@ZelgadisGW. Of course it is cheating. But it is just cheating on the Core rules of BGEE, and that's the way I define it in the poll statement. Yet, each person on this forum has the right to play the game the way he or she enjoys it most, and we should all continue to respect that. Even the designers tend to encourage it.
It is perfectly acceptable to play the game at Normal Difficulty level. Yet, to many eventually it doesn't provide enough of a challenge, so they move up to Core or even higher difficulty or they use difficult mods. Yet they can still object to some of the rules, like writing spells, that they don't like (I don't like it and I would like to modify it). The point is, they have a right to play with any combination of rules, both enhancing difficulty or easing difficulty, that they feel right with, unless they are entering a challenge that proposes a fixed set of rules.
I for one have been fascinated to hear on this thread how each of you have decided to approach an aspect of the Core rules that is in fact on the "razor's edge" and where players come down decidedly on both sides of it.
Let's see, player-character mage, capable of feats and progression far beyond the typical mage in the world, a master of the arcane arts in the making, a hero or villain of extraordinary potential. Yeah, that totally sounds like you should have a chance to fail to learn how to do the thing at which you excel. Maybe Fighters should have a random chance to not gain extra proficiency pips or their extra attacks.
I wonder if Gygax and the rest of "the founders" developed the chance to learn spell rule to force magic-user players to diversify their spellbooks and figure out creative ways to use spells, since it's likely that most people were using the same spells and not exploring others.
You are lowering it for a brief moment so that you could get a perfect roll. For me, that is cheating, no matter how I try to look at it.
I really don't see how. If you turn it back to Core or higher, party members still take full damage from your aoe spells and enemies do full damage. I would agree that having max HP'd level 8 warriors makes the game too easy for my tastes, but cheating is the wrong word. Cheating would be doubling your HP total through Shadowkeeper, or manipulating the old familiar HP glitch.
If your dwarven fighter always have 120 HP (125 with helm of Balduran on), while normally you would have around 80 HP, then it affects overall difficulty of the game. 40 HP is a huge difference for a party's tank. Even if you are still recieving a normal ammount of damage etc, you're still making your game much easier.
If one likes to play on easy/normal, then fine. If someone is playing on core rules or above... Please, be the man and accept the consequences.
For the sake of this conversation, I'm afraid I have to repeat what I have said earlier: this is merely my opinion on the matter. I'm in no position, and I don't intend to, to tell you how you should play. I might see some gamers as guttless, but again, that's my opinion. Have fun the way you like.
You are lowering it for a brief moment so that you could get a perfect roll. For me, that is cheating, no matter how I try to look at it.
I really don't see how. If you turn it back to Core or higher, party members still take full damage from your aoe spells and enemies do full damage. I would agree that having max HP'd level 8 warriors makes the game too easy for my tastes, but cheating is the wrong word. Cheating would be doubling your HP total through Shadowkeeper, or manipulating the old familiar HP glitch.
This brings up a larger discussion on what we define as cheating. Is throwing a Web or other AoE spell at a group of monsters/enemies hidden by the fog of war considered cheating? What about re-rolling your stats during character creation or memorizing several Protection from Petrification spells before entering the Basilisk area?
How many times did you have to reload the battle with Aec'Letec before you figured out how to beat him? Why didn't you just accept that your party failed and start over at the beginning with a new character? Cheater!
Generally, cheating is when you circumvent the "rules" to accomplish goals otherwise attainable through established means. Using Shadowkeeper to double hit points or alter ability scores to god-like levels is obviously cheating. So is using the CLUA Console to ctrl-Y difficult opponents or to assign all 18s to your PC during character creation. I think we can all agree on that. But, outside of the coded game mechanics, you're essentially your own DM/GM, so it's up to you to determine how you're going to play the game.
I use Shadowkeeper to change the colors of my PC's clothing, leather, and even skin color, since many of the colors available aren't accessible through the palette we're given in the character screen. I hate the colors that Viconia and a few other NPCs were assigned, so I always change those, too. Is that cheating?
From what I've seen on this thread, it looks like many of us set up some sort of "house rules" that we more-or-less adhere to during our playthroughs. Since all rules are made-up, and therefore negotiable, I think cheating should be defined according to the context of the players' rules, since BG allows for a wide range of playing options.
for writing spells I use the 100% learn spells tweak (it's in BG2 Tweaks, I think), for hit points, I use my self-imposed rule to apply the save-and-reload if I don't like the roll only 3 times, i.e.: I take the best of 3 rolls.
If your dwarven fighter always have 120 HP (125 with helm of Balduran on), while normally you would have around 80 HP, then it affects overall difficulty of the game.
I voiced this exact sentiment in my reply. "Affecting the overall difficulty of the game," is not cheating if you're not taking advantage of hacks or glitches.
If your dwarven fighter always have 120 HP (125 with helm of Balduran on), while normally you would have around 80 HP, then it affects overall difficulty of the game. 40 HP is a huge difference for a party's tank. Even if you are still recieving a normal ammount of damage etc, you're still making your game much easier.
The decision the designers should have made if they wanted people to have a certain HP value is for them to give a specific HP value, and not a random chance for a better or worse value.
By nature, many people will want their character to be optimal. Making a character weaker or stronger in the long-term by luck is a really bad way do to things. Many will circumvent this randomness by changing the difficulty or some other method.
Back to the comment above, 40HP is a huge difference for a party's tank. I just don't want to run the risk that my party's tank might be significantly below average from some unlucky dice rolls*. For me at least, it's not about character's being really great, it's just that I don't want their greatness to be diminished by chance, especially when I might be sinking a number of hours into a runthough.
*Simulated dice rolls, there are no dice in my machine.
In the past I used to reload when a precious scroll was wasted or I got little HP. It didn't spoil the pleasure for me at all.
But then, particularly based on what I've read on this forum, I decided to try to accept anything this game brings me. And I find the results amusing. It changes the usual experience. It's something like "Oh, I so much like fireballs... let's try to memoize this spell... Ouch... Is it possible to run without it? Maybe I should try skull traps? You know, they are not bad... It's even more interesting:)"
And having tried to accept the results at every levelling up, I tend to think that in this game the HP additions always even themselves out in the end. Maybe you get rather "bad" results at two levels but the next one will bring the near-maximum number. I believe into this and try to wait. And having less HP helps to seek some new ways of overcoming difficult fights. Wands of MM, of frost and of lighting can be a good replacement. Potions can really be a key in some situations. But when everyone has maximum HP and every spell available there can even be no need for wands and potions.
@Mathmick You don't want to risk your party Tank to become weaker? Fine, but at the same time you want your playthroughts to become way too predictable. I'm bored with (At the end of BG) mages of EXACTLY 54 HP, human warriors with 112 HP, Thieves with 80 HP, etc. Can't you see how predictalbe and boring those values are? Nothing is going to be interesting around characters that develop in predictable way.
@Mathmick You don't want to risk your party Tank to become weaker? Fine, but at the same time you want your playthroughts to become way too predictable. I'm bored with (At the end of BG) mages of EXACTLY 54 HP, human warriors with 112 HP, Thieves with 80 HP, etc. Can't you see how predictalbe and boring those values are? Nothing is going to be interesting around characters that develop in predictable way.
As I said earlier, it is for boring gamers.
You're right. Silly me. Nothing is going to be interesting about choosing proficiencies, spells, when to dual-class, different magical items, and who to give stat tomes.
@Mathmick You don't want to risk your party Tank to become weaker? Fine, but at the same time you want your playthroughts to become way too predictable. I'm bored with (At the end of BG) mages of EXACTLY 54 HP, human warriors with 112 HP, Thieves with 80 HP, etc. Can't you see how predictalbe and boring those values are? Nothing is going to be interesting around characters that develop in predictable way.
As I said earlier, it is for boring gamers.
I don't like long-term power gameplay to be determined by randomness early on. I don't have anything against randomness of power when it actually suits the game. I like to use FTL as an example of this. The randomness suits there because (a) a playthrough is incredibly short, (b) there are no save/load functions built into the game to circumvent it and, most importantly, (c) there is an opportunity to circumvent the risk that you will end up weaker in any situation.
I just don't feel that Baldur's Gate relies on that randomised power to submit to random die rolls* myself. There's enough annoying randomness in this series *cough*save-or-die*unconvincing-cough* that removing power as something determined by luck has more upsides than downsides. For me, at least.
*Still no dice in my computer, I even checked this time.
You're right. Silly me. Nothing is going to be interesting about choosing proficiencies, spells, when to dual-class, different magical items, and who to give stat tomes.
Keep hearing what you want to hear. You're great at it. Whatever. I'm done. No point in discussing with people who refuse to listen.
I do not understand how saving time and irritation by reloading over and over is considered "cheating". I'm just pretending I reloaded like 20+ times and not getting frustrated.
Well i have my own way of playing, i get full HP rolls ( cause i found it more logical and close to 3rd edition) , but play on double damage setting. 15 years before i finished like this and it was not that easy. healing spells are never enough, cause even a kobold can dish out huge damage with some lucky roll.
Although i am much better at tactics & dnd knowledge now, (+15yrs :O) bad things happen: a winter wolf hit for 51 on Rasaad for example
Still, playing with "archer" kit, i wish the insane setting was instead one of the below;
1-All other monsters and npc's do %50 more damage and have double hit points. 2- double damage and %50 mor hp sth like that.
Because , even if you cheated or not on max HP rolls, if enemies die before they have a chance to inflict double damage on you, its not "insane" ..
Maybe i should suggest HP should added to monsters on hard&insane difficulty. Edit: possibly after 1 unmodded completion i should try mods
I was just playing an un-modded BG1 to get a character for BG2EE and I was wondering why Minsc was dying all the time when I suddenly realised "aha, since the patch my mods have stopped working and he's getting 3 hit points per level because I wasn't paying attention". Since I noticed I've started cheating a bit: for melee characters I save and reload until I get a reasonable score on level up; not a max but a decent amount. For spells I accept losing a few common spells but I lower difficulty for the rare ones where there are only a couple in the game. Before I noticed what was happening Imoen managed to have more HP than Ajantis or Minsc which I think is silly. I don't care how many HP casters or thieves have: they're supposed to be weaker than fighters.
If its a really important spell, like breach, then I'll just reload until the spell is successfully memorized. For HP, I use the same 1 re-roll rule my DM uses in PnP. Anything under an average roll, I will reload for one reroll and take whatever the result is.
I only do it for writing spells - I enjoy the cruelty the rolls can be. When you get a nice big 1 additional hitpoints. You feel you have been betrayed.
Comments
It is perfectly acceptable to play the game at Normal Difficulty level. Yet, to many eventually it doesn't provide enough of a challenge, so they move up to Core or even higher difficulty or they use difficult mods. Yet they can still object to some of the rules, like writing spells, that they don't like (I don't like it and I would like to modify it). The point is, they have a right to play with any combination of rules, both enhancing difficulty or easing difficulty, that they feel right with, unless they are entering a challenge that proposes a fixed set of rules.
I for one have been fascinated to hear on this thread how each of you have decided to approach an aspect of the Core rules that is in fact on the "razor's edge" and where players come down decidedly on both sides of it.
If one likes to play on easy/normal, then fine.
If someone is playing on core rules or above... Please, be the man and accept the consequences.
For the sake of this conversation, I'm afraid I have to repeat what I have said earlier: this is merely my opinion on the matter. I'm in no position, and I don't intend to, to tell you how you should play. I might see some gamers as guttless, but again, that's my opinion. Have fun the way you like.
How many times did you have to reload the battle with Aec'Letec before you figured out how to beat him? Why didn't you just accept that your party failed and start over at the beginning with a new character? Cheater!
Generally, cheating is when you circumvent the "rules" to accomplish goals otherwise attainable through established means. Using Shadowkeeper to double hit points or alter ability scores to god-like levels is obviously cheating. So is using the CLUA Console to ctrl-Y difficult opponents or to assign all 18s to your PC during character creation. I think we can all agree on that. But, outside of the coded game mechanics, you're essentially your own DM/GM, so it's up to you to determine how you're going to play the game.
I use Shadowkeeper to change the colors of my PC's clothing, leather, and even skin color, since many of the colors available aren't accessible through the palette we're given in the character screen. I hate the colors that Viconia and a few other NPCs were assigned, so I always change those, too. Is that cheating?
From what I've seen on this thread, it looks like many of us set up some sort of "house rules" that we more-or-less adhere to during our playthroughs. Since all rules are made-up, and therefore negotiable, I think cheating should be defined according to the context of the players' rules, since BG allows for a wide range of playing options.
for writing spells I use the 100% learn spells tweak (it's in BG2 Tweaks, I think),
for hit points, I use my self-imposed rule to apply the save-and-reload if I don't like the roll only 3 times, i.e.: I take the best of 3 rolls.
By nature, many people will want their character to be optimal. Making a character weaker or stronger in the long-term by luck is a really bad way do to things. Many will circumvent this randomness by changing the difficulty or some other method.
Back to the comment above, 40HP is a huge difference for a party's tank. I just don't want to run the risk that my party's tank might be significantly below average from some unlucky dice rolls*. For me at least, it's not about character's being really great, it's just that I don't want their greatness to be diminished by chance, especially when I might be sinking a number of hours into a runthough.
*Simulated dice rolls, there are no dice in my machine.
In the past I used to reload when a precious scroll was wasted or I got little HP. It didn't spoil the pleasure for me at all.
But then, particularly based on what I've read on this forum, I decided to try to accept anything this game brings me. And I find the results amusing. It changes the usual experience. It's something like "Oh, I so much like fireballs... let's try to memoize this spell... Ouch... Is it possible to run without it? Maybe I should try skull traps? You know, they are not bad... It's even more interesting:)"
And having tried to accept the results at every levelling up, I tend to think that in this game the HP additions always even themselves out in the end. Maybe you get rather "bad" results at two levels but the next one will bring the near-maximum number. I believe into this and try to wait. And having less HP helps to seek some new ways of overcoming difficult fights. Wands of MM, of frost and of lighting can be a good replacement. Potions can really be a key in some situations. But when everyone has maximum HP and every spell available there can even be no need for wands and potions.
You don't want to risk your party Tank to become weaker? Fine, but at the same time you want your playthroughts to become way too predictable. I'm bored with (At the end of BG) mages of EXACTLY 54 HP, human warriors with 112 HP, Thieves with 80 HP, etc. Can't you see how predictalbe and boring those values are? Nothing is going to be interesting around characters that develop in predictable way.
As I said earlier, it is for boring gamers.
I just don't feel that Baldur's Gate relies on that randomised power to submit to random die rolls* myself. There's enough annoying randomness in this series *cough*save-or-die*unconvincing-cough* that removing power as something determined by luck has more upsides than downsides. For me, at least.
*Still no dice in my computer, I even checked this time.
Whatever. I'm done. No point in discussing with people who refuse to listen.
In BG2 for example, there's no way that i would fail and let go a spell failure in write a time stop, absolute immunity, chain contingency...
Although i am much better at tactics & dnd knowledge now, (+15yrs :O) bad things happen: a winter wolf hit for 51 on Rasaad for example
Still, playing with "archer" kit, i wish the insane setting was instead one of the below;
1-All other monsters and npc's do %50 more damage and have double hit points.
2- double damage and %50 mor hp sth like that.
Because , even if you cheated or not on max HP rolls, if enemies die before they have a chance to inflict double damage on you, its not "insane" ..
Maybe i should suggest HP should added to monsters on hard&insane difficulty.
Edit: possibly after 1 unmodded completion i should try mods
Since I noticed I've started cheating a bit: for melee characters I save and reload until I get a reasonable score on level up; not a max but a decent amount.
For spells I accept losing a few common spells but I lower difficulty for the rare ones where there are only a couple in the game.
Before I noticed what was happening Imoen managed to have more HP than Ajantis or Minsc which I think is silly. I don't care how many HP casters or thieves have: they're supposed to be weaker than fighters.
But i do for scrolls. I don't carry this big mage book for nothing :P