Howdy, Stranger!

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

Categories

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!

Wizard 5th edition - possible in IE?

kotekokoteko Member Posts: 178
edited April 2016 in General Modding
Imagine a Sorcerer that can:

- scribe spells into the spellbook
- choose (or as they say, "prepare") a subset of those spells before resting

This means essentially a fusion between Wizard and Sorcerer. We can know many spells, we can only prepare a few before resting, but those prepared can be cast in any way we wish (until we finish the slots for each spell level).

Can this be done with modding? The difficult part would be the preparation I guess, since you cannot choose the same spell but it must be different.

PS: event more cool would the "spell slot" concept in 5E, as outlined in chapter 10 here, but I think it's much of a modification.

Illustair
«1

Comments

  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,467
    edited April 2016
    1) It's possible, but it would be way too much work to do it right, and it would likely be fragile and bug-prone.

    2) It would kind of destroy the whole desig. intent of the game. Wizards and sorcerers each have limitations, and the whole point of the game is to achieve success while working with those limitations.

    My favorite example of this kind of thing is Super Mario Brothers, perhaps the greatest video game ever made. It would certainly be a lot more effective if you could play the whole game under the effect of an invincibility star, and while we're at it let's say you can walk through bricks and can't fall into holes. More effective... but no fun at all.

    The enemies and bricks are in your way, limiting your progress, and the fun of the game is in working around them.

    3) Such a mod would give the player a completely unique advantage in being able to do something the AI can't. We're talking about basic AI code that was made in 1998. The only way to make the game fair (i.e. a halfway interesting challenge) would be to embark on a decade-long project to write SCS-style AI to enable enemies to use the same tools against you.

    tl;dr: it would take months of effort to create a bug-prone mod that would render the game unfun... and you can already do this right now with some judicious use of Console commands. So it doesn't seem worth it.

    EDIT - just to be clear, I don't mean to poop in the idea. IMO, what you describe is how magic always should have worked. But in this game it doesn't, and the whole game is designed around that fact.

    EDIT 2 - dammit, curse my inquisitive mind, now you've got me thinking about HOW that mod could be made. Does anyone wanna take a guess? Here's a hint: it would not involve the sorcerer class.

  • kotekokoteko Member Posts: 178
    Thanks for the reply!

    I don't actually agree on the balance, here. I've always played a Mage, and you don't really need many spells if you do a full-party walkthrough (I almost never change the ones I cast.. so there isn't much difference with a Sorcerer already, for me).

    The sorcerer is already as powerful as the 5E Mage would be, for the same reason: if you choose the spells wisely, you'll never feel the need to change them. Sorcerer is already OP.

    The 5E mage would only add more colour and add incentive to try different spells for the hell of it :) which I'd like in a solo playthrough, for example.

    About the AI, would they need to be changed? They already have a set of spells "hardcoded", and those don't necessarily follow the spell progression.

    Then again, you can penalise the kit if it's truly more powerful - reducing the number of spells that you can prepare and cast is the perfect target here.

    Anyways, I'm really curious as to how you think it could be implemented!

  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,467
    It somewhat depends on how the "learn spell" effect works for scrolls. I'm not sure how hard-coded that is.

  • AquadrizztAquadrizzt Member Posts: 958
    So I've actually looked into this quite a bit and it is actually not that hard to do for a player kit. (Non-party NPC AI would require a bit more but is also doable I think...)

    The main reason I don't already have something like this in Tome and Blood is because of my concern that such a kit, no matter how aggressively penalized, would still be really powerful... It's not like sorcerers particularly need more versatility.

    The pathfinder Arcanist (which is pretty similar to the 5E wizard) is balanced in part by the fact that the Arcanist can't nova during each encounter, or rest after each encounter. BG2 has no such restrictions unfortunately, so it would be a tough balancing act.

    subtledoctor
  • kotekokoteko Member Posts: 178
    @Aquadrizzt in all honesty, is this really an issue? Can you please expand on why is that?

    Many people like me have never even beaten the game with difficulty > Core, so how much can this really break balance for us? :P

    Also, I've looked to Tome and blood.. and many of the kits seem much more powerful, with all the cool immunities and bonuses..

    I don't know, am I the only one that does the following?
    1. only keeps "useful" spells before big encounters
    2. finishes all spells after those encounters, unless the monster dies before
    and thus, would only get the following benefit from an "Arcanist" kit: a little more variety for normal encounters and fun.

    Illustair
  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,467
    For purposes of discussions like these, it's worth pointing out that there are three basic areas of advantage, for lack of a better word, that arcane spellcasters an have:

    1) Broad access to spells: being able to learn any spell from any scroll means you can prepare spells that are useful in a huge array of situations.

    2) "Spontaneous casting:" being able to cast any of the spells you have memorized and only expending the slot, not the spell itself, gives you tons of flexibility. My wizards often rest before even casting all of their spells, because I may have gotten through a day without needing to cast situational spells like Vocalize, or Lower Resistance. So being able to cast spontaneously is functionally similar to simply having more spell slots.

    3) Having more spell slots: this is obvious. It's why Edwin is so powerful. This allows you to blast away more times with more spells, and/or to memorize a broader set if spells to be prepared for more different situations.

    Traditional mages only have 1) as an advantage, which is why nobody plays a single-class mage. Edwin gets 1) and 3) because he cheats. Sorcerers combine 2) and 3)... and note that 2) and 3) by their nature tend to compound each others' benefits. That's why sorcerers are so crazy powerful. IMO they should have given sorcerers spontaneous casting but NOT extra spell slots. Then they would be decently balanced (and then I might consider listening to pleas for multiclass sorcerers).

    If you're talking about setting up a kit/class that has all 3 of these benefits, then I'm not interested. But 2 out of the 3 could be interesting. Like, you want to give spontaneous casting to a mage? That could work as long as they have extremely few spell slots. But then, it's no fun to play a caster with few spell slots.

    @Aquadrizzt I'm curious how you would have done this. Run a dialogue every time you want to change out memorized spells?

    My thought is... a Shaman kit.
    1) Make divine versions of every arcane spell.
    2) Make arcane clone spells that use 171 to add the divine clones, and 172 to remove themselves.
    3) Add an effect via .eff to have scrolls give this kit the arcane clone spells.
    4) Use the NRD ability like my warrior feats does, to sub in a spell from your (unusable) wizard spellbook to your (castable) priest spellbook.
    5) I was going to say figure out a way to preserve the list of learned spells, but maybe not. Maybe treat this like substitutions in a soccer match: once a spell is subbed in from the "known" list to the "castable" list, it is gone forever from the "known" list unless you find another scroll and learn it again. That could be an interesting limitation right there.

    Also as a Shaman, it would be limited to 7th level spells. But that's actually okay too - given the benefits of spontaneous casting, it's reasonable to limit really high-level magic to mages who put in a lot of time studying how to achieve it. Frankly, preventing the use of 9th-level spells would have been a good balancing mechanism for vanilla sorcerers.

    Part 4 is difficult, as a technical matter; I don't know how to get a list of known priest spells. But I imagine a script could do it.

  • AquadrizztAquadrizzt Member Posts: 958
    koteko said:

    @Aquadrizzt in all honesty, is this really an issue? Can you please expand on why is that?

    Many people like me have never even beaten the game with difficulty > Core, so how much can this really break balance for us? :P

    Also, I've looked to Tome and blood.. and many of the kits seem much more powerful, with all the cool immunities and bonuses..

    I don't know, am I the only one that does the following?

    1. only keeps "useful" spells before big encounters
    2. finishes all spells after those encounters, unless the monster dies before
    and thus, would only get the following benefit from an "Arcanist" kit: a little more variety for normal encounters and fun.
    I mean certainly I have given the sorcerer kits in my mod additional benefits, but I've also added penalties and restrictions (such as casting speed penalties or reduced casts per day) to balance out those benefits.

    I think that there are two separate points that I should touch on for this: feasiblity and balance.

    Yes, it is possible to set-up something that allows you to use this kind of spontaneous casting mixed with spell swapping.

    However, I would not include it in a mod that I made unless I felt like it was at least marginally balanced, and right now I can't see a reason (even with penalties bordering on the absurd) to play a mage or sorcerer over an Arcanist.

    Also @subtledoctor, interestingly, 5th edition actually splits the wizard and sorcerer spell lists, and thus sorcerers actually are less versatile within a 5e framework.

    illathid
  • kotekokoteko Member Posts: 178


    If you're talking about setting up a kit/class that has all 3 of these benefits, then I'm not interested. But 2 out of the 3 could be interesting. Like, you want to give spontaneous casting to a mage? That could work as long as they have extremely few spell slots. But then, it's no fun to play a caster with few spell slots.

    I actually didn't even realise sorcerers had more spell slots than mages.

    So, using the generalist mage number of spells would fit your bill, wouldn't it? Just advantage 1 and 2. Would actually make a good complement to the other two groups: arcanist (1/2), mage specialist (1/3) and sorcerer (2/3).

    If still worried, you can even decrease the spell per level by 1. A bit like DD has less spells then sorcerer.

  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,467
    edited April 2016
    koteko said:

    arcanist (1/2), mage specialist (1/3) and sorcerer (2/3).

    If it was me making the mod? yeah, something like that, *plus* extra bonuses for mages (pretty much, how they are in TnB), *plus* make items like the Ring of Wizardry only work for mages who memorize spells the traditional way (it is called "Evermemory" after all).

    But, alas, it won't be me making the mod.

  • Woolie_WoolWoolie_Wool Member Posts: 156
    koteko said:

    Imagine a Sorcerer that can:

    - scribe spells into the spellbook
    - choose (or as they say, "prepare") a subset of those spells before resting

    This means essentially a fusion between Wizard and Sorcerer. We can know many spells, we can only prepare a few before resting, but those prepared can be cast in any way we wish (until we finish the slots for each spell level).

    Can this be done with modding? The difficult part would be the preparation I guess, since you cannot choose the same spell but it must be different.

    PS: event more cool would the "spell slot" concept in 5E, as outlined in chapter 10 here, but I think it's much of a modification.

    So 5E mages are basically the same as in Pillars of Eternity? I always liked Pillars' mages, but I think you'd have to design a new Infinity Engine game using GemRB to make the best use of such a system, instead of trying to cram it into Baldur's Gate. I think you could improve on Pillars' way of handling this, by making INT affect how many spells you can memorize per level, but not how many times you can cast or how powerful they are. Basically an 18 INT wizard would have more options while a 14 INT wizard would be much more restricted in what he/she can do at any one time.

    And once you're doing that you can basically blow the whole rulebook apart and rewrite it from scratch--replace rolling stats with point buy (I think 75 total points would be good to make players sweat at the character creation screen...no 18s for you unless you want to sacrifice something for them), replace WIS and CHA with stats that have more general utility for all classes, make INT affect weapon proficiency points and rogue skill points...and by that point your game is no more a Baldur's Gate game than Planescape Torment is.

    illathid
  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,467

    , make INT affect weapon proficiency points

    Poop, I forgot about that! I can actually do that now! (Sorry, off-topic) Quick - to the mod cave!

    illathidjackjack
  • kotekokoteko Member Posts: 178


    So 5E mages are basically the same as in Pillars of Eternity? I always liked Pillars' mages, but I think you'd have to design a new Infinity Engine game using GemRB to make the best use of such a system, instead of trying to cram it into Baldur's Gate. I think you could improve on Pillars' way of handling this, by making INT affect how many spells you can memorize per level, but not how many times you can cast or how powerful they are. Basically an 18 INT wizard would have more options while a 14 INT wizard would be much more restricted in what he/she can do at any one time.

    And once you're doing that you can basically blow the whole rulebook apart and rewrite it from scratch--replace rolling stats with point buy (I think 75 total points would be good to make players sweat at the character creation screen...no 18s for you unless you want to sacrifice something for them), replace WIS and CHA with stats that have more general utility for all classes, make INT affect weapon proficiency points and rogue skill points...and by that point your game is no more a Baldur's Gate game than Planescape Torment is.

    ...that escalated quickly ;) doesn't need to go as far.

  • Woolie_WoolWoolie_Wool Member Posts: 156
    edited April 2016
    koteko said:



    ...that escalated quickly ;) doesn't need to go as far.

    Huh? I wasn't being rude to you.

  • IchigoRXCIchigoRXC Member Posts: 1,001

    koteko said:



    ...that escalated quickly ;) doesn't need to go as far.

    Huh? I wasn't being rude to you.
    I think he merely meant making an entirely new engine was quite an escalation in comparison to a mod. That is how I read it.

    jackjack
  • kotekokoteko Member Posts: 178
    IchigoRXC said:

    koteko said:



    ...that escalated quickly ;) doesn't need to go as far.

    Huh? I wasn't being rude to you.
    I think he merely meant making an entirely new engine was quite an escalation in comparison to a mod. That is how I read it.
    Yep :)

  • rapsam2003rapsam2003 Member Posts: 1,636
    koteko said:

    PS: event more cool would the "spell slot" concept in 5E, as outlined in chapter 10 here, but I think it's much of a modification.

    But...why? I mean, yes, it sounds cool. It doesn't really fit the BG game at all though. NWN2? Yeah. BG series? No.

  • kotekokoteko Member Posts: 178

    koteko said:

    PS: event more cool would the "spell slot" concept in 5E, as outlined in chapter 10 here, but I think it's much of a modification.

    But...why? I mean, yes, it sounds cool. It doesn't really fit the BG game at all though. NWN2? Yeah. BG series? No.
    I'm sorry but that doesn't make any sense. And I say that without malice/polemic - it just doesn't, from a rational point of view.

    Icewind Dale 2 uses D&D 3rd edition, and many people love it. So why not a hint of 5th? And that would be enough to justify a modification of a class in this direction (not that it would be the first - have you seen the mod we quoted here, Tome and Blood? It's way off from original BG class choices, allowing for example armoured arcane casting. Still, it's a very good mod).

    But let's set that aside and take one step back. What does or does not "fit" BG, really? Does a class, as long as balanced with the others and true enough to FR lore, really "break" the BG-ness of the game? Say it to the additional classes and kits added from BG1 to BG2 to SoD, and to the plenty of mods out there.

    "BG feel" has never been about this or that rule change. It is really about the storyline, the narrative style and the balance between roleplay capabilities and hack&slash action.

    IWD is more on the latter axis, while Planescape:Torment is more on the former. BG has always been in the middle, and thus gathered a bigger following in both installments.

    PS: This came out overly long and probably more polemic that I wanted it to be. Apologies in advance if I have offended you. It is just my opinion, of course.

    illathid
  • rapsam2003rapsam2003 Member Posts: 1,636
    edited April 2016
    koteko said:

    I'm sorry but that doesn't make any sense. And I say that without malice/polemic - it just doesn't, from a rational point of view.

    It makes perfect sense from a rational point of view. The BG series is based on 2E rules.
    koteko said:

    Icewind Dale 2 uses D&D 3rd edition, and many people love it. So why not a hint of 5th?

    IWD2 is not loved specifically for the 3E rules; I would argue that the specific ruleset used is just a tool designed to aid in presenting the story, characters, etc. The story is the main reason folks love that game. Use of the 3E rules just aids in that, because the balance in IWD2 is around the 3E rules.
    koteko said:

    And that would be enough to justify a modification of a class in this direction

    The 5E rules vary greatly compared to the 2E rules. The game was balanced around the use of the 2E rules. If you use the 5E rules, then you heavily risk upsetting the game balance in that way.
    koteko said:

    (not that it would be the first - have you seen the mod we quoted here, Tome and Blood? It's way off from original BG class choices, allowing for example armoured arcane casting. Still, it's a very good mod).

    I’m not going to get into my personal thoughts on other mods.
    But armored arcane casting was always a bit silly to me, as a sidenote. (Yeah, I’m talking about you, Arcane Warrior from Dragon Age: Origins!)
    koteko said:

    But let's set that aside and take one step back. What does or does not "fit" BG, really? Does a class, as long as balanced with the others and true enough to FR lore, really "break" the BG-ness of the game?

    How do you intend to balance the 5E rules for wizards in a game designed to be balanced around the 2E rules?
    koteko said:

    Say it to the additional classes and kits added from BG1 to BG2 to SoD, and to the plenty of mods out there.

    The additional classes and kits in the official games (including SoD) were balanced using the 2E rules.

    3rd party mods may not necessary be balanced, but it behooves a mod creator to not unbalance the game.
    koteko said:

    "BG feel" has never been about this or that rule change. It is really about the storyline, the narrative style and the balance between roleplay capabilities and hack&slash action.

    “BG feel” would be broken if the balance of the game is broken.
    koteko said:

    PS: This came out overly long and probably more polemic that I wanted it to be. Apologies in advance if I have offended you. It is just my opinion, of course.

    No, you hardly offended me. It’s good to have different points of view in this matter.


    I guess my main thing is...how can you implement the 5E rules in a 2E-based game without upsetting the balanced of said game?

    Clarification: the 3.5 rules are less likely to be impacted by adding in a 5E modification, since the 3.5E rules are much closer to the 5E rules. This is why I mentioned NWN2 above; it uses the 3.5 rules. 5E really is a simplification of the 3.5 rules, for the better, imho.

  • kotekokoteko Member Posts: 178
    Well, BG has always bent AD&D 2E rules for its own purposes. I mean, if you look it up Sorcerer was introduced with the third edition! It never respected the rules fully, it just stayed within a general ruleset "feel". Which my proposal doesn't break, just like Sorcerer didn't break it (for most people, like you, it's a true AD&D 2E class).

    If I wanted to introduce, say, skills and feats, that are a very "third edition" thing, then I'd understand your point. But here we are talking to something similar to a Sorcerer or Mage kit. I think if you look at the actual rule we are talking about here, it's fully compatible with 2E.

    In BG we currently have the Sorcerer that has a limited number of spells known, but more spells per day than a mage. Since the "useful spells" are very few in BG to beat the game bloody, the Sorcerer (as well as the Dragon Disciple) is the most OP single class.

    We then have the mage specialist, that for some schools of specialisation is also very powerful (others are crappy, so they are under, if ever, used).

    At the bottom we have the mage generalist, with less spells per day than a sorcerer or mage specialist but the ability to know all possible spells (still limited by intelligence, though, so you can never scribe ALL spells in the spellbook unless you pump intelligence up somehow).

    What I am proposing is:

    - the ability to choose which spell of each spell level to cast, after resting, like a Sorcerer
    - the ability to scribe spells in the spellbook and memorise some (without duplicates) before resting, like a mage
    - a reduction in spells-per-day adequate to the increased flexibility. This can be argued: I'd keep the spells per day equal to the mage generalist, because right now that doesn't have any advantage already. One might instead want to reduce it even further. This can be put as an alternative choice in a mod (like some class/kit mods have).

    So the general gameplay would still be: go around, cast your spells-per-day. When finished, rest. Then start again. With a bit more flexibility allowing you to use, sometimes, less common spells instead of the usual "tried and tested".

    PS: regarding the last bit you quoted (which would be too much for BG, as I've acknowledged), that's essentially an extremely simple, stripped down metamagic: like, casting magic missile as a level 2 spell instead of level 1. Metamagic was born in AD&D, too, not in 3rd, although it's there that bloomed. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tome_of_Magic

  • rapsam2003rapsam2003 Member Posts: 1,636
    koteko said:

    Well, BG has always bent AD&D 2E rules for its own purposes. I mean, if you look it up Sorcerer was introduced with the third edition! It never respected the rules fully, it just stayed within a general ruleset "feel". Which my proposal doesn't break, just like Sorcerer didn't break it (for most people, like you, it's a true AD&D 2E class).

    Actually, I would argue that sorcerers aren't a true 2E class. But I see no issue with adding new classes or kits or modifications to current classes or kits, if balance is preserved.
    koteko said:

    What I am proposing is:
    - the ability to choose which spell of each spell level to cast, after resting, like a Sorcerer
    - the ability to scribe spells in the spellbook and memorise some (without duplicates) before resting, like a mage

    That kind of defeats the point of a sorcerer, in that he/she doesn’t have to scribe spells, doesn’t it? I mean, if we’re blurring the lines between sorcerer and mage…why have any differentiation at all?

    Also, not to discourage you, but this is going to be hard to implement, error prone, and likely be hard to debug.
    koteko said:

    - a reduction in spells-per-day adequate to the increased flexibility. This can be argued: I'd keep the spells per day equal to the mage generalist, because right now that doesn't have any advantage already. One might instead want to reduce it even further. This can be put as an alternative choice in a mod (like some class/kit mods have).

    Fair enough.
    koteko said:

    So the general gameplay would still be: go around, cast your spells-per-day. When finished, rest. Then start again. With a bit more flexibility allowing you to use, sometimes, less common spells instead of the usual "tried and tested".

    Ok, now…the kicker is, which spells? Some 5E spells are easily going to be ridiculously overpowered in a 2E setting, I can tell you already. Others are particularly useless even in 5E (*cough* thaumaturgy *cough*).

  • kotekokoteko Member Posts: 178
    What do you mean, which spell? The same BG spells :) I've never mentioned implementing new spells here.

  • kotekokoteko Member Posts: 178
    Ahh. I see where you are coming from.

    I merely mean: spells that people don't use much in BG, because they are not worth a spell slot (for a Sorcerer) or to rest-memorise-cast and then go back to one's "favourite" memorised set.

    Even just spells of the blue/white type, or less powerful summons that one might one to use once in a while.

  • rapsam2003rapsam2003 Member Posts: 1,636
    koteko said:

    Ahh. I see where you are coming from.

    I merely mean: spells that people don't use much in BG, because they are not worth a spell slot (for a Sorcerer) or to rest-memorise-cast and then go back to one's "favourite" memorised set.

    Even just spells of the blue/white type, or less powerful summons that one might one to use once in a while.

    Ah, cool. Makes sense to me then.


    If you can implement it and balance it and all that, go for it. You're in for a hell of a time! And I don't mean that in a bad way, necessarily. lol

  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,467
    edited April 2016

    If you can implement it

    Balance considerations aside, this is the real issue. Aside from Aquadrizzt who claims to be able to do this, and me who only has the barest, hare-brained idea of how it might possibly *be* done, I don't see anyone looking into doing this. If it wasn't difficult, it would have been done already.

    Post edited by subtledoctor on
  • kotekokoteko Member Posts: 178
    edited April 2016

    If you can implement it

    Balance considerations aside, this is the real issue. Aside from Aquadrizzt who claims to be able to do this, and me who only has the barest, hate-brained idea of how it might possibly *be* done, I don't see anyone looking into doing this. If it wasn't difficult, it would have been done already.
    I'm still hoping @Aquadrizzt pities me and discloses how he thinks this might be implemented :P my modding knowledge is very limited (your suggestion already went over my head), but if he's got a solid implementing idea I can try to fiddle around.

  • rapsam2003rapsam2003 Member Posts: 1,636
    edited April 2016

    If you can implement it

    Balance considerations aside, this is the real issue. Aside from Aquadrizzt who claims to be able to do this, and me who only has the barest, hate-brained idea of how it might possibly *be* done, I don't see anyone looking into doing this. If it wasn't difficult, it would have been done already.
    This is true. Hence my "You're in for a hell of a time!" statement. And, to be frank, if you're not really familiar with programming in some way, the task just became harder. I have never one to tell someone to shy away from something because it is hard, but you must be willing to learn -- a lot. I don't think there's going to be any guides or documentation for this kind of thing either. You're basically on your own. Now, if you really want to do this, then don't let any of that deter you.

  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,467
    (Posting just to say: I mean "hare-brained" idea! Not hate-brained.)

  • AquadrizztAquadrizzt Member Posts: 958
    @koteko, I'm more than willing to disclose it. I know exactly how I would implement this (and, in fact, attempted to do so for a ruleset mod that is on the backburner while I work on bigger mods like TnB and FnP). In fact, thinking about it, I could probably get a more optimized version of this working within a couple hours... unfortunately, I don't really have a couple hours to spend on it this week, but I'm always open to new things like this, balanced or not, although I usually refrain from implementing things that I can already anticipate will be unbalanced but anyway.

    Basically I would use my existing (in development) spell selection generator with a custom spell list and spells known progression. I would have my generator also allow you to swap spells of the same level in and out of your spell book (using some iterative checks for currently known spells). So, for example, if you already know the number of spells you're supposed to know, you can always select to trade one for another (e.g. Armor for Burning Hands...)

    The ability that triggers this whole mess would only be usable out of combat, to prevent certain side effects; the ability requires that the caster be completely rested upon checking known spells (although I think that this might no longer be the case... pretty sure they added a new opcode).

    This is probably incoherent but basically, I know exactly how I would do this, and maybe if I'm feeling innovative at some point in the near future, I'll throw something together to demonstrate how to do it.

  • AquadrizztAquadrizzt Member Posts: 958
    edited April 2016
    The logic underlying the dialog would be something like this. The numbers represent the dialog options that the player can select within that dialog state.


    State:Level_1
    1: If (do not know Armor) then go to State:Armor
    2: If (do not know Grease) then go to State:Grease
    3: If (do not know Burning Hands) then go to State:Burning Hands
    4: Exit

    State:Armor
    1: If (spells currently known < max spells allowed), then learn Armor
    2: If (spells currently known = max spells allowed AND know Grease), then exchange Grease for Armor
    3: If (spells currently known = max spells allowed AND know Burning Hands), then exchange Burning Hands for Armor
    4: If (true), then go to State:Level_1.
    5: Exit

  • Woolie_WoolWoolie_Wool Member Posts: 156
    But armored arcane casting was always a bit silly to me, as a sidenote. (Yeah, I’m talking about you, Arcane Warrior from Dragon Age: Origins!)
    I disagree, though I think there should be penalties involved in armored arcane casting. Armor in Pillars of Eternity slows down your casting, for instance, but there's also the issue that Pillars splits AC into Deflection (which works like AC in Baldur's Gate and depends mostly on stats and level) and Damage Reduction (which absorbs some incoming damage and depends on your armor). You can put a mage in plate armor if you want, but he's still not going to make it if a dragon gets all up in his grill because his Deflection will be terrible so the dragon will be able to get hits or crits with pretty much every attack and 20 DR is nothing against a monster that can exceed your DR four times over with a single hit.

    AC is really kind of dumb. Does 5E still use AC? I hope not.

    For armored casting in BG, I like the way the various tweak packs handle it--the miscast chance is prohibitive for anything beyond leather armor and really armor is just there as a crutch until you can get elven chainmail or a robe of the whatever archmagi.

Sign In or Register to comment.