their game simply to be able to play it with it's original rules. I don't think it's fair to impose a (relatively) major inconvenience for them, in order to avoid a minor inconvenience for yourself, especially when you're the one asking to make changes to something that's been in effect for over decade, meaning you're not in a strong bargaining position to begin with.

    AHF
  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,363
    edited February 2013
    Yes. Grand mastery only in a single weapon of choice
    TJ_Hooker said:

    I don't think it's fair to impose a (relatively) major inconvenience for them, in order to avoid a minor inconvenience for yourself, especially when you're the one asking to make changes to something that's been in effect for over decade,

    1) But, it's not just a minor inconvenience. If you're on a fight with one hand behind your back, it is very hard to resist the urge to bring of in front of you when you're about to be hit. Because it's smart to do so; you would have to constantly fight your own instincts, which is aggravating. Whereas, if your hand was tied there and you couldn't do anything about it, you would simply lash out with the other hand and not worry about it. Being actually restricted makes things more natural and fun. So, so-called "self-restriction" is not a minor inconvenience. It's perfectly intelligent and reasonable to disagree with me on the substantive matter... just please don't argue that I ought to be aggravated. You'll never convince anyone with that argument.

    2) Nor is the opposite a major inconvenience. Is the inability to play a druid/mage a major inconvenience? It's just a rule, no more or less arbitrary than saying you can or can't play a ranger/cleric. If you removed ranger/clerics from the game (something quite reasonable in my view, given the ridiculous spell-selection bug) people would howl and moan... but how the change affects those people is a different questions from the abstract question of, would the game be better without it.

    3) And the 10 years old thing is neither here nor there. The Overhaul people are making lots of changes that you may or may not like (*cough* blackcheeseguards *cough*)... It's a decision - a change - and someone will always disagree. My feeling is, when a game has such a devoted modding community, the proper order of things is: a game with restrictions, and mods that open up those restrictions. The other way around just doesn't work.

    Post edited by subtledoctor on
  • RhymeRhyme Member Posts: 190
    No. Leave it as it is.

    TJ_Hooker said:

    I don't think it's fair to impose a (relatively) major inconvenience for them, in order to avoid a minor inconvenience for yourself, especially when you're the one asking to make changes to something that's been in effect for over decade,

    1) But, it's not an inconvenience. If you're on a fight with one hand behind your back, it is very hard to resist the urge to bring of in front of you when you're about to be hit. Because it's smart to do so; you would have to constantly fight your own instincts, which is aggravating. Whereas, if your hand was tied there and you couldn't do anything about it, you would simply lash out with the other hand and not worry about it. Being actually restricted makes things more natural and fun. So, so-called "self-restriction" is not a minor inconvenience. It's perfectly intelligent and reasonable to disagree with me on the substantive matter... just please don't argue that I ought to be aggravated. You'll never convince anyone with that argument.

    2) Nor is the opposite a major inconvenience. Is the inability to play a druid/mage a major inconvenience? It's just a rule, no more or less arbitrary than saying you can or can't play a ranger/cleric. If you removed ranger/clerics from the game (something quite reasonable in my view, given the ridiculous spell-selection bug) people would howl and moan... but how the change affects those people is a different questions from the abstract question of, would the game be better without it.

    3) And the 10 years old thing is neither here nor there. The Overhaul people are making lots of changes that you may or may not like (*cough* blackcheeseguards *cough*)... It's a decision - a change - and someone will always disagree. My feeling is, when a game has such a devoted modding community, the proper order of things is: a game with restrictions, and mods that open up those restrictions. The other way around just doesn't work.
    A lot of what you said made a lot of sense. I don't agree with it, but I can at least understand where you're coming from.

    But then you got to the last sentence and completely lost me.

    What do you mean, "The other way around just doesn't work"?

    Are you seriously saying that mods that put restrictions in place aren't feasible? Please, tell me what the difference is between the developers modifying the game the way you want in a patch, and a mod modifying the game the way you want in a patch. Or is it another case of, "The temptation is too strong! I could never bring myself to install the mod, knowing that I'd be handicapping myself, even though I feel strongly enough about this that I want the developers to make it manditory for everybody!"

  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,363
    edited February 2013
    Yes. Grand mastery only in a single weapon of choice
    I mean the mods don't exist. Go look - they're not out there. There's a mod out there that allows demihumans to dual-class, written by someone who thinks that restriction is arbitrary and silly. But even among those people who strongly believe dual-classing is broken as implemented in BG, nobody has made a mod to eliminate it. Likewise, nobody's taken time out of their busy life to make a mod to eliminate the ranger/cleric spell bug. Whereas, if the game was changed to eliminate that combo, you can be sure someone would make a mod to re-enable it, and thus everyone would be happy.

    I'm not saying that's how things should be. I'm just saying that's how things are. Where the game imposes restrictions, mods will tend to remove those restrictions. The opposite simply doesn't happen.

  • NifftNifft Member Posts: 1,065
    No. Leave it as it is.
    @AHF - I think I misinterpreted what you'd said earlier, and consequently we got off on the wrong foot here. My apologies for that!

    I'll just post briefly to elucidate my main point; I don't want to derail the thread.
    AHF said:

    (1) I don't have trouble accepting any argument relying on PnP DMs. I find it hard to believe any legit PnP DM would approve giving Kensai bonuses to all melee weapons, including weapons in which the Kensai is not proficient. Thus, any argument relying on the PnP world seems to fall flat when I don't believe any reasonable PnP DM would allow this. This is actually essential to what I am trying to communicate. I think back to the DMs when I played PnP, and I cannot see one of them allowing a Kensai specialized in the short sword to gain special bonuses with a war hammer. To me, the PnP world argument is one that weighs against the BG mechanic.

    See, IMHO the solution here is for you as a player to simply never use any weapon other than your chosen weapon.

    If you never use any other weapon type, the fact that there are bonuses to other weapons doesn't matter.

    Yes, this requires some self-control as a player, but that's what I meant when I said every BGEE player is his own DM: in a single-player game like this, you impose these restrictions on yourself, instead of having an outside DM to impose limits on you.

    IMHO it's just as satisfying to win in spite of your own restrictions, as it is to beat the game's inherent restrictions. Therefor, I don't mind if the game lacks certain restrictions -- I'm a strong-willed human being, I can impose my own restrictions. :-)
    AHF said:

    My bottomline is that I respect that some people really like the game mechanic of using the advantages of the Kensai's special training for all melee weapons and some thrown weapons. I get why they would ask that it not be nerfed. I can't understand, however, how the special training to become one with the Kensai's weapon would provide the exact same bonuses to very different weapons in which the Kensai has not even developed basic proficiency. So for me any justification that relies on how this BG mechanic would fly in the PnP world or in any framework in which people are giving this some genuine critical thought would have to rely on some argument that doesn't come to my mind and hasn't been articulated yet on this thread.

    Just my $.02. Others are free to disagree as my opinions aren't the be-all, end-all by any means.

    Just off the top of my head, let's think about a Dagger Kensai.

    He's a consummate knife guy. He juggles daggers, he knows their balance perfectly and can throw them with deadly intent, and eventually (after studying Special Forces neck-stabbing techniques) he finishes his Thief dual-class and knows all about sticking a dagger in his opponent's liver from behind.

    I can imagine why this guy might be good with throwing daggers in addition to the hand-held kind.

    That's not a character I've ever played, but it might be cool, and allowing the bonus to apply to throwing daggers seems appropriate... but, this is just a concept, just like the "Florentine Fencer" concept.

    All I'm saying is, if you take away the ability of other people to selectively ignore some constraints, you may unintentionally remove some interesting character concepts.

    (But note that I've never actually wanted to play one of those concepts, so maybe they're not all that interesting...)

    Cheers, -- N

  • AHFAHF Member Posts: 1,376
    Yes. Grand mastery only in a single weapon of choice
    Nifft said:

    He's a consummate knife guy. He juggles daggers, he knows their balance perfectly and can throw them with deadly intent, and eventually (after studying Special Forces neck-stabbing techniques) he finishes his Thief dual-class and knows all about sticking a dagger in his opponent's liver from behind.

    I can imagine why this guy might be good with throwing daggers in addition to the hand-held kind.

    For what it is worth, your concept would be possible with every single version being proposed on this thread (GM limits, bonus limits or keeping it vanilla) because the dagger proficiency is the same for held and thrown daggers. When doing this, the Kensai bonuses do apply to thrown and held knives.

    I am in favor of a mod that would make the bonus specific to a chosen weapon and not a rewrite of the game but if I were creating the game new (as opposed to an enhanced edition) I would (a) not allow the Kensai bonus to apply across all melee weapons and (b) not allow the Kensai to use thrown weapons given the intended restriction on missile weapons.

    Cheers!

    TJ_Hooker
  • RhymeRhyme Member Posts: 190
    No. Leave it as it is.

    I mean the mods don't exist. Go look - they're not out there. There's a mod out there that allows demihumans to dual-class, written by someone who thinks that restriction is arbitrary and silly. But even among those people who strongly believe dual-classing is broken as implemented in BG, nobody has made a mod to eliminate it. Likewise, nobody's taken time out of their busy life to make a mod to eliminate the ranger/cleric spell bug. Whereas, if the game was changed to eliminate that combo, you can be sure someone would make a mod to re-enable it, and thus everyone would be happy.

    I'm not saying that's how things should be. I'm just saying that's how things are. Where the game imposes restrictions, mods will tend to remove those restrictions. The opposite simply doesn't happen.

    Oh. Yeah, that makes total sense. You're right. At present, the only modder most of us have to appeal to is the development team.

    I sometimes wish we had a group of modders who loved to make quick and easy mods upon request, the same way we have artists doing such great work "Baldurizing" custom portraits. But I guess modding is a beast of a different nature. Still, if there was a thread called "Somebody make this mod for me!" where people could request and get the mods they want, I bet we could prevent almost all of the arguments we have on these forums about whether nerfs/buffs/changes should be made to the game.

    If I had the ability, I'd be the first one in line to volunteer. Sadly, I wouldn't even know where to start.

  • DeeDee Member Posts: 10,447
    We do have a Modding forum. If you post your request there, I'm sure someone can either do it for you or tell you how to do it yourself.

    TJ_HookerNifft
  • TJ_HookerTJ_Hooker Member Posts: 2,438
    edited February 2013
    No. Leave it as it is.
    I couldn't tell if he didn't know about the modding board, or if he was just being sarcastic.

  • RhymeRhyme Member Posts: 190
    No. Leave it as it is.
    Usually the answer is sarcastic. But in this case, I'll confess to being oblivious. Is it under fan creations?

  • AHFAHF Member Posts: 1,376
    Yes. Grand mastery only in a single weapon of choice
    Rhyme said:

    Usually the answer is sarcastic. But in this case, I'll confess to being oblivious. Is it under fan creations?

    About 7 links down from Fan Creations under the title "Modding." You can find it easily with a Control-F search of the webpage.

  • MoomintrollMoomintroll Member Posts: 1,481
    edited February 2013
    No. Leave it as it is.
    I'd like to see some more general skills with later specialisation, say..

    Clubs - branching out into; maces, hammers, wooden clubs.

    Pole arms - staves, halberds, spears

    But with fewer points to spend. In other words, you can use more weapons without penalty, but still only become masterful at one, or at least very few.

    1 point in the first skill (club, pole arm) would allow use of the branch weapons without penalty.

    TJ_Hooker
  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,363
    Yes. Grand mastery only in a single weapon of choice
    Rhyme said:

    Still, if there was a thread called "Somebody make this mod for me!" where people could request and get the mods they want, I bet we could prevent almost all of the arguments we have on these forums about whether nerfs/buffs/changes should be made to the game.

    Well, you can request mods in the modding forum, and there are request subforums in most of the big modding sites out there (G3, SHS, Pocket Plane, etc.) I don't know how successful requests like that are, because making a mod can be a bit labor-intensive, and few people have the time to do it if they don't share a passion for the idea behind it.

    That said, if the devs nerfed the game in a way I liked, I would personally be happy to assist in making a mod to revert things for players who don't like it. I don't know how to use WeiDU, and don't have time to learn (shame, because I have a few personal NI modifications I would love to distribute). But if, say, the kensai were changed to only get GM in blade weapons, or if the thac0/damage bonuses were only applied to swords, I could and would give you a single file that you could drop into your Override folder that would revert the class to the old way.

Sign In or Register to comment.