@semiticgod, I just read your post on why you prefer to play without permanent deaths, and have historically invoked the bug reload rule to achieve that end. I'll just share a thought.
I'm fond of poetry. Free verse poetry, mainly. All of my favorite poets write in free verse. When I write poetry, I write in free verse. I find constraint constraining. I pass.
Robert Frost was once asked what he thought of free verse. He sighed disdainfully and said: "It's like playing tennis with the net down, you know." When I heard that I thought: "And that, Bobby dearest, is why you can be a bit of a bore. Tennis isn't the only game." I still feel that way.
In this context, in the world of Baldur's Gate, I suppose I'm a little like Robert Frost. I play tennis and I play with the net up. I restrict tactics; I loathe the console; I never use custom kits; I keep my game mechanics standard. I've accepted the EE changes in the interest of relatability, but I still won't play an EE kit (shudder!).
Does that make me a bore? Maybe. But, you know, some people like Robert Frost. And I'm glad that he's around- even if I'm also glad that he's not all there is.
I've always preferred to think of the no reload community as an artists collective. It's good that we have different styles, different perspectives, different ways of playing. Creators on opposite ends of a spectrum will always render different judgements. That doesn't mean that they can't respect and appreciate each other's work
I guess what I'm saying is you do you, my friend. I'll often see things differently, but in the end, that's good. Stylistic variety is a positive. I'm glad you're here; I'm glad you're different; We're all better for it.
I prefer playing with chunking on as it can give a sense of surprise and loss to a run... however its effects can be somewhat disproportionate depending on where you are in the game, and can strain the narrative. It is as hard to imagine recruiting a 20th level+ npc to replace someone in ToB as it is to imagine that Jaheira is 1st level after years as a Harper in BG1. It works best around SoD when losing an npc forces different tactics on you, and replacing them with someone of a similar level seems comprehensible.
I have only played no reload once, and that has been in my multiplayer runs with the Monty Python Crew. I must admit that, while I appreciate some aspects of the style, I really don't like other aspects. I suppose I can understand rolling with the punches, but I prefer to keep rolling regardless of what the punch does to me. If I am enjoying a run and I get a fatal punch, for instance, I see no reason to want to ruin a good thing and start all over. I would rather reload. I am very much a completionist too. If, say, Sarevok kills me in the final fight, there is no way in hell I am NOT going to reload and try again! That seems crazy to me! My restartitis is bad enough honestly... Even without feeling a need to start all over if my character is killed half way through the game, I still start over way too much. I mean... I get challenging yourself and I could probably perform very well if I wanted to do no reload, but not reloading ever just takes all the fun out of it for me. I sometimes look at no reloading as a sort of elite club that I can never really join because of this. As much as I don't want to feel this way, it sometimes bothers me that you guys get the fame and renown for amazing knowledge and skills because you can enjoy doing this stuff. I also have amazing knowledge and skills... I just don't enjoy playing this way... Doesn't seem all that fair...
@tresset some people start playing no-reload specifically to cure restartitis ...
As for fame I'm not sure that goes any further than participating in the biggest thread on the Forum (I bet my Dad's thread is bigger than your Dad's thread ). I think that modders generally are far better known by the wider community - and that seems quite right to me.
If you think though that there should be more recognition of game skills not in a no-reload context, then why not introduce a thread to showcase those? That could perhaps be a companion thread to the one @semiticgod has done on use of tricks.
@semiticgod, I just read your post on why you prefer to play without permanent deaths, and have historically invoked the bug reload rule to achieve that end. I'll just share a thought.
I'm fond of poetry. Free verse poetry, mainly. All of my favorite poets write in free verse. When I write poetry, I write in free verse. I find constraint constraining. I pass.
Robert Frost was once asked what he thought of free verse. He sighed disdainfully and said: "It's like playing tennis with the net down, you know." When I heard that I thought: "And that, Bobby dearest, is why you can be a bit of a bore. Tennis isn't the only game." I still feel that way.
In this context, in the world of Baldur's Gate, I suppose I'm a little like Robert Frost. I play tennis and I play with the net up. I restrict tactics; I loathe the console; I never use custom kits; I keep my game mechanics standard. I've accepted the EE changes in the interest of relatability, but I still won't play an EE kit (shudder!).
Does that make me a bore? Maybe. But, you know, some people like Robert Frost. And I'm glad that he's around- even if I'm also glad that he's not all there is.
Hmm. I might not be entitled to a comment on this, but I cant resist (I never document my runs and I always reload...). Reading all the post in the no reload thread has been an inspiration, and I am considering a documented run my self (thats coming a long way. 1 year a go I would have thought such an idea moronic...).
I like the verse quotation, but I feel its a bit out of place. Semiticgod always plays with a net - and most assuredly in the same height as the best (besides the potion denying Grond0...).
But Semiticgod plays on a different surface (I am holding on to the tennis similies). You may prefer the classic grass court, whilst Semiticgod plays on many different surfaces... his setup is never the vanilla bg, but always interesting and always balanced. So imo the net is always there and always at the same height - but the surface is never is always changing.
I remember reading the post on the “chunk run”. The chunking did ruin the run, and when you see that most of the mishaps shouldnt have occured, you get the feeling that the game treated a fair player unfair.
Perhaps its just me misunderstanding the quote. Perhaps I am poking in to something I shouldnt. But I hope that we (well mostly you...) can document runs and afventuring instead of splitting hairs about chunking. I very much feel that both views on the game can be contained in the same thread.
About save penalties being "hiddenly" added to specialists - a while ago I've ran some tests about it; so if it's any use; quoting myself here:
" Some more test results from a Fixpack + TobEx beta 0026 install: TobEx does not fix the bug like I previously thought. Whatever is going on is definitely an improper interaction between a creature's kit and the specialist save bonus/penalty. For example, when a shadow fiend has its kit set as TRUECLASS, your save vs. death needs to be 1 to always save against its paralyzing attack. When its kit is changed to NO_KIT, your save needs to -1.
This is soo odd. I'll do some testing with this. So far, I've noticed that this works as the opposite of what's quoted here. NO_KIT is easier to resist, if you kit a shadow fiend as a skald or whatever else (Shadow bards ftw!) suddenly his attack can paralyze you even at save vs death = 0. If he's NO_KIT, save vs death = 1 is enough to never fail the save. Incredible.... It also works with kits and any on-hit effects. Kensai has a better chance for triggering Celestial Fury's stun then a regular fighter, and will have a chance to stun a target with save vs spell at 1, which a trueclass figher never will. Again, incredible. Korgan can swing Unyielding better then Mazzy simply because he's a berserker and his vorpal will come with an additional -2 penalty just because of that. Multiclass fighters don't benefit from this, but dual-classed do. kensai/berserker-mage duals now seem even more omnipotent than before..."
Corey's comment about where your save needs to be to be apsolutely safe:
"Like GrimJim said, for no-reloading purposes, basically just add +2 to whatever save you are wanting to make to "insure" a save. "
I think so. Or, rather, it seems you didn't fully appreciate the context, and my purpose in using the quote.
The purpose of the post wasn't to critique Semiticgod. It was to celebrate diversity, and his playing style in particular, while at the same time acknowledging, that I, personally, don't like using custom kits, the console, exploits, etc.
I was using the Frost quote to label myself a tired old-fuddy-duddy, not to suggest that semiticgod was or is doing anything wrong.
I've always preferred to think of the no reload community as an artists collective. It's good that we have different styles, different perspectives, different ways of playing. Creators on opposite ends of a spectrum will always render different judgements. That doesn't mean that they can't respect and appreciate each others work
I guess what I'm saying is you do you, my friend. I'll often see things differently, but in the end, that's good. Stylistic variety is a positive. I'm glad you're here; I'm glad you're different; We're all better for it.
Net or no net, tennis or no tennis, my runs or other people's runs, I think it's quite fair to say that I've always erred on the side of leniency when it comes to the rules.
I've said before that folks like @Alesia_BH and @Grond0 are immensely disciplined players in a way that I am not, and I meant that both in terms of the strictness of their rules as well as their technical skill and the incredible precision of their gameplay. You guys have always played by the strictest rules, and yet you've had the most successful runs in the community.
I think some newcomers might not be familiar with the history of this challenge. For those of you who aren't familiar with the old 500+ page Bioware thread, or haven't followed every single post in the now-200 page no-reload thread at the Beamdog forums, here's my two cents about the difference between me and @Alesia_BH:
@Alesia_BH has yet to brag even once about her record, but she is by far the most accomplished no-reloader in the entire community. She's done trilogy no-reloads under the harshest of rules, the toughest mods, and while playing solo. Though she's said she's stood on the shoulders of giants, she herself flat-out invented the meta game for Bounty Hunters (which so many people deemed worthless until she proved otherwise) and she single-handedly designed workable strategies, including solo strategies, for the immensely complicated and high-pressure Ascension Melissan fight. Not to mention a very long list of optimizations for no-reload gameplay. She's done more to refine the metagame than anyone else.
She's also one of the kindest and most generous people in the entire community. My friends have reacted with no small amount of surprise that the best BG2 player in the world is so humble. She's largely responsible for the pleasant community at Bioware, and her influence lives on here at the Beamdog forums. In more than one way, she's long been an inspiration for myself and the no-reload community as a whole.
Just for those of you who don't already know. Because Lord knows Alesia herself is the last person to tell you this.
If you think though that there should be more recognition of game skills not in a no-reload context, then why not introduce a thread to showcase those?
On the original Bioware forums, we had two threads for this purpose. One was the Ascension Solo Challenge the other was The Campfire: A Place to Share Tales of Heroism and Adventure.
I, personally, would use all three threads, including the NR Challenge. When I wanted to try a play through that I didn't think would work as a no reload (my Questpack/Tactics (parts)/Ascension Transmuter solo, for example). I'd post in The Campfire. If the character was solo, I'd move her over to the Ascension Solo Challenge upon reaching ToB.
Of course, you could also give no reloading another try. You may learn to like it. For those of us who have embraced it, it is now very nearly the only way to play. For me, it just makes sense. You die, you lose: game over. You live, you win. It's satisfying.
Best,
A.
PS: I'll note that all the threads, but especially the NR Challenge and the Ascension Solo Challenge aided my development as a player. By running everything from a transmuter, to an avenger druid, to a beastmaster, to an unkitted cleric through the Ascension Solo Challenge -with reloads- I was able to experiment, and acquire a set of tactics that later allowed me to no reload a variety of characters through the Ascension battles. Simultaneously, the No Reload Challenge focused my play and revealed sloppiness and deficiencies that had been obscured by use of Power Word: Reload. I'm better for having tried both styles, but now no reloading is the way.
We think we have the pattern down, as covered earlier in the thread.
The issue now is whether was can implement a fix. .
Ditto.
There's no modders' fix for this, I'm afraid. Other than some hacker genius emerging; the only way to get this odd behaviour to change is asking devs to do it.
We think we have the pattern down, as covered earlier in the thread.
The issue now is whether was can implement a fix. .
Ditto.
There's no modders' fix for this, I'm afraid. Other than some hacker genius emerging; the only way to get this odd behaviour to change is asking devs to do it.
The devs have been asked and, according to the status of the redmine ticket for this issue, they are indeed going to try to fix it. I hope they succeed, and personally I can't wait for a fix to this issue. https://support.baldursgate.com/issues/31342
This thread reads like the Ship conversations in Iain M Banks Culture Books.
Good to know the "Gods" are keeping an eye on things, though I prefer to keep an element of flabberghasted surprise when things go wrong when playing. For me that's part of the magic.
(And also makes me feel better when I have done something spectacularly stupid while playing, "weren't me guv'nor, those NPC have a mind of their own, honest")
We think we have the pattern down, as covered earlier in the thread.
The issue now is whether was can implement a fix. .
Ditto.
There's no modders' fix for this, I'm afraid. Other than some hacker genius emerging; the only way to get this odd behaviour to change is asking devs to do it.
The devs have been asked and, according to the status of the redmine ticket for this issue, they are indeed going to try to fix it. I hope they succeed, and personally I can't wait for a fix to this issue. https://support.baldursgate.com/issues/31342
For all my laxness about rules, I was expecting us to roll with this bug instead of fix it!
Yuppers. I'm glad we're fixing it because, setting aside mages, it effectively nerfs unkitted characters, while advantaging kits and that's, like, not what we need.
Until the fix comes, though, I intend to accept it as part of the game.
Btw, lightning trap tripped by my Priest of Lathander...
(Previously, we had concluded that traps weren't affected, but we didn't really understand the mechanic then and may have been testing with the wrong builds. We need to investigate, at least. Were I to allow myself, to speculate, I'd guess that they behave like the EFFs: defensive bonus for the "schoolless" clan, no evidence of an offensive bonus )
I prefer to keep an element of flabberghasted surprise when things go wrong when playing. For me that's part of the magic.
I respect that. And I suppose that's a valid critique of the no reload playing style, in a sense. You have to get everything, or else something will get you, and in that process of dissecting and analyzing anything and everything much is lost.
From Twain, Two Ways of Seeing a River:
Now when I had mastered the language of this water and had come to know every trifling feature that bordered the great river as familiarly as I knew the letters of the alphabet, I had made a valuable acquisition. But I had lost something, too. I had lost something which could never be restored to me while I lived. All the grace, the beauty, the poetry had gone out of the majestic river! I still keep in mind a certain wonderful sunset which I witnessed when steamboating was new to me. A broad expanse of the river was turned to blood; in the middle distance the red hue brightened into gold, through which a solitary log came floating, black and conspicuous; in one place a long, slanting mark lay sparkling upon the water; in another the surface was broken by boiling, tumbling rings, that were as many-tinted as an opal; where the ruddy flush was faintest, was a smooth spot that was covered with graceful circles and radiating lines, ever so delicately traced; the shore on our left was densely wooded, and the sombre shadow that fell from this forest was broken in one place by a long, ruffled trail that shone like silver; and high above the forest wall a clean-stemmed dead tree waved a single leafy bough that glowed like a flame in the unobstructed splendor that was flowing from the sun.
There were graceful curves, reflected images, woody heights, soft distances; and over the whole scene, far and near, the dissolving lights drifted steadily, enriching it, every passing moment, with new marvels of coloring.
I stood like one bewitched. I drank it in, in a speechless rapture. The world was new to me, and I had never seen anything like this at home.
But as I have said, a day came when I began to cease from noting the glories and the charms which the moon and the sun and the twilight wrought upon the river's face; another day came when I ceased altogether to note them. Then, if that sunset scene had been repeated, I should have looked upon it without rapture, and should have commented upon it, inwardly, in this fashion: "This sun means that we are going to have wind to-morrow; that floating log means that the river is rising, small thanks to it; that slanting mark on the water refers to a bluff reef which is going to kill somebody's steamboat one of these nights, if it keeps on stretching out like that; those tumbling 'boils' show a dissolving bar and a changing channel there; the lines and circles in the slick water over yonder are a warning that that troublesome place is shoaling up dangerously; that silver streak in the shadow of the forest is the 'break' from a new snag, and he has located himself in the very best place he could have found to fish for steamboats; that tall dead tree, with a single living branch, is not going to last long, and then how is a body ever going to get through this blind place at night without the friendly old landmark?"
No, the romance and the beauty were all gone from the river. All the value any feature of it had for me now was the amount of usefulness it could furnish toward compassing the safe piloting of a steamboat. Since those days, I have pitied doctors from my heart. What does the lovely flush in a beauty's cheek mean to a doctor but a "break" that ripples above some deadly disease? Are not all her visible charms sown thick with what are to him the signs and symbols of hidden decay? Does he ever see her beauty at all, or doesn't he simply view her professionally, and comment upon her unwholesome condition all to himself? And doesn't he sometimes wonder whether he has gained most or lost most by learning his trade?
I used to have that feeling about analysing poems I liked, or trying to master a thematic board game like War of the Ring. However I sometimes find that it's possible to come out the other side and see the beauty again, almost by surprise.
I used to have that feeling about analysing poems I liked, or trying to master a thematic board game like War of the Ring. However I sometimes find that it's possible to come out the other side and see the beauty again, almost by surprise.
Then you might enjoy Pirsig, who sees beauty in the classical, empirical, analytical world view. From Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance
A classical understanding sees the world primarily as underlying form itself. A romantic understandig sees it primarily in term of immediate appearance. If you were to show an engine or a mechanical drawing or electronic schematic to a romantic it is unlikely he would see much of interest in it. Is has no appeal because the reality he sees is its surface. Dull, complex lists of names, lines and numbers. Nothing interesting. But if you were to show the same blueprint of schematic or give the same description to a classical person he might look at it and then become fascinated by it because he sees that within the lines and shapes and symbols is a tremendous richness of underlying form.
The romantic mode is primarily inspirational, imaginative, creative, intuïtive. Feelings rather than facts predominate. “Art” when it is opposed to “Science” is often romantic. It does not proceed by reason or by laws. It proceeds by feeling, intuition and esthetic conscience. […]
The classic mode, by contrast, proceeds by reason and by laws – which are themselves underlying forms of thought and behaviour. […]
Although surface ugliness is often found in the classic mode of understanding it is not inherent in it. There is a classic esthetic which romantics often miss because of its subtlety. The classic style is straightforward, unadorned, unemotional, economical and carefully proportioned. Its purpose is not to inspire emotionally, but to bring order out of chaos and make the unknown known. It is not an esthetically free and natural style. It is esthetically restrained. Everything is under control. Its value is measured in terms of the skill with which this control is maintained.
I appreciate both of Twain's ways of seeing a river. And I embrace Pirsig's project of reconciling the romantic and classical, the inspirational and empirical.
(Previously, we had concluded that traps weren't affected, but we didn't really understand the mechanic then and may have been testing with the wrong builds. )
This is true. I concluded that traps weren't affected by the bug because I couldn't get any of my test characters to suffer a save penalty, but I never looked for a save bonus. If the version of lightning bolt from that trap is school-less, then that would make sense.
@Alesia_BH Yes, I read Pirsig with appreciation many years ago...when I was in Nepal I think. It's good to have a wide range of 'goggles' available to filter one's experiences & insights through, so a single instance can become multiple through reflection. It's always interesting to see you and other forumites taking these mechanics to task with the Scientific Method anyway .
Twain is wrong. Lovely passage, quite wrong though.
You can always see the beauty you just need to let yourself see it. I reckon he was just feeling a bit miserable when he wrote that.
It wasn't a critique of playstyle BTW, just an observation reading this thread and watching TPTB come out to play. It really did remind of the "ship" conversations, you're operating on a different level.
I checked the scripts for traps. Some of them, including Lightning Bolt and Call Lightning, use a unique version of the spell that has no school, so kitted characters will get a save bonus. On the other hand, some traps do use the proper version of the spell that has a school, including some nasty ones like Wail of the Banshee and Finger of Death, so kitted characters won't get a bonus there.
Comments
Best,
A.
I'm fond of poetry. Free verse poetry, mainly. All of my favorite poets write in free verse. When I write poetry, I write in free verse. I find constraint constraining. I pass.
Robert Frost was once asked what he thought of free verse. He sighed disdainfully and said: "It's like playing tennis with the net down, you know." When I heard that I thought: "And that, Bobby dearest, is why you can be a bit of a bore. Tennis isn't the only game." I still feel that way.
In this context, in the world of Baldur's Gate, I suppose I'm a little like Robert Frost. I play tennis and I play with the net up. I restrict tactics; I loathe the console; I never use custom kits; I keep my game mechanics standard. I've accepted the EE changes in the interest of relatability, but I still won't play an EE kit (shudder!).
Does that make me a bore? Maybe. But, you know, some people like Robert Frost. And I'm glad that he's around- even if I'm also glad that he's not all there is.
I've always preferred to think of the no reload community as an artists collective. It's good that we have different styles, different perspectives, different ways of playing. Creators on opposite ends of a spectrum will always render different judgements. That doesn't mean that they can't respect and appreciate each other's work
I guess what I'm saying is you do you, my friend. I'll often see things differently, but in the end, that's good. Stylistic variety is a positive. I'm glad you're here; I'm glad you're different; We're all better for it.
Go get'em, tiger
Best,
A.
As for fame I'm not sure that goes any further than participating in the biggest thread on the Forum (I bet my Dad's thread is bigger than your Dad's thread
If you think though that there should be more recognition of game skills not in a no-reload context, then why not introduce a thread to showcase those? That could perhaps be a companion thread to the one @semiticgod has done on use of tricks.
I like the verse quotation, but I feel its a bit out of place. Semiticgod always plays with a net - and most assuredly in the same height as the best (besides the potion denying Grond0...).
But Semiticgod plays on a different surface (I am holding on to the tennis similies). You may prefer the classic grass court, whilst Semiticgod plays on many different surfaces... his setup is never the vanilla bg, but always interesting and always balanced. So imo the net is always there and always at the same height - but the surface is never is always changing.
I remember reading the post on the “chunk run”. The chunking did ruin the run, and when you see that most of the mishaps shouldnt have occured, you get the feeling that the game treated a fair player unfair.
Perhaps its just me misunderstanding the quote. Perhaps I am poking in to something I shouldnt. But I hope that we (well mostly you...) can document runs and afventuring instead of splitting hairs about chunking. I very much feel that both views on the game can be contained in the same thread.
" Some more test results from a Fixpack + TobEx beta 0026 install:
TobEx does not fix the bug like I previously thought.
Whatever is going on is definitely an improper interaction between a creature's kit and the specialist save bonus/penalty. For example, when a shadow fiend has its kit set as TRUECLASS, your save vs. death needs to be 1 to always save against its paralyzing attack. When its kit is changed to NO_KIT, your save needs to -1.
This is soo odd. I'll do some testing with this. So far, I've noticed that this works as the opposite of what's quoted here. NO_KIT is easier to resist, if you kit a shadow fiend as a skald or whatever else (Shadow bards ftw!) suddenly his attack can paralyze you even at save vs death = 0. If he's NO_KIT, save vs death = 1 is enough to never fail the save.
Incredible....
It also works with kits and any on-hit effects. Kensai has a better chance for triggering Celestial Fury's stun then a regular fighter, and will have a chance to stun a target with save vs spell at 1, which a trueclass figher never will.
Again, incredible. Korgan can swing Unyielding better then Mazzy simply because he's a berserker and his vorpal will come with an additional -2 penalty just because of that.
Multiclass fighters don't benefit from this, but dual-classed do. kensai/berserker-mage duals now seem even more omnipotent than before..."
Corey's comment about where your save needs to be to be apsolutely safe:
"Like GrimJim said, for no-reloading purposes, basically just add +2 to whatever save you are wanting to make to "insure" a save. "
The purpose of the post wasn't to critique Semiticgod. It was to celebrate diversity, and his playing style in particular, while at the same time acknowledging, that I, personally, don't like using custom kits, the console, exploits, etc.
I was using the Frost quote to label myself a tired old-fuddy-duddy, not to suggest that semiticgod was or is doing anything wrong. Quoting myself from the same post: Again, quoting myself from the same post: Best,
A.
We think we have the pattern down, as covered earlier in the thread.
The issue now is whether was can implement a fix.
Read the posts, seek replication if you need to, and absolutely, positively let us know if you find a way to implement.
Best,
A.
I've said before that folks like @Alesia_BH and @Grond0 are immensely disciplined players in a way that I am not, and I meant that both in terms of the strictness of their rules as well as their technical skill and the incredible precision of their gameplay. You guys have always played by the strictest rules, and yet you've had the most successful runs in the community.
I think some newcomers might not be familiar with the history of this challenge. For those of you who aren't familiar with the old 500+ page Bioware thread, or haven't followed every single post in the now-200 page no-reload thread at the Beamdog forums, here's my two cents about the difference between me and @Alesia_BH:
@Alesia_BH has yet to brag even once about her record, but she is by far the most accomplished no-reloader in the entire community. She's done trilogy no-reloads under the harshest of rules, the toughest mods, and while playing solo. Though she's said she's stood on the shoulders of giants, she herself flat-out invented the meta game for Bounty Hunters (which so many people deemed worthless until she proved otherwise) and she single-handedly designed workable strategies, including solo strategies, for the immensely complicated and high-pressure Ascension Melissan fight. Not to mention a very long list of optimizations for no-reload gameplay. She's done more to refine the metagame than anyone else.
She's also one of the kindest and most generous people in the entire community. My friends have reacted with no small amount of surprise that the best BG2 player in the world is so humble. She's largely responsible for the pleasant community at Bioware, and her influence lives on here at the Beamdog forums. In more than one way, she's long been an inspiration for myself and the no-reload community as a whole.
Just for those of you who don't already know. Because Lord knows Alesia herself is the last person to tell you this.
I, personally, would use all three threads, including the NR Challenge. When I wanted to try a play through that I didn't think would work as a no reload (my Questpack/Tactics (parts)/Ascension Transmuter solo, for example). I'd post in The Campfire. If the character was solo, I'd move her over to the Ascension Solo Challenge upon reaching ToB.
Of course, you could also give no reloading another try. You may learn to like it. For those of us who have embraced it, it is now very nearly the only way to play. For me, it just makes sense. You die, you lose: game over. You live, you win. It's satisfying.
Best,
A.
PS: I'll note that all the threads, but especially the NR Challenge and the Ascension Solo Challenge aided my development as a player. By running everything from a transmuter, to an avenger druid, to a beastmaster, to an unkitted cleric through the Ascension Solo Challenge -with reloads- I was able to experiment, and acquire a set of tactics that later allowed me to no reload a variety of characters through the Ascension battles. Simultaneously, the No Reload Challenge focused my play and revealed sloppiness and deficiencies that had been obscured by use of Power Word: Reload. I'm better for having tried both styles, but now no reloading is the way.
There's no modders' fix for this, I'm afraid.
Other than some hacker genius emerging; the only way to get this odd behaviour to change is asking devs to do it.
https://support.baldursgate.com/issues/31342
Good to know the "Gods" are keeping an eye on things, though I prefer to keep an element of flabberghasted surprise when things go wrong when playing.
For me that's part of the magic.
(And also makes me feel better when I have done something spectacularly stupid while playing, "weren't me guv'nor, those NPC have a mind of their own, honest")
Better to have it fixed, though.
Until the fix comes, though, I intend to accept it as part of the game.
Best,
A.
(Previously, we had concluded that traps weren't affected, but we didn't really understand the mechanic then and may have been testing with the wrong builds. We need to investigate, at least. Were I to allow myself, to speculate, I'd guess that they behave like the EFFs: defensive bonus for the "schoolless" clan, no evidence of an offensive bonus )
From Twain, Two Ways of Seeing a River:
Now when I had mastered the language of this water and had come to know every trifling feature that bordered the great river as familiarly as I knew the letters of the alphabet, I had made a valuable acquisition. But I had lost something, too. I had lost something which could never be restored to me while I lived. All the grace, the beauty, the poetry had gone out of the majestic river! I still keep in mind a certain wonderful sunset which I witnessed when steamboating was new to me. A broad expanse of the river was turned to blood; in the middle distance the red hue brightened into gold, through which a solitary log came floating, black and conspicuous; in one place a long, slanting mark lay sparkling upon the water; in another the surface was broken by boiling, tumbling rings, that were as many-tinted as an opal; where the ruddy flush was faintest, was a smooth spot that was covered with graceful circles and radiating lines, ever so delicately traced; the shore on our left was densely wooded, and the sombre shadow that fell from this forest was broken in one place by a long, ruffled trail that shone like silver; and high above the forest wall a clean-stemmed dead tree waved a single leafy bough that glowed like a flame in the unobstructed splendor that was flowing from the sun.
There were graceful curves, reflected images, woody heights, soft distances; and over the whole scene, far and near, the dissolving lights drifted steadily, enriching it, every passing moment, with new marvels of coloring.
I stood like one bewitched. I drank it in, in a speechless rapture. The world was new to me, and I had never seen anything like this at home.
But as I have said, a day came when I began to cease from noting the glories and the charms which the moon and the sun and the twilight wrought upon the river's face; another day came when I ceased altogether to note them. Then, if that sunset scene had been repeated, I should have looked upon it without rapture, and should have commented upon it, inwardly, in this fashion: "This sun means that we are going to have wind to-morrow; that floating log means that the river is rising, small thanks to it; that slanting mark on the water refers to a bluff reef which is going to kill somebody's steamboat one of these nights, if it keeps on stretching out like that; those tumbling 'boils' show a dissolving bar and a changing channel there; the lines and circles in the slick water over yonder are a warning that that troublesome place is shoaling up dangerously; that silver streak in the shadow of the forest is the 'break' from a new snag, and he has located himself in the very best place he could have found to fish for steamboats; that tall dead tree, with a single living branch, is not going to last long, and then how is a body ever going to get through this blind place at night without the friendly old landmark?"
No, the romance and the beauty were all gone from the river. All the value any feature of it had for me now was the amount of usefulness it could furnish toward compassing the safe piloting of a steamboat. Since those days, I have pitied doctors from my heart. What does the lovely flush in a beauty's cheek mean to a doctor but a "break" that ripples above some deadly disease? Are not all her visible charms sown thick with what are to him the signs and symbols of hidden decay? Does he ever see her beauty at all, or doesn't he simply view her professionally, and comment upon her unwholesome condition all to himself? And doesn't he sometimes wonder whether he has gained most or lost most by learning his trade?
Best,
A.
A classical understanding sees the world primarily as underlying form itself. A romantic understandig sees it primarily in term of immediate appearance. If you were to show an engine or a mechanical drawing or electronic schematic to a romantic it is unlikely he would see much of interest in it. Is has no appeal because the reality he sees is its surface. Dull, complex lists of names, lines and numbers. Nothing interesting. But if you were to show the same blueprint of schematic or give the same description to a classical person he might look at it and then become fascinated by it because he sees that within the lines and shapes and symbols is a tremendous richness of underlying form.
The romantic mode is primarily inspirational, imaginative, creative, intuïtive. Feelings rather than facts predominate. “Art” when it is opposed to “Science” is often romantic. It does not proceed by reason or by laws. It proceeds by feeling, intuition and esthetic conscience. […]
The classic mode, by contrast, proceeds by reason and by laws – which are themselves underlying forms of thought and behaviour. […]
Although surface ugliness is often found in the classic mode of understanding it is not inherent in it. There is a classic esthetic which romantics often miss because of its subtlety. The classic style is straightforward, unadorned, unemotional, economical and carefully proportioned. Its purpose is not to inspire emotionally, but to bring order out of chaos and make the unknown known. It is not an esthetically free and natural style. It is esthetically restrained. Everything is under control. Its value is measured in terms of the skill with which this control is maintained.
I appreciate both of Twain's ways of seeing a river. And I embrace Pirsig's project of reconciling the romantic and classical, the inspirational and empirical.
Btw, is this off topic or not? I can't decide.
Best,
A.
Not sure, though. I do think we should test.
Best,
A.
Twain is wrong. Lovely passage, quite wrong though.
You can always see the beauty you just need to let yourself see it. I reckon he was just feeling a bit miserable when he wrote that.
It wasn't a critique of playstyle BTW, just an observation reading this thread and watching TPTB come out to play.
It really did remind of the "ship" conversations, you're operating on a different level.