The faulty description is in itself a bug (lowest severity however - but it's not just an awkward phrasing it's missing information), so whichever way you turn it there's one
For example foebane has got a fixed description relatively recently because the old one had misleading info about a functionality that was technically broken (bonus damage vs extraplanar which was never really implemented)...so that fix went that way and it could have gone in the way of fixing functionality. Gordian knot sorta thing. Same here.
Fair enough. I suppose it's mostly a philosophical debate whether an incomplete description is a bug or simply superficial. It matters, I guess, because unlike your Foebane example, there is nothing in the description of these items that does not actually occur with the item itself - there's just also some extra stuff that isn't mentioned in the description (but does not contradict it).
That leads me personally to conclude that the items are working as intended, and that the full scope of that intent simply isn't communicated down to the last detail. Not entirely unheard of, as there's other interactions as well that aren't EXPLICITLY mentioned in descriptions (but don't contradict them). And it would certainly bloat the description quite a bit to specifically mention every little thing like Kensai bonuses etc.
You are being logical and under a different set of circumstances i'd agree, but here there's such a thing as a class of items that infers certain properties. When an item is designated as a weapon: longsword, and the discrepancy between generic and real properties is is not mentioned, it in fact is a case of something in the description that doesn't occur. The description is lying.
@bob_veng I disagree. While you don't get all the bonuses for the weapon proficiency, it's not as though the proficiency just doesn't matter at all. Characters that can't use long swords still can't use the Void Sword. Characters with 0 pips in long swords still receive THAC0 penalties for not being proficient.
It is a long sword. It just doesn't get the full extent of bonuses.
is the staff mace a quarterstaff? imagine staff mace description not mentioning that what you have is in fact a staff mace (just referring to it as a staff) - would you consider that satisfactory?
now, just like it's a staff with the attributes of a mace...
and therefore not a staff but a staff mace: it shares some attributes with a quarterstaff such as blunt damage and proficiency type but really it's in a category of it's own
...the voidsword is a longsword which lacks the preponderance of attributes of a longsword
and therefore not a longsword, but something else: this "else" isn't a declared category like "mace", but this honestly doesn't change the equation: by analogy with the staff mace it's a "longsword not a longsword" which puts it in a sui generis category which is in some way related to longswords
the category can be "void weapons" (there are already two, the sword and the hammer): weapons that don't behave like physical weapons at all or some other fluff explanation; but there must be an explanation, because currently the player is being mislead into thinking he'll for example be able to make great use of the voidsword with a not too strong but very skilled longsword master (edit: say, Khalid?), and then it turns out that it's a pseudo-longsword, a fake longsword, a pale-shadow-of-a-longsword, a wannabe longsword that a longsword master has no use for. how infuriatingly lame is that?
on these forums, issues like this were always treated as bugs - helmet descriptions lacking "protects from critical hits" were at one point systematized and fixed to include this information.
edit: and on top of this i have another line of argumentation - in order for an item to be a longsword, it must first be a weapon, and voidsword is in a majority of aspects not even a weapon, but a sui generis offensive wieldable item (in a broad sense a wand is a weapon too, but really we don't call wands weapons); by your logic, not going upward to a higher category and sticking to the superficial level would also render a wooden longsword, or a toy longsword a longsword
edit2: MORE BAD NEWS - you can't backstab with the voidsword (needs checking in 2.2)
I often look for logic where there isn't any, such in the case of Baldurs Gate for instance. And the logic tells me that this sword works exactly as it should. Those bonus damage points, where do they come from? The strength bonus comes from you hitting something extra hard. The proficiency points comes from you hitting something slightly better. The backstab comes from you hitting the exact right spot.
But this sword have 0 physical damage. How can a sword that doesn't cut you, cut deeper if you use it better? It's a foam sword dealing magic damage when it hits. That's it. Why would a spell, basically, hit harder if you are stronger or better at wielding the item in which the magic is held? It's a cast on strike wand in the shape of a longsword. So you get the bonus to hit if you are proficient with longswords, but nothing else.
A bit sad for an interresting piece of equipment but it's perfectly logical.
I often look for logic where there isn't any, such in the case of Baldurs Gate for instance. And the logic tells me that this sword works exactly as it should. Those bonus damage points, where do they come from? The strength bonus comes from you hitting something extra hard. The proficiency points comes from you hitting something slightly better. The backstab comes from you hitting the exact right spot.
But this sword have 0 physical damage. How can a sword that doesn't cut you, cut deeper if you use it better? It's a foam sword dealing magic damage when it hits. That's it. Why would a spell, basically, hit harder if you are stronger or better at wielding the item in which the magic is held? It's a cast on strike wand in the shape of a longsword. So you get the bonus to hit if you are proficient with longswords, but nothing else.
A bit sad for an interresting piece of equipment but it's perfectly logical.
I am not an expert in what "Magic damage" is in real life, but I'd argue that any other type of damage works better if you hit the right spot. Cutting a finger will cause bleeding, cutting a throat will cause death. Throwing acid on someone's hand will be horribly painful but much less damaging that throwing it on someone's eyes. I can understand that Strength should not affect an "ghost sword". But it still feels logical that if you hit the right spot (which is what a backstabbing thief or a Kensai do) it should hit harder
There's space for improvement in how these weapons work, whether in the description or in the mechanics. If you have a specific idea for how you'd like these weapons to be changed, I recommend submitting a ticket for it on Redmine: http://support.baldursgate.com
(Like any feature request, there's no guarantee that it will be implemented, but the development team can't implement your request if they don't know it exists.)
I am not an expert in what "Magic damage" is in real life, but I'd argue that any other type of damage works better if you hit the right spot. Cutting a finger will cause bleeding, cutting a throat will cause death. Throwing acid on someone's hand will be horribly painful but much less damaging that throwing it on someone's eyes. I can understand that Strength should not affect an "ghost sword". But it still feels logical that if you hit the right spot (which is what a backstabbing thief or a Kensai do) it should hit harder
That's very true. If someone had pips in void-weapons and "instinctively" knew where to hit, they could also get the bonus damage. But it's not the same as with swords. As you almost wrote there, cutting the neck kills someone, but why would magic damage to the neck be more damaging than to the hand?
You sort of agreed with me there even though you meant it otherwise.
I am not an expert in what "Magic damage" is in real life, but I'd argue that any other type of damage works better if you hit the right spot. Cutting a finger will cause bleeding, cutting a throat will cause death. Throwing acid on someone's hand will be horribly painful but much less damaging that throwing it on someone's eyes. I can understand that Strength should not affect an "ghost sword". But it still feels logical that if you hit the right spot (which is what a backstabbing thief or a Kensai do) it should hit harder
That's very true. If someone had pips in void-weapons and "instinctively" knew where to hit, they could also get the bonus damage. But it's not the same as with swords. As you almost wrote there, cutting the neck kills someone, but why would magic damage to the neck be more damaging than to the hand?
You sort of agreed with me there even though you meant it otherwise.
I'd say that some parts of the body are overall more vulnerable - and vital - than others. Try (well, don't try IRL, it might be dangerous) plugging two wires to a battery, then put your hand in contact with both, you'll feel a slight itch. Now go for the eyes, Boo, and it might cause permanent blindness. The same goes with fire, acid etc...: Eyes, throat, Chest, head are all more vulnerable to most of these than yours legs and hands. It sounds pretty likely that magic damage would cause the same. It may not, of course, we cannot know for sure since it does not exist in real life, but it's still a fair assumption.
Besides, once trained with a sword for example, it's not instinctive to target vital points specifically, it's instinctive to target anywhere you want. Just try this particular sword on a couple of gibberlings to figure out where this one hurts most, and then you'd know where to target.
The reason proficiencies don't increase magic damage is because they can't, due to engine limitations. Same goes for STR bonuses and backstabs; they only affect physical damage. You could, however, mod the sword so it does a little extra magic damage on a critical hit, due to a new opcode unique to EE. You could also use a separate opcode to increase all magic damage dealt, but that would also strengthen Magic Missile and Horrid Wilting, and would apply regardless of the character's combat stats.
Otherwise the question of whether proficiencies should increase the Voidsword and Voidhammer's magic damage is moot. It can't be done in the first place.
Even proficiencies can be considered by using opcode 326 (Apply effects list) with "STAT PROFICIENCYLONGSWORD >= specified value" or similar checks. And opcode 340 (Backstab hit effect) could be used to apply additional damage or special effects on successful backstabs. Pretty much everything is possible with the v2.0 game engine. It's just a matter of how much work you want to invest into the item.
Comments
Bugged weapon
Crappy craftable item (always a sad thing)
False choice
For example foebane has got a fixed description relatively recently because the old one had misleading info about a functionality that was technically broken (bonus damage vs extraplanar which was never really implemented)...so that fix went that way and it could have gone in the way of fixing functionality. Gordian knot sorta thing. Same here.
That leads me personally to conclude that the items are working as intended, and that the full scope of that intent simply isn't communicated down to the last detail. Not entirely unheard of, as there's other interactions as well that aren't EXPLICITLY mentioned in descriptions (but don't contradict them). And it would certainly bloat the description quite a bit to specifically mention every little thing like Kensai bonuses etc.
Edit: lying that you're using a longsword
It is a long sword. It just doesn't get the full extent of bonuses.
is the staff mace a quarterstaff?
imagine staff mace description not mentioning that what you have is in fact a staff mace (just referring to it as a staff) - would you consider that satisfactory?
now, just like it's a staff with the attributes of a mace...
and therefore not a staff but a staff mace: it shares some attributes with a quarterstaff such as blunt damage and proficiency type but really it's in a category of it's own
...the voidsword is a longsword which lacks the preponderance of attributes of a longsword
and therefore not a longsword, but something else: this "else" isn't a declared category like "mace", but this honestly doesn't change the equation: by analogy with the staff mace it's a "longsword not a longsword" which puts it in a sui generis category which is in some way related to longswords
the category can be "void weapons" (there are already two, the sword and the hammer): weapons that don't behave like physical weapons at all or some other fluff explanation; but there must be an explanation, because currently the player is being mislead into thinking he'll for example be able to make great use of the voidsword with a not too strong but very skilled longsword master (edit: say, Khalid?), and then it turns out that it's a pseudo-longsword, a fake longsword, a pale-shadow-of-a-longsword, a wannabe longsword that a longsword master has no use for. how infuriatingly lame is that?
on these forums, issues like this were always treated as bugs - helmet descriptions lacking "protects from critical hits" were at one point systematized and fixed to include this information.
edit: and on top of this i have another line of argumentation - in order for an item to be a longsword, it must first be a weapon, and voidsword is in a majority of aspects not even a weapon, but a sui generis offensive wieldable item (in a broad sense a wand is a weapon too, but really we don't call wands weapons); by your logic, not going upward to a higher category and sticking to the superficial level would also render a wooden longsword, or a toy longsword a longsword
edit2: MORE BAD NEWS - you can't backstab with the voidsword (needs checking in 2.2)
And the logic tells me that this sword works exactly as it should. Those bonus damage points, where do they come from? The strength bonus comes from you hitting something extra hard. The proficiency points comes from you hitting something slightly better. The backstab comes from you hitting the exact right spot.
But this sword have 0 physical damage. How can a sword that doesn't cut you, cut deeper if you use it better? It's a foam sword dealing magic damage when it hits. That's it. Why would a spell, basically, hit harder if you are stronger or better at wielding the item in which the magic is held? It's a cast on strike wand in the shape of a longsword. So you get the bonus to hit if you are proficient with longswords, but nothing else.
A bit sad for an interresting piece of equipment but it's perfectly logical.
Cutting a finger will cause bleeding, cutting a throat will cause death. Throwing acid on someone's hand will be horribly painful but much less damaging that throwing it on someone's eyes. I can understand that Strength should not affect an "ghost sword". But it still feels logical that if you hit the right spot (which is what a backstabbing thief or a Kensai do) it should hit harder
(Like any feature request, there's no guarantee that it will be implemented, but the development team can't implement your request if they don't know it exists.)
You sort of agreed with me there even though you meant it otherwise.
The same goes with fire, acid etc...: Eyes, throat, Chest, head are all more vulnerable to most of these than yours legs and hands. It sounds pretty likely that magic damage would cause the same. It may not, of course, we cannot know for sure since it does not exist in real life, but it's still a fair assumption.
Besides, once trained with a sword for example, it's not instinctive to target vital points specifically, it's instinctive to target anywhere you want. Just try this particular sword on a couple of gibberlings to figure out where this one hurts most, and then you'd know where to target.
Otherwise the question of whether proficiencies should increase the Voidsword and Voidhammer's magic damage is moot. It can't be done in the first place.
Pretty much everything is possible with the v2.0 game engine. It's just a matter of how much work you want to invest into the item.