Howdy, Stranger!

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

Categories

Neverwinter Nights: Enhanced Edition has been released! Visit nwn.beamdog.com to make an order. NWN:EE FAQ is available.
Soundtracks for BG:EE, SoD, BG2:EE, IWD:EE, PST: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!

Balance Dexterity

13»

Comments

  • TJ_HookerTJ_Hooker Member Posts: 2,438
    edited May 2013
    @kamuizin my only experience with DnD is through video games, so I won't know all the fine details, but I think I know most of basic differences between 2E and 3.5. I'm just asking because you keep talking about how much 3rd edition stuff is in BG, but have yet to actually demonstrate this. You did mention a few things on the first page of this thread, but @Demivrgvs refuted most of them. The only things left were sorcerers and blackguards, and I really don't think that one class and one kit constitute "a LOT of elements from 3.5E".

  • EntropyXIIEntropyXII Member Posts: 656
    @Draith012 - I always assumed, or imagined that said character would drop all that weight when a battle began. I can't imagine any character fighting away with 7 swords strapped to his/her back with 3 extra plate mails. Is this what you meant?

    If so, that's the only way I can justify it in my head. I always thought the extra weight would be discarded before fights. Kind of like an invisible mule etc..

  • KilivitzKilivitz Member Posts: 1,456
    edited May 2013
    The number of 3e rules implemented in BG or BG2 is precisely zero.

    The only 3e stuff that's been implemented are BG2's new classes/races (and now the new kits, adapted from Prestige Classes), and even those were either slightly altered or introduced mechanics that didn't contradict any AD&D 2e rules.

    Anyone with free time (and patience) to do a little research would also find out that most BG/BG2 rules that aren't in AD&D's core rulebooks can be found on supplements such as the Player's Option series. HLAs, for example, came straight out of "DM's option: High-Level Campaigns".

    The only instance I can think of a 2e rule clearly making way to it's 3e equivalent would be Sneak Attack being added to IWD with the HoW expansion, and even that was optional.

    TJ_Hooker
  • Draith012Draith012 Member Posts: 174
    I haven't quite established how the characters carried stuff. I assume they have an adventurer's backpack crammed with junk. Samwise from LotR sometimes fights with his still on. If they always dropped their excess weight, then why do you have to manually drop the excess weight for encumbered characters during a fight to have full movement. Plus Imoen isn't very strong to begin with. Her gear and potions can sometimes bring her to her limits but I still make her fight. According to the manual scores of 9 and 10 suppose to represent the average human ability. Commoner quality. Anything beyond is exceptional; 18 being the greatest humanly possible. Though we take it for granted, those high strength score are phenomenal compared to the average people of DnD but we play fighters and thieves with those 16+ strength as though it should be expected of any melee combatant. In fact, a man with 12 strength might actually think himself strong since he -is- stronger than most men.

    EntropyXII
  • KilivitzKilivitz Member Posts: 1,456
    edited May 2013
    One more thing: I'm not arguing that the current way DEX and armor interact is realistic enough or even that AD&D handles it better than 3e, but I personally believe that making the game a mishmash of 2e and 3e rules to any degree would not really improve anything.

    To be completely honest, I'm not even too thrilled about including adapted 3e fluff, with so many 2e sourcebooks to draw out content from. I can see why they did it from a marketing perspective, though, considering how many fans 3e (and the NWN series as well) has/have.

    IMHO, the editions play too differently from each other, to the point where it's better to choose one over the other instead of picking and choosing.

    EntropyXIITJ_Hooker
  • Draith012Draith012 Member Posts: 174
    It's been ages since I played the first IWD. Was that in 2nd edition? Cause the IWD2 is in 3rd.

  • KilivitzKilivitz Member Posts: 1,456
    edited May 2013
    That's right. IWD1 came out just a little before BG2 and used 2e rules as well.

  • PeccaPecca Member Posts: 1,943
    edited May 2013
    @EntropyXII: I'd suggest to stop thinking about this game in terms of what is realistic. It's just a game and huge amount of things in it are not realistic. Fighting, inventory, reputation system, interactions, food, travel, level-ups, etc, etc... But none of it prevents me from enjoying it. I think the game doesn't need to be more realistic, I don't see the point. If you wanted to push it to be more realistic, you'd end up with *very* different game.

  • EntropyXIIEntropyXII Member Posts: 656
    edited May 2013
    @Pecca - Never once did I say that I didn't enjoy Baldur's Gate. In fact, I have said on numerous occasions that I love this game. I am well aware it's not realistic, unless magical dancing Elves and surly bearded Dwarves have arisen on planet Earth. I don't want unnecessary 'realism'. I do however think that 3rd edition rules regarding a nice balance between dexterity and armour type was a good 'realistic' touch to DnD.

    This is a feature request thread - and I believe I am agreeing with @kamuizin when he requests a balance to dexterity. Is that so much of a problem?

    I have absolutely no problem with 2nd edition rules the way they are, but I do think that this one addition from 3rd edition won't be such a bad idea and allow me to get into my character just that little bit more.

    The only thing I would like: is to have the option to play a non-18/00 strength warrior. I mean it's not like i'm asking the dev's if they could include: Tieflings, Aasimar, or my all time favourite: "OMGROFL I wants 2 ridez Dragonz!!!"

    Icewind Dale has a nifty button in the customization section which allows you to switch 2nd edition rules to 3rd edition rules, Sneak Attack -> Backstab.

    If it was possible to have something similar implemented, where everyone will be happy (those who don't want it, don't have to click it etc), wouldn't that be better?

    Anyhow, it won't happen. It's an awful lot of work for Beamdog to contend with and i'm sure they have a lot on their plate as it is. If they give me a cheesy 'Bladesinger' kit, i'll be more than happy :)

    @Draith012 - Interesting point and well noted. I never thought of it that way. I guess you get used to the 19 strength rogues over time.

  • PeccaPecca Member Posts: 1,943
    @EntropyXII: No problem with me. It just seemed to me that you put a lot of weight on realism and I don't think it's a very good approach with this game.

    I wouldn't be very happy with 3e rules in BG, but if they were optional it would be ok. In fact I'm all for as much customization as possible. But as you say, that is an awful lot of work.

  • EntropyXIIEntropyXII Member Posts: 656
    @Pecca - It's not realism i'm after - Just the option to play a quick, agile fighter over a massive brute of a warrior. Roleplay for me is at least having this option, because I simply do not enjoy playing 18/00 fighters.

    It's such a shame that whenever I do play a fighter I have to lower his strength for RP purposes. I always feel I am gimped somehow, and that is because all the other fighters that join you have close to maximum strength.

    It's because of this I purposefully avoid melee classes - call me childish - but it breaks immersion for me. Unless of course I decide to roll with my Super Human Paladin of Torm.

    It's been brought up already, but a 'finesse' feature would be a suitable substitute for me. If 'Dex' is higher than strength then the PC uses that statistic to determine thac0. Surely their could be no complaints for this request.

  • PeccaPecca Member Posts: 1,943
    @EntropyXII: I see. It would be a lot of work but I guess it could be done if interest were high enough. Anyway, as for light fighter, I made something similar as a mod. I made Xan "bladesinger" by modding his blade to give him thaco and damage (and some other) bonuses, that increased as he leveled up. This way it would be possible to create a kit, which would use kit-restricted light weapons, with these bonuses. This kit could be also restricted from having high strength and have high minimal dexterity.

    EntropyXII
  • kamuizinkamuizin Member Posts: 3,679
    No one where trying on the begin to use realism to base this request, the "realism" issue was an off-topic argument only.

    Back to the main issue, the balance dexterity was requested in face of the cosmetic reason of existance of some armors, as defined in the open topic, as the absolute no distinction bettwen leather armor+1 x Studded leather armor, or Chain mail+1 x Splint mail.

    The justify of the request is based on 3.5 Ed rules, as something that already exist.

    EntropyXII
  • Draith012Draith012 Member Posts: 174
    On another note, if I recall correctly from the 2nd edition monster manual. A horse had a strength of 17. Yes, your fighters and rogues are physically stronger than a horse!!!

    EntropyXII
  • Jedi_GnomeJedi_Gnome Member Posts: 92



    It's been brought up already, but a 'finesse' feature would be a suitable substitute for me. If 'Dex' is higher than strength then the PC uses that statistic to determine thac0. Surely their could be no complaints for this request.

    This is the part that interests me. I never played 3.5 ed. but I do have some of the books. I would like to play a gnome with a swashbuckler kit for a fighter (not a thief) that is similar to the Swashbuckler class in 3.5 with the "Weapon Finesse" feat. That way I can have a swordsman that doesn't have a big bruising strength. Or at least if my kensai (who can't wear armor) have Weapon Finesse, and have a high DEX and a lower STR.

    EntropyXII
  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 10,689
    edited May 2013
    The armor-based DEX penalty is already addressed by a number of mods, and those implement it very well, and IMHO it is something best left to mods.

    DEX thac0 bonuses, on the other hand, are a different story because ability bonuses are hard-coded and not moddable. I always thought the 2e STR-based thac0 bonus was kind of senseless. It seems like it tries to approximate a damage threshold system (and fails, in my view).

    I think that enabling DEX-based thac0 bonuses should be a separate request, and discussed in the "Requests for Externalization" thread. Put STR and DEX thac0 bonuses into their own .2da files, and make an opcode to enable one or the other; that would let you implement a 'finesse' ability, for kits or even via items - you could make a "rapier of fencing mastery" or something like that. Would be great for thieves.

    Pecca
  • kamuizinkamuizin Member Posts: 3,679
    This already exist in inverse @subtledoctor as the sling of seeking in BG 2 uses strenght bonus to add damage for that ranged weapon.

  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 10,689
    edited May 2013
    The Sling of Seeking works because STR damage bonuses already exist; it's quite easy to have a weapon use that bonus. But for now, you can't do the opposite (make a rapier of weapon finesse) even if you wanted to. The devs would have to open up ability bonuses for modding; they are hard-coded right now and all you can do with DEX is alter AC, missile weapon thac0, and initiative/weapon speed.

    Hmm, I suppose you could make a weapon that looked like a melee weapon and has a melee animation, and a small range of attack, but it could be technically classed as a missile weapon... it would thus use DEX for thac0 bonuses. You'd have to give it invisible bonuses to offset the "caught in melee with a missile weapon" penalty...

    Post edited by subtledoctor on
  • Jedi_GnomeJedi_Gnome Member Posts: 92
    Yeah, I realize that it can't be done and it was not part of 2nd edition. But, I like the sound of "Weapon Finesse" and like the concept of my character and it would be cool if it could be implemented. Perhaps maybe for BG3?

  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 10,689

    it would be cool if it could be implemented. Perhaps maybe for BG3?

    What I'm saying is, if a well-worded post in the "requests for externalization" thread moved the devs to un-hard-code this stuff, then a mod could make that possible now, and you wouldn't have to wait.

Sign In or Register to comment.