Howdy, Stranger!

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

Categories

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

[MOD] -Might and Guile- a tweak mod and kit pack for warriors and rogues.

1235779

Comments

  • BillyYankBillyYank Member Posts: 2,719
    The modern truncheon or baton is not meant to be a deadly weapon, it's specifically designed to be non-lethal. Classic clubs have heavy heads and taper to the handle. The archetype is more the shillelagh than the police baton. Also think of Aztec or Polynesian war clubs that are shaped more like cricket bats, they still put most of the weight out towards the tip. That's simply the most efficient way to crush skulls and break bones, which is something you don't want to do with a baton.

    The mace was designed to be a more durable club, cheap and easy to make, and usable by any thug you recruit into your service. They're the Saturday night specials of the medieval world. They're not really that much heavier than a shillelagh, the handles are hollow while the clubs are solid wood.

    The quarterstaff, on the other hand, is a two handed weapon, six to NINE feet long (really) that's primary attack is the thrust, not the strike. Some of the old fighting schools forego strikes completely, since it takes too long to get the staff back on center and leaves you open to a thrust.
    Stepping back for a second, I don't see why the concept of proficiencies must be tied to a single arm motion or even a single overall skill. We could just say "proficiency with light bludgeons" and it could cover skill fighting with a club, as well as a separate skill fighting with a staff.
    Quarterstaves are not light, nor are they bludgeons.

    The collection of motions that make up the standard attacks and parries when using a particular weapon is the proficiency. I know you're looking more at game balance than realism, but if you go too far, you start impacting suspension of disbelief. If you have a thug from Waterdeep who knows all there is to know about bashing peoples' heads in with a club, and you tell me that experience means he can fight effectively with a quarterstaff, I'm not going to believe you. If you tell me that same experience means he can use a mace, I'm going to buy it.



    Skatansemiticgod
  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,185
    You don't mind the vanilla game lumping morning stars with flails??

    A truncheon is designed such that it *can* be used nonlethally, but it can still be perfectly bone-breaking weapon. Plus, I question whether being skilled with a shillelagh (essentially, a shepherd's weapon) is the same as being skilled with a mace or morning star, which are heavy soldiers' weapons. Especially in the context of these games, based on the thief usability and weapons rated for backstabbing, a "thug from Waterdeep" would not use a mace. He would use a club.

    All
    BillyYank said:

    The quarterstaff, on the other hand, is a two handed weapon, six to NINE feet long (really) that's primary attack is the thrust, not the strike.

    The video you yourself posted - not to mention the animations in BG, which to some extent, is what's important here - contradict this.

    Club + mace + morning star is just too broad. Club by itself is too narrow. The question is, what to do instead?

  • ALIENALIEN Member Posts: 904

    @subtledoctor
    - bows = long bows + short bows
    - slings = slings

    I think that slings are used same as the bow: first hand is holding a weapon and second is loading ammo. How about merged long bows + short bows + slings?

  • SkatanSkatan Member, Moderator Posts: 4,582
    I think you need to decide, @subtledoctor, whether to forgo balance and focus on "realism" or the other way around. A qstaff is prolly more similar to your polearm category than a club, and I agree to pretty much everything @billyyank says, especially this: "
    The collection of motions that make up the standard attacks and parries when using a particular weapon is the proficiency. "

    Really, the way you use a weapon to score a hit, measured in THAC0, is what defines your proficiency with said weapon. And using a club and a qstaff use completely different motions to strike, thus having proficiency in one is not equal to the other. But using a mace and a club are very similar in battle. It's essentially the same weapon, one in wood and one with metal. The morninstar is essentially the same as well, just some spikes on top. Even warhammers are very similar, though since some warhammer also has a spike/hook on the opposite side of the blunt head, they may offer other tactical/movement choices in battle thus being profiecent with a mace doesn't necesseraly equal prof. in warhammers.

    So, I will very soon back out of this discussions since it's your mod and you seem set on what you want to do with it. I fully respect that and the work you pour into this, so I will not continue to argue just for sake of arguing :) but with that said, I would forgo the idea of having exactly 2 weapons in each category and instead focus on what seem realistic. You will still have different prereq's for different weapons, meaning if you ie lump in qstaffs with polearms, it doesn't mean a mage can suddenly weild a halberd.

    So, to summarize, I would go with:

    polearms: staff, spear, halberd
    Blunt: club, mace, morninstar

    One final comment, "light sword" could maybe be called "thrusting sword" or "straight edge sword". A long sword can hardly be called light since it's both longer and heavier than a bastard sword. Unless a longsword is interpreted as an arming sword, then it's prolly lighter.

    Cheers,
    //skat.


  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,185
    edited December 2015
    Skatan said:

    I think you need to decide, @subtledoctor, whether to forgo balance and focus on "realism" or the other way around.

    Well, considering this is all an outgrowth of a mod called "Scales of Balance," you can probably guess realism is not going to win here. :) This mod is not going to combine staffs and halberds anytime soon.
    Skatan said:

    Really, the way you use a weapon to score a hit, measured in THAC0, is what defines your proficiency with said weapon. And using a club and a qstaff use completely different motions to strike,

    Again, the term "proficiency" need not be a single learned arm motion. It can be a cultural thing. Shillelaghs and staffs are, basically, weapons derived from farmers' and shepherds' implements. Whereas spears are designed for hunting. And halberds are very specifically weapons of war for attacking massed infantry. So you could do proficiencies that way:
    - simple weapons
    - hunting weapons
    - soldiers' weapons
    - fencing weapons
    - eastern weapons
    - etc.

    Each "proficiency" can involve multiple skills and disciplines, that are tied to each other not by similarity of body movements but by who teaches it and how they teach it. This is essentially what the BG1 system does (except, I think, poorly).

    It's totally arbitrary no matter how you slice it up. Yes swinging a morning star and a shillelagh involve superficially similar arm movements... but then it's also similar to swinging a sword or an axe. Where do you draw the line? I think if you were trained in fighting with a shillelagh and then picked up a mornign star and had to fight for your life, you would be unused to the weight and would get destroyed.
    Skatan said:

    A long sword can hardly be called light since it's both longer and heavier than a bastard sword.

    ... is it April fool's or something?

    I'm just going by the 2E weapon descriptions. Long Sword = ~36" long, thin and straight. The PnP game has a separate "broadsword" category that is heavier and single-edged but otherwise has similar size and damage. Bastard swords are ~42" long and heavier, and have a larger hilt, and are designed to be used with 2 hands. They're only slightly smaller than a claymore. (That's why I laugh when I see people talking about dual-wielding bastard swords.)

  • inethineth Member Posts: 555
    edited December 2015
    The Might and Guile mod looks really neat - I'm planning an IWD:EE playthrough with several components from it.

    @subtledoctor, does the following mod combination & install order look alright?

    Awesome Soundsets
    - [all]

    Minor NPC Portraits
    - [all]

    Thieving Mod for IWDEE
    - [all]

    More Style for Mages
    - [all]

    House Rules
    - REVEAL CITY MAPS
    - ITEMS

    Improved Archer Kit
    - Add +4 arrows, bolts and two powerful bows to the game

    Frosty Journey Kitpack
    - Earthwalker of Grumbar

    Monastic Orders of Faerun
    - Core Revisions
    - Expanded Race Options
    - Hin Fist Monk

    BG2Tweaks
    - 90 Disable Portrait Icons Added by Equipped Items
    - 2150 Wear Multiple Protection Items -> P&P Restrictions
    - 3040 Make Bags of Holding Bottomless
    - 3080 Unlimited Ammo Stacking
    - 3090 Unlimited Gem and Jewelry Stacking
    - 3100 Unlimited Potion Stacking
    - 3110 Unlimited Scroll Stacking

    Faiths & Powers beta
    - ...

    Might & Guile
    - 120 Weapon Proficiency Overhaul
    - 160 Saving Throw Overhaul
    - 200 Revised Stat Bonuses
    - 205 Revised Hit Point Tables
    - 210 Revised XP Tables
    - 215 Revised Spellcasting Tables
    - 220 Revised Movement Bonuses ("Quickstride")
    - 205 Revised Hit Point Tables
    - 270 Revised Bard Kits
    - 322 Add the ELVEN ARCHER ranger kit
    - 500 Multiclass Kits

    Full Plate And Packing Steel
    - Between You And Harm: Armour System Rework

    Also, can you give me the Faiths & Powers beta?
    And do I need a modified version of Full Plate and Packing Steel?

    Post edited by ineth on
  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,185
    edited December 2015
    @ineth That list mod list looks fine, and the install order looks fine. I'll PM you a link to Faiths & Powers.

    You can use the EE-specific version of FPPS found here:
    https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/42465/full-plate-and-packing-steel-a-total-conversion-of-the-armour-system-updated-for-bg-ee-and-bg2-ee#latest

    Note, to make that work, you need to edit the .tp2 file so that wherever you see
    ~totlm~
    you change it to
    ~totlm iwdee~
    That's not a perfect conversion of the mod, but it's what I've been playing with and it's been fine.

    ineth
  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,185
    edited December 2015
    Btw if anyone is about to install this, I've got a new build with some changes to one component: the hit dice revisions. Its's a bit streamlined. The new version looks like this
    - Wizards: 1d4
    - Rogues: 1d5+1
    - Priests: 1d6+1
    - Warriors: 1d6+3
    - Barbarians: 1d8+3
    - At each even point of CON starting at 12, the minimum roll increases, to a max of 4 at 16; then from 18 and up each even point gets you some regeneration at increasing rates.
    - At each odd point of CON from 13 and up, you get an extra hit point.
    - You start with 5 extra HP at level 1.

    This reduces variation, without going to the extent of just having max HP every level, which is cheaty and harms the challenge and fun of a lot of the game. In this system, given the same CON score, a warrior will never roll fewer HP than a priest or rogue; and a priest or rogue will never roll fewer hp than a mage. A 16-CON fighter will get from 9-11 HP each level, vs. 3-12 in the vanilla system, or 12 per level if you use max rolls. You're still rolling... but the rolls will always seem fair given your stats.

    I think this is better than the current component, which is a bit too complicated. I'll upload it in a few hours.

    (To be clear, The new build does NOT change any proficiency groupings, it does not combine club & staff... that is still, and will likely remain, solely a matter of discussion. I did say up front it was a radical suggestion! :) )

    ineth
  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,185
    edited December 2015
  • SkatanSkatan Member, Moderator Posts: 4,582
    edited December 2015


    Well, considering this is all an outgrowth of a mod called "Scales of Balance," you can probably guess realism is not going to win here. :) This mod is not going to combine staffs and halberds anytime soon.

    I hear you and I'm stepping out of this discussion. :)


    Skatan said:

    A long sword can hardly be called light since it's both longer and heavier than a bastard sword.

    ... is it April fool's or something?


    I'm just going by the 2E weapon descriptions. Long Sword = ~36" long, thin and straight. The PnP game has a separate "broadsword" category that is heavier and single-edged but otherwise has similar size and damage. Bastard swords are ~42" long and heavier, and have a larger hilt, and are designed to be used with 2 hands. They're only slightly smaller than a claymore. (That's why I laugh when I see people talking about dual-wielding bastard swords.)
    No man it's not April's, it's called historical accuracy, hehe... or perhaps the lack thereof in the games.

    True, in DnD longswords are smaller than bastard swords, but in reality they were longer. I've had this discussion in other threads ("little things that annoy you", among others), but a proper long sword is what BG is calling twohanded swords. The long sword in BG should really be called an "arming sword" and not a long sword. A proper long sword was used with two hands and was both taller and heavier than the bastard sword which was, slightly shorter and could be used be one or two hands. But anyways, this is a game and their interpretation is weird and incorrect alot of times (like the katana doing a D10 in damage, ridiculous!).

    I won't spam your thread with videos/links, but if you're at all interrested I can PM you links to videos/sites which explain the real world swords and how they were used.

  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,185
    edited December 2015
    @Skatan that's all fair enough, I don't doubt you for a second. But the game is what it is. A mod that makes weapons more accurate in description/use/characteristics would be very interesting... but this is not that mod.

    I suppose I could go in that direction - the Item & Weapon Overhaul component would be a natural place for it. But I would need a conprehensive plan beforehand - what weapons need changing, and how? E.g. renaming all longswords to "arming swords" is definitely possible... and from a 10-minute review on the web, it seems that arming swords might actually have more in common with the short sword/drusus/spatha in form and use, than with longer and later swords like hand-and-a-half swords. Which actually supports my idea of combining arming swords and short swords into a single 'light swords' proficiency.

    If you have suggestions I'm all ears, as always. ("Arming swords?" Sure. Reduce katana damage? Sure. Etc.). But the final review of any changes will be geared toward game balance, so be prepared to be slightly annoyed by the end product. :)

    E.g. from a realism perspective, I don't think the wounds caused by these weapons are so different. A solid slash with a drusus can disembowel you just as thoroughly as one from a claymore. Also, STR differences for using 2 hands with a weapon are not implemented. So game balance question: how to represent that? Maybe:
    - dagger = 1d5 damage
    - short sword = 2d3
    - arming sword = 2d3+1
    - bastard sword = 3d3
    - 2-hand sword = 3d4

    Maybe (here's an immensely controversial suggestion) add an equipping effect for weapons that changes your STR score. A bonus for 2-handed weapons first occurred to me... but that would make things a bit crazy and unbalanced, especially given the game's mishandling of the "exceptional strength" rule.

    So how about just do the opposite: apply a -1 STR penalty to all 1-handed weapons? The idea is, Minsc with his 18/93 would do great on the carnival contest where you see how hard you can swing the hammer... but if you try it one-handed, you're handicapping yourself a bit.

    That would also have the beneficial side-effect of making 2-handed weapons a bit more competitive vs. dual-wielding.

    Post edited by subtledoctor on
  • SkatanSkatan Member, Moderator Posts: 4,582

    @Skatan that's all fair enough, I don't doubt you for a second. But the game is what it is. A mod that makes weapons more accurate in description/use/characteristics would be very interesting... but this is not that mod.

    I suppose I could go in that direction - the Item & Weapon Overhaul component would be a natural place for it. But I would need a conprehensive plan beforehand - what weapons need changing, and how? E.g. renaming all longswords to "arming swords" is definitely possible... and from a 10-minute review on the web, it seems that arming swords might actually have more in common with the short sword/drusus/spatha in form and use, than with longer and later swords like hand-and-a-half swords. Which actually supports my idea of combining arming swords and short swords into a single 'light swords' proficiency. '

    Spatha yes, gladius probably not as much. But I think I should stop giving you new ideas and let you finish on the ones you are currently working on instead :wink:


    If you have suggestions I'm all ears, as always. ("Arming swords?" Sure. Reduce katana damage? Sure. Etc.). But the final review of any changes will be geared toward game balance, so be prepared to be slightly annoyed by the end product. :)

    I don't think so. The reason I reply so much to your topics is because I think what you are doing is really impressive. If I install your mod I know what I get and ofc won't be annoyed. If I had the time, energy and knowledge I would tailor a mod suiting my own preferences, but I don't :) I'm lazy, busy and don't know jack sh*t about modding, hehe..


    E.g. from a realism perspective, I don't think the wounds caused by these weapons are so different. A solid slash with a drusus can disembowel you just as thoroughly as one from a claymore. Also, STR differences for using 2 hands with a weapon are not implemented. So game balance question: how to represent that? Maybe:
    - dagger = 1d5 damage
    - short sword = 2d3
    - arming sword = 2d3+1
    - bastard sword = 3d3
    - 2-hand sword = 3d4

    I think I've mentioned that in other posts, I think there's alot one can do by tweaking the dmg rolls, just as you suggest here. I think for example that one thing that would make 2-handed swords better would be to up their minimum damage instead of their maximum. They are clumsy and heayy, but if you actually manage to score a hit with it, it should hurt. Alot.


    Maybe (here's an immensely controversial suggestion) add an equipping effect for weapons that changes your STR score. A bonus for 2-handed weapons first occurred to me... but that would make things a bit crazy and unbalanced, especially given the game's mishandling of the "exceptional strength" rule.

    So how about just do the opposite: apply a -1 STR penalty to all 1-handed weapons? The idea is, Minsc with his 18/93 would do great on the carnival contest where you see how hard you can swing the hammer... but if you try it one-handed, you're handicapping yourself a bit.

    That would also have the beneficial side-effect of making 2-handed weapons a bit more competitive vs. dual-wielding.

    Yeah, this IS a controversial suggestion. I like how you think, way, way "outside the box" :) I don't dislike the idea in general, however, I think, though, that it might make more sense to reduce the dmg per weapon instead of applying a fixed strenght penalty. Reducing strenght will also reduce THAC0 bonuses, so not sure that is what you want?

  • BlackravenBlackraven Member Posts: 3,197
    Hey @subtledoctor, this mod looks superinteresting.
    I understand this mod is to be installed before SCS and aTweaks. Does this apply to all components? I'm particularly interested in trying the revised stat bonuses component. Would I have to uninstall SCS and aTweaks if I were to install that component only?

  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,185
    Nope, if you just want to drop that component in, it should be fine.

    The IWO should go after all other item mods. The WPO should go after all item and kit mods. The M&G kits should go after the WPO. So a lot of these components are somewhat interdependent and it's easiest to instruct people to install everything right before SCS. But some of the components are totally independent, like the stat revisions, XP tables, and spell tables.

    (In fact now that I think about it, the MRO should actually be installed *after* aTweaks. So maybe I should break that out on its own, or something. Hmmm...)

    Blackraven
  • BlackravenBlackraven Member Posts: 3,197
    Great! I'm going to play only with revised bards and stats revision for now, basically because of a multiplayer game that I want to keep playing without forcing my partner to do a near complete reinstall. I'm very tempted to try out other components though. Thanks a lot for your work.

    subtledoctorJuliusBorisov
  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,185
    edited December 2015
    quick update to v1.6:
    https://github.com/subtledoctor/Might_and_Guile/releases/tag/1.6.1

    This fixes the Beastmaster spirit summons on the pre-EE engine (in 1.5 it caused problems with SCS).

    This also makes some IWDEE-specific changes in the IWO component. First, it normalizes the prices of the various weapons for sale. E.g. the Sword of Myrloch Vale is now around 25,000gp instead of 45,000 gp, and the Love of Black Bess is now about 12,000gp instead of 7,000gp. (They're both +3 weapons!)

    Second, the Black Knight and White Bishop figurines are now usable once *per day* instead of once *ever.* (What was up with that?? Worst loot evar. But fixed now. :) )

    Third, "speed weapons" like the Long Sword of Action +4 now sets base APR higher, instead of giving bonus APR when equipped. In my testing, one of the effects of this is, if you have a speed weapon in your off-hand, it will increase your off-hand attacks instead of your main-hand attacks. I think.

    Also, the weapons Of Action +2 that normally just give a crappy +1 DEX bonus, now give an extra 1/2 APR. So they're half as good as the weapons Of Action +4.

    I also went through RNDTRES.2da and "de-randomized" the tables so that you're more likely to find loot that I (subjectively) think is good and useful. But this is NOT enabled in the mod currently. You have to go into /components/100_iwo.tpa and un-comment that line near the bottom of the file. If people like this idea, let me know and I can enable it in a future version. For now it's really only ther for my personal use. :)

    Post edited by subtledoctor on
    bob_vengsemiticgod
  • bob_vengbob_veng Member Posts: 2,252
    awesome changes.

    ...
    i have another suggestion (for an optional component) that entails more extensive changes to the items:

    merchants offer several magical weapons that are unique, have nice icons and descriptions, and are extremely expensive but don't have any special properties, or at least no useful special properties.

    maybe... you could keep them similarly pricey but give them more useful special properties of certain better random loot weapons. weapon type wouldn't have to match completely.

    and then replace this random loot (whose properties you copied to purchasable weapons) with more generic random loot that doesn't have special properties (so you might find a generic longsword +3, flail +3 etc, but not the fire flail).

    this will singlehandedly solve:
    - the big ugly discrepancy in iwd's item design: generic weapons have unique icons and fluff and those awesome, uniquely-working weapons have relatively generic sounding names, lame generic icons so that you can't tell them apart and generally no descriptions.
    - the lame merchant ware problem: now you will want to spend money on those weapons; normally, no one ever buys weapons from merchants

    it will also keep loot equally random (instead of de-randomizing like you did). just the finds will be less crucial.
    it also won't affect game balance. instead of finding the most awesome stuff, you will have to buy it, and there simply isn't enough money for all of it (likewise, you weren't able to obtain all of the best random loot without savescumming).

    this could also cover some non-random uber-weapons that lack special icons and fluff, such as longsword of action +4

    semiticgod
  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,185
    edited December 2015
    Very good idea. I agree it's weird how the weapons with lore and history have mostly generic characteristics, while weapons with generic descriptions have awesome effects. The only things that gives me pause:

    1) I don't think the awesome stuff should only be available for purchase. It's fun to find unique and useful items while exploring.

    2) RL is sucking up all my time. I can do some quick basic Weidu item patching, but more extensive/creative work will have to wait.

    Post edited by subtledoctor on
    semiticgod
  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,185
    Continuing in this vein, another idea for the IWO: the various weapons that grant extra spell memorization slots are really annoying, because the second you switch to another weapon, or cast MMM or SR Magic Stone, you lose that spell.

    Some players have appealed to Beamdog to change the engine to prevent this... but it seems to me the more obvious choice is to stop adding that effect to weapons. Or, in the case of a mod like this, to take the effect away from existing weapons. For balance reasons - it's a nice effect, we don't want to remove it from the game - it seems like the best plan is to switch the effects of certain weapons and wearable items.

    For example: early in the game you can get a belt that confers permanent Bless on the wearer, and a war hammer that give +1 1st-level divine spell. Seems to me we could have the belt give +1 spell, and give the hammer Bless-while-equipped.

    So, is anyone familiar with all of the extra-spell weapons? I recall the following:
    - war hammer of holiness +1
    - sanctified war hammer +3 (...?)
    - sanctified morning star +3 (...?)
    - mage dagger +2
    - mage dagger +4

    Any more?

    Also, what items should get the extra spells? The priest spells could be switched with certain shields, I think. What about the mage daggers?

    If people know the IWD items well and suggest switches for these effects, I can make it happen.

  • bob_vengbob_veng Member Posts: 2,252
    i'll try to make a complete list, but for clerics there might be a shortcut:
    there are already divine spells rings - i think two locations for rings of holiness which give +1 lvl1-4 slots

    they're both random, so just maybe add more of them. maybe make one a certified find and have two random ones

    as for the weapons - i think some late-game dudes actually use (and drop...) sanctified mornin gstars +3. i'd give them a plain +3 morning star. the remaining "of holiness" and sanctified weapons i would remove from the game without even bothering to replace them since they're all random anyway (and there's a clutter of weapons already).

  • semiticgodsemiticgod Member, Moderator Posts: 13,515
    The most fun weapons are the ones with on-hit effects, not the ones with passive on-self effects. Those effects are more attention-grabbing and flashy, and easier to appreciate than passive effects of any sort.

    ineth
  • inethineth Member Posts: 555
    The description of component "500: Multiclass Kits" says:
    this component introduces nine more multiclass kits to the game. These are not available at character generation, rather you must use a totem or item to adopt the kit.
    Can I find these totems somewhere in IWD:EE? Or can I CLUAConsole them in?

    Also, how does that work with level 1 abilities? For example, the "Elven Bladesinger" kit description says: "Bladesingers begin at level 1 with proficiency in Single-Weapon Style."
    Do I need to make sure that she already has this proficiency when I create the character as a plain Fighter/Mage?

  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,185
    edited December 2015
    You will find the tomes & totems for sale at Pomab's in Easthaven and at Fiddlebender's in Kuldahar.

    Bladesingers get free proficiency in SWS when you read the tome, so you can put that point somewhere else. You can read the tome at level 3 and all of the level 1 and other abilities will be retroactively added to your character.

    Btw I'm going to upload the new FnP beta at lunchtime today, in about 3-4 hours, so if you haven't started your game yet you might want to wait for that. (Turns out more of the Frosty Journey kits were bugged like Grumbar, but they're all fixed now.)

    ineth
  • inethineth Member Posts: 555
    Another thing:
    Is component "210: Revised XP Tables" compatible with BG2 Tweaks' XP cap remover? And if so, in what order do they need to be installed?

  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,185
    edited December 2015
    I don't think it matters. The cap remover overwrites 3 files, while my revised table only overwrites xplevel.2da. To be safest, if you want to have no cap and use my tables, you should install the MnG component after the BG2Tweaks component.

    (Be aware, this component drastically slows down your advancement in the late game, making it about twice as slow above level 24 or so.

    EDIT - looks like my tables only go up to level 40, which is reached with 10,800,000 XP (minimum, for thieves) up to 15,000,000 XP (for wizards). So I guess in solo play you might actually exceed that. I should extend the table to level 50, and make sure the last level has no cap. I'll do this in an update soon.

  • inethineth Member Posts: 555
    edited December 2015

    (Be aware, this component drastically slows down your advancement in the late game, making it about twice as slow above level 24 or so.

    That's ok.
    I just hate it when my Bard reaches max level way before the end of the game, and doesn't have anything new to look forward to in terms of character advancement.

    (Which happens not just in BG2+ToB games, but also in IWD+HOW games when you play at Insane difficulty with double XP, or with a smaller party.)

  • inethineth Member Posts: 555
    edited December 2015
    Two more questions:

    1) I've installed component "270: Revised Bard Kits", but chargen shows the original kit description for the Skald, rather than the one from the mod's readme:
    image
    Will it work anyway?
    Will it work anyway?

    2) Why can't my Cleric (Earthwalker of Grumbar) put points in dual-wielding? And why can he put points in Halberds? Did component "120: Weapon Proficiency Overhaul" do this? I can't find it in its description.

  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,185
    edited December 2015
    1) Well look at that. Looks like the Skald description might be pointing to the wrong strref. There's a lot of cruft in the IWDEE .tlk file - like, two or three or more kit descriptions for the Skald. When I looked it up, maybe I picked the wrong one. I'm putting this on the list of things to fix in v1.6.1 (along with the XP table, new spell tables, and fixing the animation for the Elven Archer's Faerie Fire called shot).

    2) Honestly I'm not sure about that. Did you install component 120? If so, nobody should be able to put points in halberds, they are now rolled into the spears proficiency, and halberds should actually appear as "..." in the proficiency screen. (But, I believe clerics can put points in spears.)

    As for 2-weapon fighting: the WPO treats all mod kits from other mods alike. All non-MnG cleric kits get access to the same profs. Off the top of my head, I think that rogues are limited to Dual-Wielding and Single-Weapon styles, while clerics are limited to Sword & Shield and Two-Hand styles. I have to check the code to be sure. But if that's the case, I guess it should go in the readme huh? :sweat_smile:

  • inethineth Member Posts: 555
    edited December 2015

    Did you install component 120? If so, nobody should be able to put points in halberds, they are now rolled into the spears proficiency

    Yes, that's the one I mean. I believe it was called "Spears/Halberds" in the proficiency list on the left-hand-side of the chargen screen, but "Polearms" in the description to the right.
    Just wanted to make sure that clerics wielding halberds is intended... :)

    It's a little sad that my cleric won't be able to dual-wield maces, but I'll get over it. ;)

Sign In or Register to comment.