Higher level NPC hit point inequality - poor Jaheira
Winedogger
Member Posts: 17
I enjoy playing different NPCs - at least through PC level 5 when they all stop advancing on their own. But it seems that some NPCs have their HPs unfairly nerfed compared to others. I certainly understand and agree with the idea that on their own, an NPC won't and shouldn't receive max HP/level, but Jaheira gets slammed! Other multis at their highest level like Coran and Yeslick have almost all of their maximum XP. Jaheira, on the other hand loses almost 40%! If I have the numbers right, at PC level 5, she is Fighter 5/Druid 6 and would have a maximum of 65 HP. She gets 40. Again, I fully support lower than maximum HP totals for idle characters, but this seems a tad harsh.
3
Comments
thing about Jaheira is she joins when you're at level 1 or 2 so if her HP are bad, it's usually because you yourself rolled bad.
Her max base HP at 5/6 should be 49, which 17 constitution would bump to *I believe* 65 like you said. Her HP is theoretically better than most other NPCs in the whole game.
Average HP at that level for her should be 41 or 42, actually. 5 for base fighter level, 2.5x4 for the rest of those levels, 3 base druid, 1.5x5 for druid levels + 2x5 CON hp bonus to fighter levels + 1x6 CON HP bonus for druid level = 41.5. Just in case you were wondering.
So, in this respect, the 'good' ones are Montaron, Khalid, Branwen, Dynaheir, Coran, Yeslick and Tiax - losing 18% or less. The 'bad' ones are Xzar, Jaheira, Garrick, Kivan, Ajantis, Viconia, Faldorn and Alora - all losing over a third, up to one half! It appears to be quite random. I can't think of anything those groups have in common.
It seems almost cheating to take advantage of Coran's 3% (he already has multiple advantages) and then a lot less fun to get nailed with Jaheira's 40%. The Shar-Teel percentage seems a good middle of the road. I wish they were all a little closer to the that.
I have been using this site - http://www.forgottenwars.com/bg1/good.htm - but some of the numbers have been changed for the mod on the main page. Anyone know a better site with this level of NPC detail?
Honestly? I hack NPCs to have max HP per level. I have always, always, always contended rolling for HP per level is just a terrible mechanic. Under no theoretical circumstance should a warrior ever have less HP than a wizard. Ever. If you get hosed with unlucky rolls, it just has a ripple effect.
I wish there was something that put everything at the max HP for said character, whether it be your NPCs or enemies. Would make for a more interesting experience, I think.
I'm pretty sure BG2Tweaks does this -- gives you the option of max HP on level up, and another option to give all enemy mobs max HP.
(As an aside: OH MY GOD I AGREE. I get DnD's fascination with dice rolls, I really do. That's part of the fun.
But what idiot decided that part of your character's core progression should be decided completely by RNG? The way the system is set up, a mediocre roll completely negates the point of having CON bonuses. Nevermind that multi class characters skew towards the lower end of the range, because their rolls are halved and there's a bigger chance they'll end up with a "1" on each level. So frustrating. Hehe, I was nerd raging about this the other night. Had to get that off my chest. :P)
Actually MC characters actually get a little boost from rolling 2 dice instead of one per level, and by level I mean advancing one level in each class. For example let's take a Fighter/Cleric and a Fighter. A fighter gains on average 5.5 HP/level, (1+10)/2. A Fighter/Cleric also gets 5.5HP/level, (1+5)/2 + (1+4)/2. This happens with any 2-class MC where the 2 classes are 1 hit die size apart (warrior/priest, priest/rogue, rogue/wizard).
Thanks for the clarification!
Btw, personally I used NearInfinity to mod my game so that the NPCs have better HP. So I totally understand your frustration, to say the least. Hint: It doesn't.
- Mages/Sorcerers: 3.5 HP x lv, round down;
- Thieves/Bards: 5 HP x lv;
- Clerics/Druids/Monks: 6.5 HP x lv, round down;
- Fighters/Rangers/Paladins: 8 HP x lv;
- Barbarians: 9.5 HP x lv, round down.
Multi-Class characters: half HPs, round down.
Add constitution bounses where present.
That's more than average HPs, but not as much as max HPs, and I feel it's balanced between game-mechanics and sensible advancement.
[I also sometimes retouch them a little (let's say by 3-6 HPs) to make a particular NPC tougher or weaker regarding HPs.]
That's the same measure I use for original NPCs to find if they're overpowered or underpowered in regards of HPs at a certain level.
It looks like he is targeting about 80% of max before CON bonuses. I might go a bit lower, say 70/75%, and allow CON bonuses to bring some higher. Alternatively, applying 75/80% to the total including CON bonuses might be easier and more fair.
But why nerf the multis to half? This is, after all, about poor Jaheira. I would simply apply the calculation to all the same. Applying these to poor Jaheira would give her 50/53 or 49/52HP - reasonable IMO.
I have never used an editor and would prefer the game handled this in a fair and even way. It just doesn't make sense that Tiax gets more HP than Jaheira at every level!
(I believe for three-multi-class characters it's /3 instead of /2).
That's why Jaheira at 1st/1st has 12 HPs (10/2+8/2+3), and not 21.
I am kicking an idea I've been floating around in my head with my brother for a Strategy RPG. Think Final Fantasy Tactics meets Ogre Battle. I won't go into more details for I'm that fearful of my great idea being jacked. Not from you guys but from the internet at large because hey this is all public.
The thing I'm struggling with is figuring out what kind of numbers system I want to employ. I'm thinking base hundred, kind of old-school Final Fantasy numbers where 100-150 HP a level is average, when you hit level 30ish or so you start breaking the thousand damage mark. Part of me also wants to keep the numbers low a la Fire Emblem. SO MANY CHOICES. All equally as difficult to balance as the last.
Your post reminds me of stuff I read last year, when Blizzard announced Mists of Panderia and their "great stat smoosh" -- basically, there were trying to reset the game and reduce the huge attribute and damage numbers that had inflated over the years. Googling around might turn up some ideas for you.
Personally, I like the d20 systems, because I find that scale much easier to conceptualize. Once games get to crazy numbers and multiple stats, players end up squinting at their screens and trying to figure out of 372 strength is better than 519 attack power. That gets tedious fast.
I typically play BG2 on "normal," with all HP rolls maxed, but BG1 on "core" because HP rolls are random no matter what the difficulty level.