I would propose the easiest fix for Parry, and Discipline - remove them. And use the actual 3e rules for these functions.
Reasoning for Parry: It overlaps with other 3e mechanics: Combat Expertise / Fight Defensively / Total Defense.
Suggestion: Remove the Parry skill. Implement Fight Defensively and Total Defense modes. Add the feat Fencing for a defensive finesse specific fighting style: https://dnd-wiki.org/wiki/Fencing_(3.5e_Feat)
Reasoning for Discipline: Actual 3e rules for resisting Knockdown and Disarm conditions are more balanced and apply to all classes instead of only Warriors. Having a Discipline skill that needs to be maxed to be relevant effectively lowers a PC's skill points by 1. It also makes classes without Discipline as a class skill helpless against above conditions when they shouldn't be.
Suggestion: Remove the Discipline skill and implement 3e rules for resisting Knockdown and Disarm conditions.
Parry is not as good as it sounds from its description. Parry will only attempt to block (and riposte) the first attack of the 3 flurries in a melee combat round no matter how many attacks/round the parrying character has.
The skill works correctly unless dueling opponents with 4 or more attacks per round, as the flurries will "double up" to include multiple attacks. So, against someone with 6 attacks/round, you will only parry the 1st, 3rd, and 5th attacks instead of all 6 (assuming you have at least 6 attacks/round yourself). All other attacks made against you compare your AC vs. the attacker's AB as normal, as if you weren't even in Parry mode. This last part is what makes Parry generally useless and all-around inferior to (Improved) Expertise.
OBSERVED: Parry only blocks (and attempts ripostes against) 1 attack per flurry, regardless of the defender's number of attacks/round.
EXPECTED: Parry should block (and attempt ripostes against) every attack in a flurry, up to the defender's number of attacks per round (per the description).
Suggestion: Remove the Parry skill. Implement Fight Defensively and Total Defense modes. Add the feat Fencing for a defensive finesse specific fighting style: https://dnd-wiki.org/wiki/Fencing_(3.5e_Feat)
Yo, that feat is Homebrew. I don't recommend using dnd-wiki for 3.5 reference stuff, unless you want Dragonball Z races and the like.
I feel like Parry, if necessary to be kept, needs to be more workable as a defensive move. If you are surrounded right now, it doesn't do anything. And even if I max out parry, use special parry boosting items and fight a monk my level, while dualwielding, I'll still only fight them to a standstill. It's not very useful in any given circumstance in my experience.
Parry and Discipline are Homebrew as well. I don't really understand why they were created in the first place. Needing Discipline to resist knockdowns is especially unfair for Rogues.
I just looked up the Fencing feat for a replacement option for those who would enjoy a defensive mode like Parry. Can easily leave that out too. But a defensive mode should be a feat rather than a skill. Skills are essentially non-combat skills and are mechanically different with ranks rather than using AB.
I also think Parry should be either fixed (per @Flashburn 's description above) or removed entirely. I doubt it'll actually get removed, for a number of reasons, so I'd like to see it fixed.
I would also like to see some feat unhardcoding, so that modders can adjust Knockdown and the like to work without the Discipline skill, which I also think should not exist, but which will undoubtedly also remain in the game.
1. I like parry 2. I agree with Shadooow: it is favorable only in the lower levels. 3. They will not remove Parry, the game will keep the original game. 4. Yes I beliave the parry can be better, modified to be more useful
My suggestion: give a Script to the builders modify the parry on the toolset
If fixed, it could easily become too powerfull ability. It will be very hard to balance it out. Right now, of course it is almost useless ability and the only time where this skill is useable will be at lower levels.
Parry should work as intended. You are standing still deflecting attacks, its a combat mode that doesn't allow to do anything else.
Unlike expertise (and improved expertise) where you can still do other actions. Like using potions or scrolls. Use active combat feats and I can't remember, may be cast even spells.
For balancing issues its just a matter of PW configuration.
I strongly disagree. No feat or skill in the game should be removed, if only for the single reason of maintaining compatibility with modules who could use them for their own purposes.
And there's nothing wrong with Parry and Discipline being NWN-exclusive. NWN's rules differ from PnP in more things than just these, so this shouldn't be an argument, really.
Balance issues? Once again, NWN never was and never was supposed to be balanced, so I don't think it's a valid argument for removing the skill(s). Module builders, such as myself, can simply provide balance for these things themselves - and at this point I think rebalancing should be left up to them. For example, in my module non-disciple builds/classes can wear Disciple-enhancing rings to stand a fair (or more than fair) chance against KDs and other combat feats.
But it's not even a thread for discussing Discipline. As for Parry, I'd change what seems like unintended behavior - that is, being only able to parry the first attack in a round. My suggestion is to simply allow parrying every attack (up to the number of attacks per round of the parrying creature).
Parry and Discipline are Homebrew as well. I don't really understand why they were created in the first place. Needing Discipline to resist knockdowns is especially unfair for Rogues.
Nobody,at least in pvp-pve module,use pure rogue build. Just add some lvl's of warrior/ranger/bard/paladin/bg etc etc and you will get discipline. Please avoid creating non-existent problems.
Nobody,at least in pvp-pve module,use pure rogue build. Just add some lvl's of warrior/ranger/bard/paladin/bg etc etc and you will get discipline. Please avoid creating non-existent problems.
Not that I think Discipline is likely to be removed, but "nobody plays rogues" is not a good argument against the idea that rogues are being unfairly disadvantaged in some way. In fact, it's a rather good argument that they are being unfairly disadvantaged in some way.
Parry and Discipline are Homebrew as well. I don't really understand why they were created in the first place. Needing Discipline to resist knockdowns is especially unfair for Rogues.
Nobody,at least in pvp-pve module,use pure rogue build. Just add some lvl's of warrior/ranger/bard/paladin/bg etc etc and you will get discipline. Please avoid creating non-existent problems.
You just confirmed the issue. "No one uses pure Rogue". Because the system doesn't work it's not even an option.
Not everyone is a powergamer who will optimize builds and take one level of this and that for mechanical advantage. And exploit saved skill points with multiclassing so you can get a non-class skill to a high level by basically cheating the system. And I'm not even frowning at powergaming here but the game should be fair for all players.
Pure Rogues, or Clerics / Druids / whoever doesn't get Discipline, might exist on a RP server, and they will be knocked down and disarmed and killed unfairly. And everyone else loses one skill point per level to a skill that shouldn't exist in the first place.
If fixed, it could easily become too powerfull ability. It will be very hard to balance it out. Right now, of course it is almost useless ability and the only time where this skill is useable will be at lower levels.
I agree with this. A skill by definition shouldn't even be used in combat. Combat balance is based on BAB and feats. It's a basic design principle in 3e. Skills are essentially non-combat skills.
A skill like Parry can have multiple bonuses from various sources (stats, items, skill focus) and then the skill rank is compared to an attackers BAB, ignoring the Parrying character's BAB completely. The design of it is just completely bonkers. Sorry Trent or whoever came up with it.
I can live without seeing the Parry boom after a "fix" makes dedicated Parrying mechanically superior to normal 3e combating.
It is. I raised this years ago and was told that the developers knew it wasn't as per the description but that if it was then it would be way too powerful. It's why it wasn't "fixed" in NWN2 (not just Obsidian being lazy).
Pure Rogues, or Clerics / Druids / whoever doesn't get Discipline, might exist on a RP server, and they will be knocked down and disarmed and killed unfairly. And everyone else loses one skill point per level to a skill that shouldn't exist in the first place.
That doesn't sound unfairly to me at all. It sounds like a flawed character for the sake of roleplay. If you build a pure rouge, you should expect to get knocked down by fighters.
You can't be different and just the same, at the same time.
Pure Rogues, or Clerics / Druids / whoever doesn't get Discipline, might exist on a RP server, and they will be knocked down and disarmed and killed unfairly. And everyone else loses one skill point per level to a skill that shouldn't exist in the first place.
That doesn't sound unfairly to me at all. It sounds like a flawed character for the sake of roleplay. If you build a pure rouge, you should expect to get knocked down by fighters.
You can't be different and just the same, at the same time.
This isn't a convincing argument. You're basically shifting the burden of the game's design onto the players, when the issue is that everyone who isn't a martial class is less subject to a particular game mechanic in addition to everyone who is a martial class having a skill tax to avoid knockdown.
People are criticizing the design that led to this outcome, so invoking that design to defend it isn't really a valid defense.
Nobody,at least in pvp-pve module,use pure rogue build. Just add some lvl's of warrior/ranger/bard/paladin/bg etc etc and you will get discipline. Please avoid creating non-existent problems.
Not that I think Discipline is likely to be removed, but "nobody plays rogues" is not a good argument against the idea that rogues are being unfairly disadvantaged in some way. In fact, it's a rather good argument that they are being unfairly disadvantaged in some way.
Except i didn't say "nobody play rogue" but "nobody play PURE rogue" So,learn to quote.
Parry and Discipline are Homebrew as well. I don't really understand why they were created in the first place. Needing Discipline to resist knockdowns is especially unfair for Rogues.
Nobody,at least in pvp-pve module,use pure rogue build. Just add some lvl's of warrior/ranger/bard/paladin/bg etc etc and you will get discipline. Please avoid creating non-existent problems.
You just confirmed the issue. "No one uses pure Rogue". Because the system doesn't work it's not even an option.
No, No, I haven't confirmed anything. It depends by server. There are higly custom module that reward players who use pure build.
If you are a module builder just add some code in OnPlayerLevelUp to reward players who use pure rogue: e.g. +1 on discipline every 2lvl (It's exaggerated for me ... but consider your complaints, it should be fine),or create a new item, mark as useable only by rogue and add some point to disci.
Pure Rogues, or Clerics / Druids / whoever doesn't get Discipline, might exist on a RP server, and they will be knocked down and disarmed and killed unfairly. And everyone else loses one skill point per level to a skill that shouldn't exist in the first place.
That doesn't sound unfairly to me at all. It sounds like a flawed character for the sake of roleplay. If you build a pure rouge, you should expect to get knocked down by fighters.
You can't be different and just the same, at the same time.
The flaw was changing the actual 3e rules on the matter.
And single class Rogues aren't "flawed characters" in D&D. They might be from a NWN PvP server point of view, but that also isn't what D&D is about at it's core.
I dislike the argument that skills should be non-combat oriented. According to this, many of Concentration's example DC's refer to combat scenarios, and its a combat skill first and foremost in its NWN implementation. Spot and Listen in their most basic implementation in NWN are to help you spot stealthed characters by opposing their Hide and Move Silently checks, and the most likely scenario that you'd be finding stealthed characters is in combat. All this discussion of Discipline and Parry seems to be strictly ignoring Taunt, another (as far as I'm aware) homebrewed skill for NWN that only has one application: lowering an opponents AB in combat. Seeing how NWN, and D&D even, is designed around combat, it makes sense that any extra skills the game would add would be combat applicable.
Also, I feel that saying that non-martial classes are at a disadvantage in combat or are being treated unfairly is ignoring the point of non-martial classes. As far as I'm aware, in PnP Rogues are not supposed to be fighting enemies up close and personal unless their enemy is distracted, to which they can take advantage of their big Sneak Attack damage until the enemy chooses to hit them. The class's whole purpose is purpose is to get themselves or a group through a dungeon by disarming and detecting traps (especially since they are the only ones with the ability to detect high level traps in PnP), opening locks, scouting ahead, or just sneaking past enemies if their alone. They are certainly not a frontline class, and their aeformentioned skills on top of the fact they have very low HP and average attack progression should show that. If you're going straight rogue with a focus on doing PvP against martial classes, you're doing something wrong.
This discussion is supposed to be about Parry, however. As it stands, Parry seems like a really awkward skill overall that should have been a feat of a similar vein to Expertise or Power Attack, but unfortunately, we can't do that without breaking compatability. Seeing how Parry is rather pointless in its current implementation, I'm of the opinion that it should be buffed to its described levels of power, and if it is too strong or weak allow module makers to modify the skill for their own purposes. If you don't even want parry and want to make it into a feat or just removed from your module, that should also be an option for the module maker. I doubt outright removing either it or Discipline from the game is going to help anyone.
The unfair point has less to do with class concept or design and more to do with the fact that non-martial classes have been nerfed with NWN's homebrew rules that involve a bugged / overpowered skill.
So would removing Parry corrupt PC's that have ranks in it? Is this a large scale problem? Since it's always been "bugged" is it even used?
What consequences would removing a skill or two actually have?
Agreed. Modules may use Parry checks (and even more probable, Discipline checks) in dialogue. So, whatever the merits of those skills, removing them at this point is out of the question.
1. [Parry] I'm not left handed either! 2. [Discipline] My name is [CHARNAME]. You killed my father. Prepare to die.
Much as I dislike both Parry and Discipline as skills, I agree with @Fardragon . Which is why I'd like to see some of this stuff unhardcoded, so that modders and module builders can create alternate functionality without NWNEE breaking the game for those who don't want to implement, or simply haven't implemented, said alternate functionality.
Sadly, Parry was one of those ideas that just didn't get the development time it needed. We were trying to address a few issues with the original game with the Parry skill. 1. The desire to have a defensive finesse fighter. We wanted a finesse fighter who could offset attacking enemies and could swap between offense and defense as the party required. 2. We needed a sink for skill points for the melee classes as there simply were not enough skills (in the original release) for Fighter classes to spend points in 3. Parry was initially implemented while the combat system was still going through revision and it wasn't really re-examined when we added the epic levels, so it needs some re-work.
So far I'm reading people want us to improve the skill by making it more open to modification on a server basis. Is that correct?
It would be nice if it actually parried as many attacks as it should as well - perhaps with limitations for balance, say one attack + 1 for each 5 skill points invested, or -5 per attack parried after the first.
I think the biggest complaint is that it will only ever parry the first attack per "flurry", regardless of how many attacks it can block per round. Fix that, or at least provide an option to fix that, and I think most of us would be more-or-less happy.
If it parries as many attacks as the description it's way too powerful. I suspect that if it blocked 3 attacks in the first flurry it would be too powerful. I would become a must have skill, trumping even Tumble for melee builds.
Frankly I doubt it can be balanced without changing how it works substantially. As pointed out earlier it's a skill roll vs BAB, which is inherently weighted in the favour of the parrier. The limitations in number of attacks is the only thing that stops it being mega.
In my opinion I think the best all round solution would be as follows:
Step 1: Correct the in-game description of the parry skill so it reflects what the skill currently does, (so new players aren’t being effectively lied to.) This should preserve the original NWN experience as well as keeping anyone worried about parry becoming overpowered happy. The challenge of this will be trying to describe how it currently works without having to explain the entire concept of flurries to potential fledgling players.
Step 2: Add a new checkbox to game options to “allow characters to parry attacks per round equal to their number of attacks.” Along with an equivalent setting for dedicated servers. This way we can used the fixed skill in the original campaigns should we wish.
Step 3: Expose some amount of the “hardcodedness” in script form so persistent-worlds/custom-modules can balance and tweak the parry skill to their hearts content.
Honestly though I’d be happy with just step 3. I imagine simultaneously having something be controlled by a game option and exposed to a script is probably a faff.
I agree make it open and let modules decides how it works or if it exists at all.
In terms of hard coded restrictions on parry I think NWN2 had the right idea with some of their 2da expansions like with skills.2da there is a column to soft remove any skill. There is also a column for a mode ID to toggle that mode on and off with a combatmodes.2da and a 1/0 on and off option called IsActiveSkill. It would be useful to do something like that with a mapping back to feats.2da or something to open up skill behavior more easily.
Some might prefer a defensive stance boost like in the rules but some might just want it to work with all attacks.
JuliusBorisov
Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 21,910
Comments
Reasoning for Parry: It overlaps with other 3e mechanics: Combat Expertise / Fight Defensively / Total Defense.
Suggestion: Remove the Parry skill. Implement Fight Defensively and Total Defense modes. Add the feat Fencing for a defensive finesse specific fighting style: https://dnd-wiki.org/wiki/Fencing_(3.5e_Feat)
Reasoning for Discipline: Actual 3e rules for resisting Knockdown and Disarm conditions are more balanced and apply to all classes instead of only Warriors. Having a Discipline skill that needs to be maxed to be relevant effectively lowers a PC's skill points by 1. It also makes classes without Discipline as a class skill helpless against above conditions when they shouldn't be.
Suggestion: Remove the Discipline skill and implement 3e rules for resisting Knockdown and Disarm conditions.
The skill works correctly unless dueling opponents with 4 or more attacks per round, as the flurries will "double up" to include multiple attacks. So, against someone with 6 attacks/round, you will only parry the 1st, 3rd, and 5th attacks instead of all 6 (assuming you have at least 6 attacks/round yourself). All other attacks made against you compare your AC vs. the attacker's AB as normal, as if you weren't even in Parry mode. This last part is what makes Parry generally useless and all-around inferior to (Improved) Expertise.
OBSERVED:
Parry only blocks (and attempts ripostes against) 1 attack per flurry, regardless of the defender's number of attacks/round.
EXPECTED:
Parry should block (and attempt ripostes against) every attack in a flurry, up to the defender's number of attacks per round (per the description).
More info:
http://nwn.wikia.com/wiki/Parry
http://nwn.wikia.com/wiki/Flurry
I feel like Parry, if necessary to be kept, needs to be more workable as a defensive move. If you are surrounded right now, it doesn't do anything. And even if I max out parry, use special parry boosting items and fight a monk my level, while dualwielding, I'll still only fight them to a standstill. It's not very useful in any given circumstance in my experience.
I just looked up the Fencing feat for a replacement option for those who would enjoy a defensive mode like Parry. Can easily leave that out too. But a defensive mode should be a feat rather than a skill. Skills are essentially non-combat skills and are mechanically different with ranks rather than using AB.
I would also like to see some feat unhardcoding, so that modders can adjust Knockdown and the like to work without the Discipline skill, which I also think should not exist, but which will undoubtedly also remain in the game.
2. I agree with Shadooow: it is favorable only in the lower levels.
3. They will not remove Parry, the game will keep the original game.
4. Yes I beliave the parry can be better, modified to be more useful
My suggestion: give a Script to the builders modify the parry on the toolset
If fixed, it could easily become too powerfull ability. It will be very hard to balance it out. Right now, of course it is almost useless ability and the only time where this skill is useable will be at lower levels.
Unlike expertise (and improved expertise) where you can still do other actions. Like using potions or scrolls. Use active combat feats and I can't remember, may be cast even spells.
For balancing issues its just a matter of PW configuration.
And there's nothing wrong with Parry and Discipline being NWN-exclusive. NWN's rules differ from PnP in more things than just these, so this shouldn't be an argument, really.
Balance issues? Once again, NWN never was and never was supposed to be balanced, so I don't think it's a valid argument for removing the skill(s). Module builders, such as myself, can simply provide balance for these things themselves - and at this point I think rebalancing should be left up to them. For example, in my module non-disciple builds/classes can wear Disciple-enhancing rings to stand a fair (or more than fair) chance against KDs and other combat feats.
But it's not even a thread for discussing Discipline. As for Parry, I'd change what seems like unintended behavior - that is, being only able to parry the first attack in a round. My suggestion is to simply allow parrying every attack (up to the number of attacks per round of the parrying creature).
Fix parry instead. Nobody,at least in pvp-pve module,use pure rogue build.
Just add some lvl's of warrior/ranger/bard/paladin/bg etc etc and you will get discipline.
Please avoid creating non-existent problems.
Not everyone is a powergamer who will optimize builds and take one level of this and that for mechanical advantage. And exploit saved skill points with multiclassing so you can get a non-class skill to a high level by basically cheating the system. And I'm not even frowning at powergaming here but the game should be fair for all players.
Pure Rogues, or Clerics / Druids / whoever doesn't get Discipline, might exist on a RP server, and they will be knocked down and disarmed and killed unfairly. And everyone else loses one skill point per level to a skill that shouldn't exist in the first place.
A skill like Parry can have multiple bonuses from various sources (stats, items, skill focus) and then the skill rank is compared to an attackers BAB, ignoring the Parrying character's BAB completely. The design of it is just completely bonkers. Sorry Trent or whoever came up with it.
I can live without seeing the Parry boom after a "fix" makes dedicated Parrying mechanically superior to normal 3e combating.
You can't be different and just the same, at the same time.
People are criticizing the design that led to this outcome, so invoking that design to defend it isn't really a valid defense.
Just add some lvl's of warrior/ranger/bard/paladin/bg etc etc and you will get discipline.
Please avoid creating non-existent problems.
No, No, I haven't confirmed anything.
It depends by server.
There are higly custom module that reward players who use pure build.
If you are a module builder just add some code in OnPlayerLevelUp to reward players who use pure rogue: e.g. +1 on discipline every 2lvl (It's exaggerated for me ... but consider your complaints, it should be fine),or create a new item, mark as useable only by rogue and add some point to disci.
The system work very welll...but in good hands.
And single class Rogues aren't "flawed characters" in D&D. They might be from a NWN PvP server point of view, but that also isn't what D&D is about at it's core.
Also, I feel that saying that non-martial classes are at a disadvantage in combat or are being treated unfairly is ignoring the point of non-martial classes. As far as I'm aware, in PnP Rogues are not supposed to be fighting enemies up close and personal unless their enemy is distracted, to which they can take advantage of their big Sneak Attack damage until the enemy chooses to hit them. The class's whole purpose is purpose is to get themselves or a group through a dungeon by disarming and detecting traps (especially since they are the only ones with the ability to detect high level traps in PnP), opening locks, scouting ahead, or just sneaking past enemies if their alone. They are certainly not a frontline class, and their aeformentioned skills on top of the fact they have very low HP and average attack progression should show that. If you're going straight rogue with a focus on doing PvP against martial classes, you're doing something wrong.
This discussion is supposed to be about Parry, however. As it stands, Parry seems like a really awkward skill overall that should have been a feat of a similar vein to Expertise or Power Attack, but unfortunately, we can't do that without breaking compatability. Seeing how Parry is rather pointless in its current implementation, I'm of the opinion that it should be buffed to its described levels of power, and if it is too strong or weak allow module makers to modify the skill for their own purposes. If you don't even want parry and want to make it into a feat or just removed from your module, that should also be an option for the module maker. I doubt outright removing either it or Discipline from the game is going to help anyone.
So would removing Parry corrupt PC's that have ranks in it? Is this a large scale problem? Since it's always been "bugged" is it even used?
What consequences would removing a skill or two actually have?
1. [Parry] I'm not left handed either!
2. [Discipline] My name is [CHARNAME]. You killed my father. Prepare to die.
1. The desire to have a defensive finesse fighter. We wanted a finesse fighter who could offset attacking enemies and could swap between offense and defense as the party required.
2. We needed a sink for skill points for the melee classes as there simply were not enough skills (in the original release) for Fighter classes to spend points in
3. Parry was initially implemented while the combat system was still going through revision and it wasn't really re-examined when we added the epic levels, so it needs some re-work.
So far I'm reading people want us to improve the skill by making it more open to modification on a server basis. Is that correct?
Frankly I doubt it can be balanced without changing how it works substantially. As pointed out earlier it's a skill roll vs BAB, which is inherently weighted in the favour of the parrier. The limitations in number of attacks is the only thing that stops it being mega.
Step 1: Correct the in-game description of the parry skill so it reflects what the skill currently does, (so new players aren’t being effectively lied to.) This should preserve the original NWN experience as well as keeping anyone worried about parry becoming overpowered happy. The challenge of this will be trying to describe how it currently works without having to explain the entire concept of flurries to potential fledgling players.
Step 2: Add a new checkbox to game options to “allow characters to parry attacks per round equal to their number of attacks.” Along with an equivalent setting for dedicated servers. This way we can used the fixed skill in the original campaigns should we wish.
Step 3: Expose some amount of the “hardcodedness” in script form so persistent-worlds/custom-modules can balance and tweak the parry skill to their hearts content.
Honestly though I’d be happy with just step 3. I imagine simultaneously having something be controlled by a game option and exposed to a script is probably a faff.
In terms of hard coded restrictions on parry I think NWN2 had the right idea with some of their 2da expansions like with skills.2da there is a column to soft remove any skill. There is also a column for a mode ID to toggle that mode on and off with a combatmodes.2da and a 1/0 on and off option called IsActiveSkill. It would be useful to do something like that with a mapping back to feats.2da or something to open up skill behavior more easily.
Some might prefer a defensive stance boost like in the rules but some might just want it to work with all attacks.
double post.