@Lamiar I'm still using Scales of Balance v5.7.6 and here only droppable armors seem to be modified by YARAS (as intended.....)
Why creatures which wear PLAT07 should not gain DR, as "droppable" armors (as other creatures, or as your characters?).
In order to avoid making certain creatures (battle horrors for example) less resistant to damages than it was originally designed. In my game PLAT07 is not modified by YARAS -> As a result, battle horrors have correct damage resistances
@Luke93 but in your game Ravager - remains still broken (lowered creature quality). And this can potentially happens with any creature which wear armor with any new/old mod.
Your Battle Horror remains broken in terms of rules: plate mail should give 27% DR but it is not.
@Lamiar For the time being I'm playing BG:EE, so I don't know about BG2 creatures like the Ravager.....
Battle horrors are not broken in my game because they are correctly immune to missile weapons (since PLAT07 is not modified by YARAS -> PLAT07 must be considered as a special plate mail).
Things are different with the Ravager though -> If the Enkidu armor is droppable and modified by YARAS, then something must be done in order to re-set the correct damage resistances to it...
@Luke93 Just imagine your PC has 100HP and wear PLAT01: PLAT01 (equal to PLAT07) gives you additional 27% of physical resistances. This effectively means like you have 127HP against physical attacks (for simplifying we skipping rounding issues). And now you face to foe with 100HP who wear PLAT07. What this means if PLAT07 is unmodified? This means that if foe do only physical attacks at same proficiency level - you got free 27HP buff, and truly overshine this creature. And i'm sure - there is not intended.
Another thing is pure consistency - why creature who wear droppable armors should be stronger than creatures who wear undroppable armors?
So, i'm doesn't understand your complaining. I'm argue just to be consistent and fair in all changes without providing gaps. Especially when one of possible fix actually exist.
-please keep your current policy, of no ridiculously stacking resistances to insane ammouts. I mean one +5% bonus stacking with your armor should be fine, several 10%-15% is most definitly not.
- I can confirm that SoB can be safely installed after SCS, and I definitly recommend it as it saves a lot of time when updating SoB
- please proceed with the considered nerf or ranged weapons. I would start by removing the nonsential bonus to APR from bows (and honestly probably from thrown weapons too). Plus reverse the change made by IR and set min STR for long and composite bows to 15 and 17 respectively.
- I can´t check right now - is the CHA still having no effect when in range of 11-14 ? Because i remember that charisma was either 15+ or 10. Spreading it more would help to fill the blank space.
- What about redrawing the damage dice on weapons ? :P
@Arizael thanks for feedback about SoB after SCS. Just yesterday finished "big" BWS/EET installation with all (except Shandra Saga) big mods installed, with hope that i'm will able mod some rule games, and it will not be broken (more like it should be more close hardcore).
- I'm agreed that infinite stacking should not happens. But i'm doesn't see nothing wrong if armor use "increment" modifier type instead of "set". This effectively should allow stacking with some items which probably even non exist in game (yet).
- Creature design and equipment: do anyone realize that IR's Revisited Shield Bonuses makes pesky 1-level skeletons in BG1 even more worse: originally they has 19THAC0 and 8HP (so you need 1 or 2 hits to kill them). After revisited shield bonuses they has 20 THAC0 by medium shield penalty. In my taste of RNG - 20 rolls far more rarely than 19. I'm just mean: they had been helpless especially for 5-8 level party - but now they becomes even more helpless. Bonus in AC from shield can't balance loss in THAC0 in their case: their lifetime in combat is so short that it is better for them has better chance to hit in you than having more AC (which doesn't matter with party who wear EE equipment). There is something what i'm name like loss in creature quality. And creature design: 90 DR against missiles + 8HP doesn't allow feel this like they has 90 DR against missiles: 2-3 bowmans kill them just with normals bows. I mean you probably even will not try use magic or weapon with best damage types against them. I'm say that this is bad design. Surely there is big issue here that there is no proper creature leveling. I'm played with "bgeespawn" but it is only adds number of them, but not raise creature quality. As result - Rift Hammer becomes excellent weapon (with their AoE proc) against trash mobs. I'm hate situation when mobs can be named as "trash".
- Bows: As i'm wrote before - there is exist pure inconsistency with IR+SoB components installed together. SoB doesn't lower shortbow APR to 1.5, but IR do. SoB adds additional bonus damage to longbows and IR do and they finally stacks (so longbows do +3 bonus damage). This thing should be fixed. Personally i'm like use longbow below 15STR, but think that +1 bonus damage is max that they should provide (in order if shortbows will have 2APR). If all of them will has 1.5 APR... then doesn't know. Technically - any weapon with bigger base APR overshine slower weapons, but if you can get enough pips - then "slower" weapons can pick own place. Also i'm doesn't like non-integer APR's: In one round char do one number of attacks, in next do other. Especially with plain 1.5APR is becomes very strange: first round (again, as i'm feel) you will get 2 APR, and only in next 1 APR. This makes that difference betwen 1.5 and 2 is neglible. Neglible because party can (and should) focus fire -> 3 bowmans with 2 APR do 6 attacks in round -> target died or "perma-interrupted". I'm doesn't speak in terms of mid/high-level foes - larget HP pools gives chance them to act.
- What about redrawing the damage dice on weapons ? :P
Personally for self i'm think that will try redesign all weapons: Just now i'm just not see place for bastard swords, they are lost somewhere between other blades. Generally i'm thinking about "standardize" "normal" weapons vs eastern weapons. E.g.
E.g. something similar: Dagger and Ninjato should play same role (and have same base damage, let's say 1d4 piercing only). Short Sword and Wakizashi should play same role (and have same base damage, let's say 1d6 and slashing/piercing, engine should allow do 2 types of damage). Katana and Bastard Sword relatively rare, but can play about same role - 1d10 (slash/pierce).
Long Sword - uniquely placed 1d8, slashing/piercing. There is no exist common sword terminology. Bastard sword actually smaller than long sword in one terms, and not in other terms. Normally long sword is two-handed, but not in our game. Also really long one-handed swords has been used by barbarian knights. Light, well-balanced blades from ages, supposed to slash from horse. But can be used and in on-ground-battle. I'm personally feel that long sword - is another. Scimitar - uniquely placed 1d8 or 1d9, slashing only. There is purely knight weapon supposed to dissect heads when you ride on horse. It is so curved that there is no place to saying about thrusting (while katanas actually outperform any medieval 1.5 hand sword in slashing and in thrusting armors).
Any two handed weapons should roll 2d or even 3d. E.g. Greatswords should be 2d6 Halberd - i'm never use them. I'm think that halberds are not popular weapon, but in fact it is one of safest and universalest weapon. Slash/Pierce. Pollaxes can go with Crush/Pierce. So at least 2d6. Spear - traditionally Piercing Quaterstaff - due to simple design something like 2d3, crushing.
War Hammer - should do Crush/Pierce, because they suppose to thrusting much more than other weapons (well, better thrusters - is halbers). Morning Star - Crush/Pierce, but surely it is more crushing weapon. Mace - in game probably just crushing weapons. But, some of them can be crush/pierce. Basically morning stars is kind of mace. Flail - crush. may be some of them crush/pierce. due to their design - one-handed flails (unlike two-handed) is more fiction weapons (even if some of them exist). Any simple club much better than flail because club is reliable, while with flail you can graze self in best case, or kill self in worst. Club - truly crush. Uniques can go with crush/pierce (spiked clubs are easy to do).
Battle axes - mostly of them should do slashing-only damage. May be let for some uniques to do piercing.
Generally - weapons which do only one damage type should perform bit better than universal weapons.
But to make this design work... creatures need to be overhauled.
- Klatu's standardized creature resistances/immunities this days are deprecated.
Forget about Rift Hammer: AoE proc is excellent and funny to try. But... Just imagine situation: You face a party of 6x Huge Spiders which you buff with some mod to 300% HP.
You land 1-2 sleeps on them - they are sleep, so now you can easily kill it one-by one.
Now, one of your front-mans kick poor creature with Rift Hammer and it is procs what causes that creatures around wakened up and attack you! Ahahaha! (Read this like: i'm will not use this weapon in this kind cases.) In other cases when you just rush ahead and in heat of fight it procs - it is cool.
Ah, another thing about dual-damage types - normally engine choose better damage type. But this is possible to play around on-hit damage as secondary effect: Say morning stars deal crushing damage and then as on-hit effect deal other piercing damage. E.g. say 1d5 crushing, and then 1d3 piercing.
Yet another question for all, better for experienced modders:
If i'm want to do some total conversion/overhaul mod -> i'm should play with my changes step by step. Any suggestions how to deal with this in better to avoid some early possible mistakes?
First my concerns is:
1. Determine which creatures can appear in area (theoretically can be easily extracted from area-related scripts and/or something?). Surely not everything, but at least possible spawns/creatures which can appear.
2. What's is easiest way to determine "creature template"? As i'm understand after creature is spawned it is no more linked to .CRE file -> but it is important to understand .CRE file. Creature names often not unique. As idea, i'm can alter creature names and easily include resource name in it. Surely in hope, that logic from this is not be broken somehow. Who know... Or it is possible with some debug options?
3. Overhaul and stick weapon system. I mean "standardize" weapon dice rolls and damage types, fix existing weapons (weapons from mods can easily be out-of-sync, has strange rolls, e.g. 3d3 instead of 1d8+2 and without any reason - it is okay if weapon gain stronger rolls if weapon unique, but...).
4. Fix item descriptions. This text patching techniques basically turns me to idea to try remove everything and rebuild them from scratch from item properties / effects. Surely unique descriptions should remain, so exclusions.
5. Creatures... there is not clear choice. I'm basically see two ways: stay fair and mod spawning logic or buff them. More interesting should be hybrid solution. Nothing prevent to us to have really leveled spawn for example.
6. I'm ok (think that it is preffered) with go with custom .net based tooling: writing backup weidu-entries should not be really too hard, but patching in terms of READ/WRITE bytes is stupid. Libraries which used by SCS solves problem only partially and they are slow. Slow. And generally, tooling should be flexible to easily find something. There is lot of resources. Writing each time or run each time weidu script just to find something in resources is counter effective at first place. Near Infinity also solves problems only partially. So...
Probably too many work to even bothering about start. Don't know. Will glad heard any thoughts.
@subtledoctor Another big inconsistency which i'm feel, is SoB's stat bonuses and F&P Monitor of Azuth caster level bonus! This is very weird. Because many things are capped - i'm feel literally they should stack. Or: choose better of bonus. As i'm understand - there is impossible to code... So, i'm personally prefer exclude INT-based caster level bonus from SoB (monitor will achieve +4 at 20 level, e.g. much better). Other my chars: Bladesinger and Spellfilcher - are good enough even without bonuses, and will not reach even +2.
And I'm strongly against things what do TomeAndBlood to bonuses around stats (pure nerf to spell slots).
First thing, that, divine casters has much more slots than mages. And this was mistaken from start (or not). They probably should has 1-2 more slots, but but not twice more than mages. Otherwise, especially with F&P - they outperform mages in any senses in any level, except some cases. Yep, diviners should spare their slots for healing, especially if you (that should be fair) don't use "rest until heal". But in terms of combat mechanics - no. Meh.
And Tome And Blood only do pure nerf! Meh twice! Mages already one of strongest classes, but... who balance over that? Over Edwin who has +2 spells by amulet? Or that? Blah. No. It was and remains balanced over only Edwin and abyss only. I'm actually doesn't has any idea how new player should play with pure mage with this helpful "balancers". No, no and no. Kick this mod out and forget. It do only stupid things, without real goodies which change game.
Exactly, this trick when kits like bladesigner gives you +1 spell slot (because you "specialist" but you not), actually makes game only better. Mages at start are meh. So, having additional slots is good. As final value - 5 vs 6 slots/per level - do this real change at final levels? This can make difference if you play solo... but not in party. I'm argue that wizards, should have more spell slots. Otherwise users are forced to rest before fight. Even this effect was unintended - i'm strongly vote for it. From my feel - as much as you more becomes powerful - as less spells you need to use. So... doesn't seen problem here at all.
I'm also should say, that because you can cast only one spell / round -> there is no matter how many you have spell slots. Really. For "gishes" - it is no matter absolutely. This is i'm again say, that even if having +1 spell/level is was unintended -> if it was ever fixed again, i'm will personally fix it back for self. You start as mage and *should* cast mage armor and something also at least once per day.
As for SoB's INT and bonus spells, and TomeAndBlood: both work absolutely differently. In first place i'm should not... oh TomeAndBlood is not available in EET (at least in BWS). So... Ashes to ashes. Great mod with some setup with infinity stupidies. Cantrips - are stupid. Innate gives you infinite power, while 1-level cantrips makes you less powerful, than should. Spell tweaks again - stupid: tossing levels for 1-st level spells i'm think is unacceptable: scalable 1-st level armor should remain in own place (it is hard to force own char use it at all even with SR buff), shield - is not buff (and buff of course which usable), but in first place is protection from magic missile, especially from contingencies of magic missiles in SCS. Well, may be ToB rules is okay for BG2 - but generally - i'm doesn't find any of ToB changes are useful or interesting (personally - again, i'm ok that others find is good). But again: i'm never NEVER play with specialist mages: generalist are flexible. I'm always use generalist and doesn't see sense to play with specialist. Specialists are only freakingly worse options of generalists. Loosing schools? It is joke. Let's assume that we doesn't know which spells we can gain later = generalist always win. Also, i'm doesn't agree with "speciality" on this own. E.g. ToB makes specialists more interesting, but... i'm doesn't found that it is really has sense/interest in term of gameplay (nothing changes globally).
F&P for example changes diviners globally.
Ah, back to SoB's INT... Oh, no, not to INT. STO+MRO+everything still doesn't remove probability based mechanics. I'm absolutely agreed that pure MR should be banned at all, even from buffs from quests. There is just no have sense. I'm absolutely ok with replacing it with DR instead... Basically because i'm never understand saving throws itself. And still not understand: you/foe will be affected *randomly* by save throw. So, basically you should choose spells which is not negated completely by saving throw. But... this is basically reduce spell usage. And, finally - this is how to work. You only choose spells without saves allowed OR which allow at least half damage on save. Meh again.
Well, back to INT: IR no more allow raise INT. Red Potion allow do it twice (in BG1 and in BG2). So... actually, really - choice of setup easy spell learning with no spell limit is much more better option than before. Or, you should "roll" at least 17 int. This is generally wrong. I mean, not only rules of what mage and int can do, but also UI, which show you if you already know spell (and it is doesn't show you this thing if you reach max number of know spells). So... i'm like SoB's INT, i like IR changes to bottles. But, in this case i'm can only suggest to use easy spell learning without restrictions. In my case you can see: i'm doesn't use bottles, why i'm should because i'm caster? No, i'm playing without bottles. So... IR changes actually is like follow rules of someone who never use this potions of mind/genius to learn spells before. Bah. Great stupidity. Just give them bigger price and let peoples play like they want without pure hacks (Easy Spell Learning without limits).
... so, i hope we can turn game which can be interesting in all aspects. I'm for, example, like story aspect even without stupid banters. I'm hate banters. I'm HATE banters. This is why i'm like play in custom party.
But, combat mechanics at least of BG1-era requires lot of rebalancing to remain interesting. Once you reach in BG in game - no-one can give you real threat expect some of story chars. Bah!
And I'm strongly against things what do TomeAndBlood to bonuses around stats (pure nerf to spell slots).
Well, TnB adds more low-level slots.
But it is actually reduce number of slots. It provides: a) nerfed table for everyone b) provide some bonuses from stats which without reaching 25 can't even cover previous c) this looks like supposed to be work in pure classes, but on multi-classes it is ends with pure loss of spell slots (exactly by -1)
No, no and no. Kick this mod out and forget. It do only stupid things, without real goodies which change game... i'm doesn't find any of TnB changes are useful or interesting
Hmm... I wrote bunch of stuff in that mod...
You written lot of mods which you doesn't recommend in this days. Read me right: i'm like lot of changes in ToB. But, finally when it tries to "balance" - SoB alone act better. And there is wrong thing when both mods try balance spell slots.
i'm never NEVER play with specialist mages: generalist are flexible. I'm always use generalist and doesn't see sense to play with specialist. Specialists are only freakingly worse options of generalists.
We are working on some stuff that would make you appreciate specialists
But... game doesn't provide specialists for bladesingers, right? I'm no see way how i'm can see specialist. And generally in game i'm overally doesn't see how specialist can be better than generalists (high-level characters should have enough spell slots anyway). I'm repeat - i'm never play specialists exactly in this way. I'm played with Dynaheir - she was specialist. And, i'm doesn't like nor she, nor she speciality. I'm doesn't say, that this is bad thing. But, once modders provide good kits - then it is will be good choice. F&P for example provide really good kits with own strongness & weakness. M&G provides some interesting variants, but they (which i'm trying, e.g. bladesinger) - is much more sensible to generic class.
Well, back to INT: IR no more allow raise INT. Red Potion allow do it twice (in BG1 and in BG2). So... actually, really - choice of setup easy spell learning with no spell limit is much more better option than before.
Eh, I always use automatic learning anyway. Spell learning failure is silly in a game like this.
I'm now also use automatic spell learning to 100. Abusing save/load anyway will happens, and it is annoying. But same mod provide another possiblity: learn spell without limit / level. I'm just argue that old game allow learn spells of any levels because potion of genius was exists. With IR - it is not true, and best way how you can score INT - is gear. More over - gear from mods appears much sooner. So, while technically i'm understand # of spell limit / level - but without good-known ability to learn bit more spells - i'm argue that "easy spell learningh without # of known spell / level" becomes much more handful. Again, no matter how many you know spells - you only use some of them. I mean mages of course. And UI. UI generally so poor, that basically melee much more profitable, because you doesn't bother to find right spell...
And about spells / spells per level. I'm should say that bladesinger-like character can live with just 10 spells/level limit without any disadvantages. Issue only when you hit in enemy drops and you everytime should reconsider who should learn spell, or you doesn't want to learn this spell. Later - when you reach spell limit - game will not show to you that your character still doesn't know this spell. E.g. there is together (and in combining with players who doesn't know all spells ahead) - it is issue. I'm mean - it is UI issue. But for having more good UI feedback - it is easier break rules. Or go with high INT.
There's a lot that could be rebalanced, but I have precious little time. So I pick things that appeal to me when I find time.
There is not revelation for other users: surprisingly we usually also has some "real life" stuff, like childs, work and lot of other things. I'm asked about suggestion/way/seeing sense. Probably BG so broken that nothing can help. I'm don't know.
So i'm mostly ask suggestion. Own way i'm find anyway. If my way will be good for others - than... may be others can join. May be no. I'm usually expect NO answer just because mentioned by you things what can't be avoided.
I'm feel that BG EET at least BG1 part can be greatly tuned to feel "scary". By scary i'm mean, that, normally you should not walk freely over enemies. You of course can complain about other my mods, but there is truly not mods issue: just as you level up to 5-7 levels in "vanilla" your no more hit into challenge. SCS fix it partially by good tactical response (Xvar Village? Whoa! Far more of Xvarts...) - but, there is change a nothing in terms of tactical/party preferences or even doesn't force you spells.
So... may be question - do this really exist peoples who want to rebalance this world to more challengeable and more logical version or not... (surely you (subtledoctor) can't answer for all of peoples, i'm understand)).
You see - as and in previous year - my experience ended with that i'm started modding, i'm even (this time) provide some coded addition/proposals, and... i'm stop playing! So, understand me correctly: i'm can't go in this way alone - better just pick games which already do similar things (likely PoE or Tyranny has MUCH better balance). But... why i'm bother about BG? BG has UNIQUE magic! While other games provdes magic as some damage and debuffs and eventually buffs - BG has interesting things, like continguences, truly buffs, lack of good debuffs... but in general - BG has very interesting magic. There is almost impossible to survive without magic in BG world, but... by poor implementation, you easily can do it without (i mean, without SCS, without some other things). But... actually lot of mods has really nothing about melee balancing. Your mod looks best not only because it is provide unique possiblities, but also with them it provides sense of uniquess. As result - we love it.
My quick "roadmap" is probably at least year of work. So, i'm adequately understand about absense of immediate reaction. I'm basically pre-ask - do generally if anyone interesting in this. If no-one interested, it is simplier doesn't bother with this stuff.
Sorry about again post. Just understand me correctly. With mods or without whenever i'm able to reach BG - i'm already on "level cap" with or without mods. I'm never overhunt ankhegs. There is happens just beacause it is has some logic to clear some wilderness and *boring* areas before proceed into. Also, now we have new "game standard" - EET - it is doesn't prevent you in levels at all. So, you should collect all XP before siege on dragonspear, then collect XP of SoD, and only then appear in Irenicus Dungeon. Surely you will be more higher level.
Good thing about BG2 that you will not be able cast everything everywhere. On other side after IR/SR - you not need in Friends spell anyway. There is no more exist this spell.
Oh. So, what i'm say: there is already done "new game" with "uninterruptible story" (EET). But this game provide best of bad things without be heavily modded. So...
I'm sure that implementing really leveled spawn is not a problem. Surely problem only is lacking of real resources.
But - question is what is goal? With SoB or without SoB - game is freakingly easy/broken in term of rules. As well as breakers added by IR (as i'm mentioned above about shield THAC0 penalty).
Also game beatable in solo... I'm sure if apply 2x or 3x HP buff - soloers will cry. And... they should. I'm personally DISLIKE big parties. 2-3 persons it is my comfort. 4-5 it is my end of my comfort but, i'm can deal with them. 6 - out of comfort. But any way 4-6 - most of time means having "second/third line" which deal ranged damage. But! Game can't be evenly balanced against 1-3x meleers AND/OR (AND/OR !!!) 1-3x ranged damagers. So, basically, everyone when you pick ranged damage character - you kick one of hardiness step away. Plus focusing fire = win everytime everywhere.
Does things better in other games? Not so much actually. Ranged damage is king everywhere, and it is should: you can without spent time about reposition attack almost anyone. This thing i'm name "ranged advantage".
Does fighters should be best in melee? Definitely not. Actually i'm personally thing they SHOULD BE worsest. Do you play in pillars? Do you tried use their fighters as tanks? Do you tried use mages as tanks? I'm found that mages with mediocre stats at least 2x better than any fighter can be. And there is sensible. And, this is how things should be. Tricks available to mages - unavailable to others. Dead end. E.g. they poor fighters in dealing damage, but they are traditionally - greatest tanks. Etc.
There is still about balancing! At this moment, I'm only can complain current (SR) magic system in absense of reliable debuffs. Curses from diviners are correct: provide roll bonus / penalties for enemies / etc. But really - we no have spells which can debuff DR, except Know Opponent. And with understanding that Know Opponent is cast 1 round - and provide only 10% to DR and doesn't work on constructs... who fucking should be affected by this spell? Ravager? I'm sure 10% of DR there is thing when you should not be bother at this level. Good spell - is 20% AoE debuff if it is cast for full round and exposing vulnerables for full party, not just for self. Otherwise with SoB or in Vanilla - senseless spell. There is exist only one case - is debuff almost one type of enemy in BG2 who normally immune to physics, but can be maden not immune. But... again - normally, you should have elemental weapons to deal with. And you gain them even in BG1. So...
Ah. So, things is complex. I'm just usually to boried until reach BG in BG1 that i'm almost never continue. This happens again. So, for me choice: start to try modding in hope that i'm making world better, or stop and forget about this game. Ugh!
Undeads should be very strong. Do you remember this zombies on map near Ulgoth? They are weak. There is very connected to Skeletons. In my taste skeletons should be more stronger against piercing/missiles (how you plan kill creature, when you attack only scratch it?). Cleaving - valid technique - no head, no arm - no threat. So slashing should be a way against skeletons. Crushing - also should be a good way, because you can literally crush bones. Lot of peoples complain that crushing is better than other weapons in BG2 because... because of cheesy weapons + lot of undeads. But... I'm absolutely feel wrong when we able kill skeletons only by "gaze" them by arrows and etc. Even first-level sceleton in my taste should be fearable creature. Hey! On you go magically animated bones! Best chance that you can do - is dissect it by cleaving or crush it to dust. Almost same is zombies - you can thrust them with (piercing) infinitely, but they will almost immune to this. Bullets (blunt)? And what? Zombies hould be beatable again by same techniques - cleaving or crushing to dust. There is just by their unnatural nature.
Natural creatures (if not have armor) - are vulnerable to any physical damage.
To reach similarites - game engine has no many possibilities... So, it is ok to end with raising creature HP. No matter if creature has 90 or 99 missile HP - every strike will give 1 damage (so 8HP skeleton... still will be beaten down pretty easily by party). But! What if we buff creature HP? Skeleton immue to Cold? And has normal or near-to immunity to arrows? Ha! They has 0DR against fire. Buffed HP? Let give them -25 or even -50 vulnerable against fire. There is exist (at least in modded game, AC_QUEST alonge gives you excellent fire scimitar). So... there is exist interesting possibilities.
Ogre? Why ogres are so weak? First, they should wear hide (or similar) armor. Second, they absolutely can has 5-15 natural DR against physical damage. Ogres - are powerful enemies! Orges should act as first ogre which you meet in game - which can you kill in 1 strike - and better strategy - kill it with ranged weapons, while one of acrobat kite it. It is absolutely legal tactics. More over - there is normal tactics. I mean... you have party, and you should take party and ranged advantage. Surely you can go with 2-6 chars in melee onto ogre - but what you get in result? You get at first level that half of party is died and you need go to priest temple to ressurect. I'm personally play with internal rule with any games to play without death/ressurects.
And... anyway "ranged advantage" used everywhere. It is better to use this ranged advantage than use paralyze wand. BTW: I'm doesn't use wands at all. Every enemy in heavily magic party can be kited and striked by "own" missiles. (Or even something simplier - no matter.) I mean, that, i'm doesn't never use this "cheese" items. I'm played with different partys, first real foe - is Albert who turn to daemon - and... it is hard. But, there is exist lot of techniques to kill it down, especially if you play in party. Soloer? I'm doesn't think that game designed to be soloed. E.g. it is possible, but only by existence of this over cheesy items. In all other terms - you prefer party. Better - full party. My party of 5x is big. But, it is multi! It is advanced very slowly at start. But once this party hit in perfect levels (around 5-7) - this party better than anything you can has. Etc...
Anyway. Again. I'm personally back to BG why? I'm played in PoE enough, in PoE i'm pick also custom party, basically same can do with in-game chars. But... PoE in some terms is very annoying. I'm like PoE's engagement mechanics, but because i'm long time ago doesn't play with pure fighters - it is doesn't matters. And even in PoE - ANYWAY you will stick with magic-based damage, e.g. high-level abilities of Paladin - makes Paladin one of greatest chars. Chanter - same - having 30 pt damage shield over everything each 6-8 sec - is excellent!. So only add to this few mages and priest - and your party no-one can beat. Really. I'm only like PoE because it is allow some really interesting, unbalanced builds, - but generally there is all is meh. Things becomes similar like to BG in the end.
But, again, magic in BG - is greatest over any game which has been done after BG (IWD probably also good.)
So...
I'm has experience in "balancing" of DAO (dragon age). And fixing issues of some DAO mods. But... hey.
Just look at this on another side:
We can pick BG EET + MODS as good base.
We can put own rules on top of that. (Damage rolls, creature qualities, etc)
And we can fix anything what wrong. (Wrong quests, or anything)
But... there is require lot of patience.
I'm doesn't know why i'm stick in this thread. At one time i'm disband everything of this, and eventually read this thread updates. But then... i'm read about new @subtledoctor updates... and eventually want to try. And try. BWS btw is new thing. In previous year i'm install everything by hands. I'm prefer hands or normal mod manager. BWS is stupid. And bad. But, i'm no have time to read tons of EET docs. And generally - unless we doesn't create better EET installing tool - why we should complain about it? Yes, it is has pure disadvantages - it behave very strange especially when it is sleeps long time. But overally it completely work, and frees my mind from lot of things.
And I'm strongly against things what do TomeAndBlood to bonuses around stats (pure nerf to spell slots).
Eh, I always use automatic learning anyway. Spell learning failure is silly in a game like this.
But the thrill of uncertainity when right clicking coveted spell scroll during no reload run...
I guess i am getting a little masochistic, but not getting everything you want is great part of Item Randomizer. Plus i welcome anything that makes wizards a little bit weaker.
@Luke93 Just imagine your PC has 100HP and wear PLAT01: PLAT01 (equal to PLAT07) gives you additional 27% of physical resistances. This effectively means like you have 127HP against physical attacks (for simplifying we skipping rounding issues). And now you face to foe with 100HP who wear PLAT07. What this means if PLAT07 is unmodified? This means that if foe do only physical attacks at same proficiency level - you got free 27HP buff, and truly overshine this creature. And i'm sure - there is not intended.
Yeah, now I see what you meant with "broken". As @subtledoctor said, there is probably no right answer in this specific case.........
@subtledoctor Hey there, I just noticed in IWDEE (the current beta) with this mod I'm not getting any extra APR for warrior classes at level 7 and 13. Is that intended or did I screw up my mod installation? Thank you for your time. Been trying to find the answer here by searching but oh boy, it nets me almost 20 pages with the right keywords.
I'm not getting any extra APR for warrior classes at level 7 and 13. Is that intended
Yes, intended. You get .5 extra APR for each extra proficiency (2 stars, 3 stars, and 4 stars) and a final .5 bonus at 15th level. Since you start out with only 1 star, this means fighters will have: 3/2 APR at level 3 (specialization) 2 APR at level 6 (mastery) 5/2 APR at level 9 (high mastery) 3 APR at level 15
So anything but a trueclass fighter/kensai is stuck at 2APR until level 15 as opposed to level 13 (not really a small XP difference for rangers, paladins and multi-classes). And only trueclass/kensai can ever get 3APR. 4APR with dualwield ++.
Yikes. Guess I'm skipping this one and will keep just the fighting style rebalance and weapon categories merge on. And hey, no reason to roll extra ~4 on stat screen for 14 INT fighters.
So anything but a trueclass fighter/kensai is stuck at 2APR until level 15 as opposed to level 13 (not really a small XP difference for rangers, paladins and multi-classes). And only trueclass/kensai can ever get 3APR. 4APR with dualwield ++.
Yikes.
EDIT - not sure what you mean about trueclass/kensai. Unless there's a bug I'm not aware of, all fighters can reach high mastery and 3 APR. (And in fact so can some rangers now - stalkers can reach high mastery with short swords and daggers.)
It is in line with vanilla, somewhat. I really do prefer vanilla to two more levels needed for certain classes for that APR. Not sure why going to level 15 seems fairer than keeping the last APR bonus at 13. But that's just me. Obviously this part of the mod makes pure clerics/thieves/multis etc. better because they can semi-legally (with APR on spec) get an extra 1/2 APR. I prefer not to play with pure clerics or multis without fighter in them, so that doesn't appeal to me personally.
Trueclass fighters and Kensai can attain Mastery (+++) at 6th level, and High Mastery (++++) at 9th level, in any weapons they focus on. Other kitted fighters plus barbarians, paladins, and rangers can attain Mastery (+++) at 6th level. Rogues, clerics and druids, as well as mage/thieves, cleric/thieves and cleric/mages, can attain Specialization (++) with any weapons they can normally use. Multiclass fighter/mages can attain Mastery (+++) in any weapon but the only available styles are Single-Weapon and Two-Handed Weapon. Fighter/clerics and Fighter/thieves can attain Mastery (+++) in any weapon they can use.
Beyond that, certain kits will be able to reach 1 point higher or lower in certain weapons (e.g. Archers can reach (++++) with missile weapons, and only (++) with melee weapons; Assassins can reach (+++) with daggers; etc.).
Which makes me think only kensai and pure fighter can get ++++. Berserker and Wizard Slayer fall short going by readme, I consider those two fighters too. That stalker example and others would be cool to appear in game or in readme at least (etc. for that kind of thing is not enough for my taste).
For me the dealbreaker is that multi-class fighter needs a whopping million more experience points to get that last 1/2 APR compared to vanilla. That's the yikes for me. Paladin needs an extra half a million.
Comments
And this can potentially happens with any creature which wear armor with any new/old mod.
Your Battle Horror remains broken in terms of rules: plate mail should give 27% DR but it is not.
Battle horrors are not broken in my game because they are correctly immune to missile weapons (since PLAT07 is not modified by YARAS -> PLAT07 must be considered as a special plate mail).
Things are different with the Ravager though -> If the Enkidu armor is droppable and modified by YARAS, then something must be done in order to re-set the correct damage resistances to it...
Another thing is pure consistency - why creature who wear droppable armors should be stronger than creatures who wear undroppable armors?
So, i'm doesn't understand your complaining. I'm argue just to be consistent and fair in all changes without providing gaps. Especially when one of possible fix actually exist.
-please keep your current policy, of no ridiculously stacking resistances to insane ammouts. I mean one +5% bonus stacking with your armor should be fine, several 10%-15% is most definitly not.
- I can confirm that SoB can be safely installed after SCS, and I definitly recommend it as it saves a lot of time when updating SoB
- please proceed with the considered nerf or ranged weapons. I would start by removing the nonsential bonus to APR from bows (and honestly probably from thrown weapons too). Plus reverse the change made by IR and set min STR for long and composite bows to 15 and 17 respectively.
- I can´t check right now - is the CHA still having no effect when in range of 11-14 ? Because i remember that charisma was either 15+ or 10. Spreading it more would help to fill the blank space.
- What about redrawing the damage dice on weapons ? :P
- I'm agreed that infinite stacking should not happens. But i'm doesn't see nothing wrong if armor use "increment" modifier type instead of "set". This effectively should allow stacking with some items which probably even non exist in game (yet).
- Creature design and equipment: do anyone realize that IR's Revisited Shield Bonuses makes pesky 1-level skeletons in BG1 even more worse: originally they has 19THAC0 and 8HP (so you need 1 or 2 hits to kill them). After revisited shield bonuses they has 20 THAC0 by medium shield penalty. In my taste of RNG - 20 rolls far more rarely than 19. I'm just mean: they had been helpless especially for 5-8 level party - but now they becomes even more helpless. Bonus in AC from shield can't balance loss in THAC0 in their case: their lifetime in combat is so short that it is better for them has better chance to hit in you than having more AC (which doesn't matter with party who wear EE equipment). There is something what i'm name like loss in creature quality. And creature design: 90 DR against missiles + 8HP doesn't allow feel this like they has 90 DR against missiles: 2-3 bowmans kill them just with normals bows. I mean you probably even will not try use magic or weapon with best damage types against them. I'm say that this is bad design. Surely there is big issue here that there is no proper creature leveling. I'm played with "bgeespawn" but it is only adds number of them, but not raise creature quality. As result - Rift Hammer becomes excellent weapon (with their AoE proc) against trash mobs. I'm hate situation when mobs can be named as "trash".
- Bows: As i'm wrote before - there is exist pure inconsistency with IR+SoB components installed together. SoB doesn't lower shortbow APR to 1.5, but IR do. SoB adds additional bonus damage to longbows and IR do and they finally stacks (so longbows do +3 bonus damage). This thing should be fixed. Personally i'm like use longbow below 15STR, but think that +1 bonus damage is max that they should provide (in order if shortbows will have 2APR). If all of them will has 1.5 APR... then doesn't know. Technically - any weapon with bigger base APR overshine slower weapons, but if you can get enough pips - then "slower" weapons can pick own place. Also i'm doesn't like non-integer APR's: In one round char do one number of attacks, in next do other. Especially with plain 1.5APR is becomes very strange: first round (again, as i'm feel) you will get 2 APR, and only in next 1 APR. This makes that difference betwen 1.5 and 2 is neglible. Neglible because party can (and should) focus fire -> 3 bowmans with 2 APR do 6 attacks in round -> target died or "perma-interrupted". I'm doesn't speak in terms of mid/high-level foes - larget HP pools gives chance them to act. Personally for self i'm think that will try redesign all weapons: Just now i'm just not see place for bastard swords, they are lost somewhere between other blades. Generally i'm thinking about "standardize" "normal" weapons vs eastern weapons. E.g.
E.g. something similar:
Dagger and Ninjato should play same role (and have same base damage, let's say 1d4 piercing only).
Short Sword and Wakizashi should play same role (and have same base damage, let's say 1d6 and slashing/piercing, engine should allow do 2 types of damage).
Katana and Bastard Sword relatively rare, but can play about same role - 1d10 (slash/pierce).
Long Sword - uniquely placed 1d8, slashing/piercing. There is no exist common sword terminology. Bastard sword actually smaller than long sword in one terms, and not in other terms. Normally long sword is two-handed, but not in our game. Also really long one-handed swords has been used by barbarian knights. Light, well-balanced blades from ages, supposed to slash from horse. But can be used and in on-ground-battle. I'm personally feel that long sword - is another.
Scimitar - uniquely placed 1d8 or 1d9, slashing only. There is purely knight weapon supposed to dissect heads when you ride on horse. It is so curved that there is no place to saying about thrusting (while katanas actually outperform any medieval 1.5 hand sword in slashing and in thrusting armors).
Any two handed weapons should roll 2d or even 3d.
E.g.
Greatswords should be 2d6
Halberd - i'm never use them. I'm think that halberds are not popular weapon, but in fact it is one of safest and universalest weapon. Slash/Pierce. Pollaxes can go with Crush/Pierce. So at least 2d6.
Spear - traditionally Piercing
Quaterstaff - due to simple design something like 2d3, crushing.
War Hammer - should do Crush/Pierce, because they suppose to thrusting much more than other weapons (well, better thrusters - is halbers).
Morning Star - Crush/Pierce, but surely it is more crushing weapon.
Mace - in game probably just crushing weapons. But, some of them can be crush/pierce. Basically morning stars is kind of mace.
Flail - crush. may be some of them crush/pierce. due to their design - one-handed flails (unlike two-handed) is more fiction weapons (even if some of them exist). Any simple club much better than flail because club is reliable, while with flail you can graze self in best case, or kill self in worst.
Club - truly crush. Uniques can go with crush/pierce (spiked clubs are easy to do).
Battle axes - mostly of them should do slashing-only damage. May be let for some uniques to do piercing.
Generally - weapons which do only one damage type should perform bit better than universal weapons.
But to make this design work... creatures need to be overhauled.
- Klatu's standardized creature resistances/immunities this days are deprecated.
Time to create new mods.
You land 1-2 sleeps on them - they are sleep, so now you can easily kill it one-by one.
Now, one of your front-mans kick poor creature with Rift Hammer and it is procs what causes that creatures around wakened up and attack you! Ahahaha!
If i'm want to do some total conversion/overhaul mod -> i'm should play with my changes step by step. Any suggestions how to deal with this in better to avoid some early possible mistakes?
First my concerns is:
1. Determine which creatures can appear in area (theoretically can be easily extracted from area-related scripts and/or something?). Surely not everything, but at least possible spawns/creatures which can appear.
2. What's is easiest way to determine "creature template"? As i'm understand after creature is spawned it is no more linked to .CRE file -> but it is important to understand .CRE file. Creature names often not unique. As idea, i'm can alter creature names and easily include resource name in it. Surely in hope, that logic from this is not be broken somehow. Who know... Or it is possible with some debug options?
3. Overhaul and stick weapon system. I mean "standardize" weapon dice rolls and damage types, fix existing weapons (weapons from mods can easily be out-of-sync, has strange rolls, e.g. 3d3 instead of 1d8+2 and without any reason - it is okay if weapon gain stronger rolls if weapon unique, but...).
4. Fix item descriptions. This text patching techniques basically turns me to idea to try remove everything and rebuild them from scratch from item properties / effects. Surely unique descriptions should remain, so exclusions.
5. Creatures... there is not clear choice. I'm basically see two ways: stay fair and mod spawning logic or buff them. More interesting should be hybrid solution. Nothing prevent to us to have really leveled spawn for example.
6. I'm ok (think that it is preffered) with go with custom .net based tooling: writing backup weidu-entries should not be really too hard, but patching in terms of READ/WRITE bytes is stupid. Libraries which used by SCS solves problem only partially and they are slow. Slow. And generally, tooling should be flexible to easily find something. There is lot of resources. Writing each time or run each time weidu script just to find something in resources is counter effective at first place. Near Infinity also solves problems only partially. So...
Probably too many work to even bothering about start. Don't know. Will glad heard any thoughts.
And I'm strongly against things what do TomeAndBlood to bonuses around stats (pure nerf to spell slots).
First thing, that, divine casters has much more slots than mages. And this was mistaken from start (or not). They probably should has 1-2 more slots, but but not twice more than mages. Otherwise, especially with F&P - they outperform mages in any senses in any level, except some cases. Yep, diviners should spare their slots for healing, especially if you (that should be fair) don't use "rest until heal". But in terms of combat mechanics - no. Meh.
And Tome And Blood only do pure nerf! Meh twice! Mages already one of strongest classes, but... who balance over that? Over Edwin who has +2 spells by amulet? Or that? Blah. No. It was and remains balanced over only Edwin and abyss only. I'm actually doesn't has any idea how new player should play with pure mage with this helpful "balancers". No, no and no. Kick this mod out and forget. It do only stupid things, without real goodies which change game.
Exactly, this trick when kits like bladesigner gives you +1 spell slot (because you "specialist" but you not), actually makes game only better. Mages at start are meh. So, having additional slots is good. As final value - 5 vs 6 slots/per level - do this real change at final levels? This can make difference if you play solo... but not in party. I'm argue that wizards, should have more spell slots. Otherwise users are forced to rest before fight. Even this effect was unintended - i'm strongly vote for it. From my feel - as much as you more becomes powerful - as less spells you need to use. So... doesn't seen problem here at all.
I'm also should say, that because you can cast only one spell / round -> there is no matter how many you have spell slots. Really. For "gishes" - it is no matter absolutely. This is i'm again say, that even if having +1 spell/level is was unintended -> if it was ever fixed again, i'm will personally fix it back for self. You start as mage and *should* cast mage armor and something also at least once per day.
As for SoB's INT and bonus spells, and TomeAndBlood: both work absolutely differently. In first place i'm should not... oh TomeAndBlood is not available in EET (at least in BWS). So... Ashes to ashes. Great mod with some setup with infinity stupidies. Cantrips - are stupid. Innate gives you infinite power, while 1-level cantrips makes you less powerful, than should. Spell tweaks again - stupid: tossing levels for 1-st level spells i'm think is unacceptable: scalable 1-st level armor should remain in own place (it is hard to force own char use it at all even with SR buff), shield - is not buff (and buff of course which usable), but in first place is protection from magic missile, especially from contingencies of magic missiles in SCS. Well, may be ToB rules is okay for BG2 - but generally - i'm doesn't find any of ToB changes are useful or interesting (personally - again, i'm ok that others find is good). But again: i'm never NEVER play with specialist mages: generalist are flexible. I'm always use generalist and doesn't see sense to play with specialist. Specialists are only freakingly worse options of generalists. Loosing schools? It is joke. Let's assume that we doesn't know which spells we can gain later = generalist always win. Also, i'm doesn't agree with "speciality" on this own. E.g. ToB makes specialists more interesting, but... i'm doesn't found that it is really has sense/interest in term of gameplay (nothing changes globally).
F&P for example changes diviners globally.
Ah, back to SoB's INT... Oh, no, not to INT. STO+MRO+everything still doesn't remove probability based mechanics. I'm absolutely agreed that pure MR should be banned at all, even from buffs from quests. There is just no have sense. I'm absolutely ok with replacing it with DR instead... Basically because i'm never understand saving throws itself. And still not understand: you/foe will be affected *randomly* by save throw. So, basically you should choose spells which is not negated completely by saving throw. But... this is basically reduce spell usage. And, finally - this is how to work. You only choose spells without saves allowed OR which allow at least half damage on save. Meh again.
Well, back to INT: IR no more allow raise INT. Red Potion allow do it twice (in BG1 and in BG2). So... actually, really - choice of setup easy spell learning with no spell limit is much more better option than before. Or, you should "roll" at least 17 int. This is generally wrong. I mean, not only rules of what mage and int can do, but also UI, which show you if you already know spell (and it is doesn't show you this thing if you reach max number of know spells). So... i'm like SoB's INT, i like IR changes to bottles. But, in this case i'm can only suggest to use easy spell learning without restrictions. In my case you can see: i'm doesn't use bottles, why i'm should because i'm caster? No, i'm playing without bottles. So... IR changes actually is like follow rules of someone who never use this potions of mind/genius to learn spells before. Bah. Great stupidity. Just give them bigger price and let peoples play like they want without pure hacks (Easy Spell Learning without limits).
... so, i hope we can turn game which can be interesting in all aspects. I'm for, example, like story aspect even without stupid banters. I'm hate banters. I'm HATE banters. This is why i'm like play in custom party.
But, combat mechanics at least of BG1-era requires lot of rebalancing to remain interesting. Once you reach in BG in game - no-one can give you real threat expect some of story chars. Bah!
This is why i'm want to apply changes...
a) nerfed table for everyone
b) provide some bonuses from stats which without reaching 25 can't even cover previous
c) this looks like supposed to be work in pure classes, but on multi-classes it is ends with pure loss of spell slots (exactly by -1) You written lot of mods which you doesn't recommend in this days.
So i'm mostly ask suggestion. Own way i'm find anyway. If my way will be good for others - than... may be others can join. May be no. I'm usually expect NO answer just because mentioned by you things what can't be avoided.
I'm feel that BG EET at least BG1 part can be greatly tuned to feel "scary". By scary i'm mean, that, normally you should not walk freely over enemies. You of course can complain about other my mods, but there is truly not mods issue: just as you level up to 5-7 levels in "vanilla" your no more hit into challenge. SCS fix it partially by good tactical response (Xvar Village? Whoa! Far more of Xvarts...) - but, there is change a nothing in terms of tactical/party preferences or even doesn't force you spells.
So... may be question - do this really exist peoples who want to rebalance this world to more challengeable and more logical version or not... (surely you (subtledoctor) can't answer for all of peoples, i'm understand)).
You see - as and in previous year - my experience ended with that i'm started modding, i'm even (this time) provide some coded addition/proposals, and... i'm stop playing! So, understand me correctly: i'm can't go in this way alone - better just pick games which already do similar things (likely PoE or Tyranny has MUCH better balance). But... why i'm bother about BG? BG has UNIQUE magic! While other games provdes magic as some damage and debuffs and eventually buffs - BG has interesting things, like continguences, truly buffs, lack of good debuffs... but in general - BG has very interesting magic. There is almost impossible to survive without magic in BG world, but... by poor implementation, you easily can do it without (i mean, without SCS, without some other things). But... actually lot of mods has really nothing about melee balancing. Your mod looks best not only because it is provide unique possiblities, but also with them it provides sense of uniquess. As result - we love it.
My quick "roadmap" is probably at least year of work. So, i'm adequately understand about absense of immediate reaction. I'm basically pre-ask - do generally if anyone interesting in this. If no-one interested, it is simplier doesn't bother with this stuff.
Good thing about BG2 that you will not be able cast everything everywhere. On other side after IR/SR - you not need in Friends spell anyway. There is no more exist this spell.
Oh. So, what i'm say: there is already done "new game" with "uninterruptible story" (EET). But this game provide best of bad things without be heavily modded. So...
I'm sure that implementing really leveled spawn is not a problem. Surely problem only is lacking of real resources.
But - question is what is goal? With SoB or without SoB - game is freakingly easy/broken in term of rules. As well as breakers added by IR (as i'm mentioned above about shield THAC0 penalty).
Also game beatable in solo... I'm sure if apply 2x or 3x HP buff - soloers will cry. And... they should. I'm personally DISLIKE big parties. 2-3 persons it is my comfort. 4-5 it is my end of my comfort but, i'm can deal with them. 6 - out of comfort. But any way 4-6 - most of time means having "second/third line" which deal ranged damage. But! Game can't be evenly balanced against 1-3x meleers AND/OR (AND/OR !!!) 1-3x ranged damagers. So, basically, everyone when you pick ranged damage character - you kick one of hardiness step away. Plus focusing fire = win everytime everywhere.
Does things better in other games? Not so much actually. Ranged damage is king everywhere, and it is should: you can without spent time about reposition attack almost anyone. This thing i'm name "ranged advantage".
Does fighters should be best in melee? Definitely not. Actually i'm personally thing they SHOULD BE worsest. Do you play in pillars? Do you tried use their fighters as tanks? Do you tried use mages as tanks? I'm found that mages with mediocre stats at least 2x better than any fighter can be. And there is sensible. And, this is how things should be. Tricks available to mages - unavailable to others. Dead end. E.g. they poor fighters in dealing damage, but they are traditionally - greatest tanks. Etc.
There is still about balancing! At this moment, I'm only can complain current (SR) magic system in absense of reliable debuffs. Curses from diviners are correct: provide roll bonus / penalties for enemies / etc. But really - we no have spells which can debuff DR, except Know Opponent. And with understanding that Know Opponent is cast 1 round - and provide only 10% to DR and doesn't work on constructs... who fucking should be affected by this spell? Ravager? I'm sure 10% of DR there is thing when you should not be bother at this level. Good spell - is 20% AoE debuff if it is cast for full round and exposing vulnerables for full party, not just for self. Otherwise with SoB or in Vanilla - senseless spell. There is exist only one case - is debuff almost one type of enemy in BG2 who normally immune to physics, but can be maden not immune. But... again - normally, you should have elemental weapons to deal with. And you gain them even in BG1. So...
Ah. So, things is complex. I'm just usually to boried until reach BG in BG1 that i'm almost never continue. This happens again. So, for me choice: start to try modding in hope that i'm making world better, or stop and forget about this game. Ugh!
Undeads should be very strong. Do you remember this zombies on map near Ulgoth? They are weak. There is very connected to Skeletons. In my taste skeletons should be more stronger against piercing/missiles (how you plan kill creature, when you attack only scratch it?). Cleaving - valid technique - no head, no arm - no threat. So slashing should be a way against skeletons. Crushing - also should be a good way, because you can literally crush bones. Lot of peoples complain that crushing is better than other weapons in BG2 because... because of cheesy weapons + lot of undeads. But... I'm absolutely feel wrong when we able kill skeletons only by "gaze" them by arrows and etc. Even first-level sceleton in my taste should be fearable creature. Hey! On you go magically animated bones! Best chance that you can do - is dissect it by cleaving or crush it to dust. Almost same is zombies - you can thrust them with (piercing) infinitely, but they will almost immune to this. Bullets (blunt)? And what? Zombies hould be beatable again by same techniques - cleaving or crushing to dust. There is just by their unnatural nature.
Natural creatures (if not have armor) - are vulnerable to any physical damage.
To reach similarites - game engine has no many possibilities... So, it is ok to end with raising creature HP. No matter if creature has 90 or 99 missile HP - every strike will give 1 damage (so 8HP skeleton... still will be beaten down pretty easily by party). But! What if we buff creature HP? Skeleton immue to Cold? And has normal or near-to immunity to arrows? Ha! They has 0DR against fire. Buffed HP? Let give them -25 or even -50 vulnerable against fire. There is exist (at least in modded game, AC_QUEST alonge gives you excellent fire scimitar). So... there is exist interesting possibilities.
Ogre? Why ogres are so weak? First, they should wear hide (or similar) armor. Second, they absolutely can has 5-15 natural DR against physical damage. Ogres - are powerful enemies! Orges should act as first ogre which you meet in game - which can you kill in 1 strike - and better strategy - kill it with ranged weapons, while one of acrobat kite it. It is absolutely legal tactics. More over - there is normal tactics. I mean... you have party, and you should take party and ranged advantage. Surely you can go with 2-6 chars in melee onto ogre - but what you get in result? You get at first level that half of party is died and you need go to priest temple to ressurect. I'm personally play with internal rule with any games to play without death/ressurects.
And... anyway "ranged advantage" used everywhere. It is better to use this ranged advantage than use paralyze wand. BTW: I'm doesn't use wands at all. Every enemy in heavily magic party can be kited and striked by "own" missiles. (Or even something simplier - no matter.) I mean, that, i'm doesn't never use this "cheese" items. I'm played with different partys, first real foe - is Albert who turn to daemon - and... it is hard. But, there is exist lot of techniques to kill it down, especially if you play in party. Soloer? I'm doesn't think that game designed to be soloed. E.g. it is possible, but only by existence of this over cheesy items. In all other terms - you prefer party. Better - full party. My party of 5x is big. But, it is multi! It is advanced very slowly at start. But once this party hit in perfect levels (around 5-7) - this party better than anything you can has. Etc...
Anyway. Again. I'm personally back to BG why? I'm played in PoE enough, in PoE i'm pick also custom party, basically same can do with in-game chars. But... PoE in some terms is very annoying. I'm like PoE's engagement mechanics, but because i'm long time ago doesn't play with pure fighters - it is doesn't matters. And even in PoE - ANYWAY you will stick with magic-based damage, e.g. high-level abilities of Paladin - makes Paladin one of greatest chars. Chanter - same - having 30 pt damage shield over everything each 6-8 sec - is excellent!. So only add to this few mages and priest - and your party no-one can beat. Really. I'm only like PoE because it is allow some really interesting, unbalanced builds, - but generally there is all is meh. Things becomes similar like to BG in the end.
But, again, magic in BG - is greatest over any game which has been done after BG (IWD probably also good.)
So...
I'm has experience in "balancing" of DAO (dragon age). And fixing issues of some DAO mods. But... hey.
Just look at this on another side:
We can pick BG EET + MODS as good base.
We can put own rules on top of that. (Damage rolls, creature qualities, etc)
And we can fix anything what wrong. (Wrong quests, or anything)
But... there is require lot of patience.
I'm doesn't know why i'm stick in this thread. At one time i'm disband everything of this, and eventually read this thread updates. But then... i'm read about new @subtledoctor updates... and eventually want to try. And try. BWS btw is new thing. In previous year i'm install everything by hands. I'm prefer hands or normal mod manager. BWS is stupid. And bad. But, i'm no have time to read tons of EET docs. And generally - unless we doesn't create better EET installing tool - why we should complain about it? Yes, it is has pure disadvantages - it behave very strange especially when it is sleeps long time. But overally it completely work, and frees my mind from lot of things.
I guess i am getting a little masochistic, but not getting everything you want is great part of Item Randomizer. Plus i welcome anything that makes wizards a little bit weaker.
Been trying to find the answer here by searching but oh boy, it nets me almost 20 pages with the right keywords.
And only trueclass/kensai can ever get 3APR. 4APR with dualwield ++.
Yikes. Guess I'm skipping this one and will keep just the fighting style rebalance and weapon categories merge on. And hey, no reason to roll extra ~4 on stat screen for 14 INT fighters.
Obviously this part of the mod makes pure clerics/thieves/multis etc. better because they can semi-legally (with APR on spec) get an extra 1/2 APR. I prefer not to play with pure clerics or multis without fighter in them, so that doesn't appeal to me personally.
for the EDIT Which makes me think only kensai and pure fighter can get ++++. Berserker and Wizard Slayer fall short going by readme, I consider those two fighters too. That stalker example and others would be cool to appear in game or in readme at least (etc. for that kind of thing is not enough for my taste).
I'd jump on the WPO, if it stayed at 13.