With all changes that allow deviation from the standard NWN game logic/gameplay, these would obviously be accompanied by an INI toggle or a script flag.
I don't understand where people get the idea that just because they don't like something that it shouldn't be an option.
Example of proper attitude: I prefer permadeath, but I'm not going to ask Beamdog to remove respawn from the game.
At the risk of getting fireballed, I’ve decided to add because this topic interests me. The way I see it, those that want a 4th class just want more options to build a solo/Uber character to have fun. I can appreciate that. Then there is the other camp who I assume feels that 4 classes is getting excessive. I must admit I find myself agreeing with this and wondering, just abolish classes and a have a quota of any ability/magic you want if you want 4. My own personal thoughts are, how would one role play such a multi class character without any conflicts. Yeah I guess it is possible. But I’m still old school lol, Im an avid single class supporter, yet since then I’ve had plenty of fun with multiclass pc’s. So I come to the conclusion that everybody has a different play style and wants for what will make the game more fun for them. So although I may not agree, as long as I don’t HAVE to partake, go for it.
OK, I’ve sort of flip-flopped but you may not like my final conclusions. I now have no objection to 4. This occurred because of one sentence that was written in here. This sentence set off a logic bomb in my head. The sentence in question was to the effect that in D&D there is no limit to the number of classes that a PC can have (but was that true for 3e?).
If that is true it means that NwN (both 1.69 and EE) already has some house rules built in. That’s OK as all editions of D&D have said that house rules are fine (much to the chagrin of “rules lawyers"). Not only that but NwN comes with the tools (nwscript) to implement additional such house rules. House rules such as resting restrictions or the use of the scripted hard core rule set. Since in PnP D&D the only person who can implement such house rules in the game is the DM it surely means that anyone who creates a module is the DM for that module who just happens to allow a digital proxy to implement them. Now as all editions of the DM guide says for a DM to only allow that which the DM wants I have come to this conclusion.
I have no objection to anyone choosing to create a PC with x number of classes as long as they have no objection to me preventing such PCs being imported into any module that I create should I choose to do so.
With nwscript it is a relatively trivial matter to determine how many classes a PC has. It is also a relatively simple matter to terminate that module early even as early as when the PC enters it.
Now before anyone starts to call me all the names under the sun, I never said that I would do such a thing. It is having the possibility and means to do so should I choose, that swung it for me
OK, I’ve sort of flip-flopped but you may not like my final conclusions. I now have no objection to 4. This occurred because of one sentence that was written in here. This sentence set off a logic bomb in my head. The sentence in question was to the effect that in D&D there is no limit to the number of classes that a PC can have (but was that true for 3e?).
If that is true it means that NwN (both 1.69 and EE) already has some house rules built in. That’s OK as all editions of D&D have said that house rules are fine (much to the chagrin of “rules lawyers"). Not only that but NwN comes with the tools (nwscript) to implement additional such house rules. House rules such as resting restrictions or the use of the scripted hard core rule set. Since in PnP D&D the only person who can implement such house rules in the game is the DM it surely means that anyone who creates a module is the DM for that module who just happens to allow a digital proxy to implement them. Now as all editions of the DM guide says for a DM to only allow that which the DM wants I have come to this conclusion.
I have no objection to anyone choosing to create a PC with x number of classes as long as they have no objection to me preventing such PCs being imported into any module that I create should I choose to do so.
With nwscript it is a relatively trivial matter to determine how many classes a PC has. It is also a relatively simple matter to terminate that module early even as early as when the PC enters it.
Now before anyone starts to call me all the names under the sun, I never said that I would do such a thing. It is having the possibility and means to do so should I choose, that swung it for me
TR
I appreciate that, but I will also say, since the nature of sharing modules is a free give-and-take endeavour, and that the toolset can easily open and modify any custom module, this means that despite your best intentions for modules you give away, people can always open it up and cheat/change to their hearts content.
I guess that gets us into a realm of module copy protection, or possibly module password for editing, but I mean at that point we're getting away from the liberty with which made NWN1 so legendary.
Speaking only for myself, I make modules because I have stories I'd like to tell, and companions are (hopefully) interesting characters in their own right that players will want to have in their parties for more than just their utility. If their only purpose is to be the "the lock-picker" or "the healer" then that's a failure on my part for making boring, pointless characters. It usually leads to the kind of game where players just start murdering all the townsfolk and eventually quit altogether.
As far as I'm concerned, players can have as many classes as the game will support, and if that somehow breaks a module, then it's probably got bigger problems.
NWN modules are already collaborative efforts. Players need to want to play the way the builder intended, and want to go along with the story and rules that the builder has established. If there's some compelling reason to limit classes then players will do so, if they think the module is worthwhile. Think of the class-specific modules out there: A Dance with Rogues, Blackguard, Fester Pot's work - these are some of the most popular ones around.
If you prefer players to not have four classes in your module, give them a good reason, and they won't. They can already wreak havoc all over your carefully-crafted scripts and NPC's if they really want to. An extra class is the least of your worries.
I disagree with outrage or trepidation against expansion of character options. I understand that there are some ppl that may believe that expansion of options is motivated by a desire for greater power. I disagree with this in a general sense and personally believe that it stems from some amount of unfamiliarity with the underlying rules.
My experience is that heavy role play servers decided that taking a single level in another class was too powerful so that a character must instead be forced to take three or four levels. At the time I was very young and impressionable so I agreed with this view. It was only later after understanding how it all worked a bit better that some of us realized it was actually better to take several levels and would result in overall a more powerful character, taking a single level was actually sub-optimal.
On the other hand it adds more options for content creators and also for role playing. If you have more class slots you can take a minor thematic class like Harper and worry less about the impact it has on your character's viability.
Now here's the rub. As far as I'm aware more people play single player than use pw's or play in multi-player. With the possibility of a single player having 4 classes what is the point of having hench ersons when a pc can be fighter/rogue/cleric/mage all in one build?
TR
Why do you care how other people play single player games?
I care because it makes spending time lovingly crafting henchmen pointless. Have you built a module? I can tell you it takes a lot of work even to come up with an average module.
TR
Yes, I have, and for someone who claims to be a builder, you seem to have a lack of understanding of game mechanics.
1) 3 classes is quite enough to create a jack of all trades character, covering the main skill areas - healing, damage output, traps and locks. You never need a henchman for that, and a fighter/cleric/thief/mage would just suck at all of them. 2) I've never met a module that you actually needed to cover all skill areas anyway. You can steamroller through anything with asingle classed character and no henchman. All a henchman does is add an extra body to the fight. 3) this suggestion has always come with the proviso that module builders should be able to set a soft cap on the maximum classes, so if you wanted your module to have a maximum of 3, or 2, or 1 you would still be able to do that.
I agree with creators being able to set a cap, after all they should be given as much as possible when creating their modules. Allowing creators to encrypt their modules similar to kingmaker and the other premium modules seems like a really good idea though! Someone should really create a new thread about that.
Allowing creators to encrypt their modules similar to kingmaker and the other premium modules seems like a really good idea though! Someone should really create a new thread about that.
This is a terrible idea. I literally learned how to mod and code as a teenager by opening up my favorite designers’ modules and figuring out how they did things 15 years ago. It goes against the open spirit of NWN modding.
I think it would just be another cool option for module creators who want to protect their work instead of forcing them to only create open modules. If there is an open spirit when it comes to making modules i'm sure most of the creators will choose to leave their modules open, otherwise this open spirit is just being forced on creators by people who want to open their modules.
I think it would just be another cool option for module creators who want to protect their work instead of forcing them to only create open modules.
Out of sheer curiosity: protect their modules from what?
You can already host a module server-side if you don't want people to have access to your scripts. This isn't corporate espionage.
In all the 15+ years of NWN modding we haven't had a single instance that I'm aware of where someone stripped out content from one module and tried to pass it off as their own. Especially now adays where the mod volume is extremely low it would be immediately spotted and laughed off the Vault.
All this would accomplish is hurt novice modders who don't know how to do complex things like scripted puzzles and lessen the frequency of quality mods in the future. The only reason the Premium Modules were encrypted was because of how trivially easy it would be to share the paid modules around if not (see: how it was shared after Bioware's authenticator disappeared).
I see it as just another option for module creators, if a module creator for whatever reason wants to encrypt the module why not let them? If a creator wants to do something and you tell them no then that's limiting their choices.
You either believe no one will encrypt their modules because every creator wants to be open and share their source work, in which case why be so against the option if only a small fraction will use it? Or you believe most creators will want to encrypt their work and your now telling them no they cant because you and other people want access to their source work. If most creators will use this then surely it was a feature they wanted?
This is just my opinion and it looks like i'm in the minority which is totally fine with me as its just a suggestion
I'm not really convinced of the gameplay benefit of a fourth class, and would prefer that development focus on things that improve the toolset, improve gameplay, and add new content.
That said, the cap at three classes is arbitrary and I don't see why changing the cap to make it four is the right solution. It seems like if this was something that would go forward, the thing that would make the most sense would be to just remove the cap and let people do what they want classwise.
I think four classes was requested on the basis that that it is a more reasonable request than "infinite classes" which would be truer to PnP rules but is almost certainly technically impossible.
Other enhancements also include building peripheral modding tools from scratch for modders that already have such tools, and remaking content that already exists. At least with extra class slots it's something you can't already do today.
It's an actual enhancement to the current package rather than just a pre-installation or re-implementation of existing features. It benefits everyone including those that use Google to find things and those that don't. It's also completely optional for those that prefer fewer class slots.
Unless it's going to costs an exorbitant amount of time, and I don't know why it would, then I don't really understand the arguments that tend towards other features taking priority.
A Cap of 4 classes could be cool, if the max level was also raised to 60, otherwise pointless. I can do in 3 classes, what you would be trying to do with 4.
A Cap of 4 classes could be cool, if the max level was also raised to 60, otherwise pointless. I can do in 3 classes, what you would be trying to do with 4.
Some official classes also seem to require 4 slots. Fochlucan Lyrist requires druid language, bard knowledge, arcane casting, divine casting, and evasion. If you start out as something like a gnoll that has a humanoid HD level requirement you would need 5 class slots for that.
A Cap of 4 classes could be cool, if the max level was also raised to 60, otherwise pointless. I can do in 3 classes, what you would be trying to do with 4.
OK, make me a HiPsing Death Attack Arcane Archer in 4 base NWN classes. How about a HiPsing Red Dragon Monk? Bah on 60 levels, I want them in 20.
The main issue with four classes is the UI, especially the radial menu. We built it in such a way that all the basics are in the same location so you can quickly select options based on a fixed location. We'd have to come up with a way to put four classes in without breaking everything else.
radial menu has always been terrible in design, I avoid it like the plague in combat, out of combat it's fine. This is why 36 QS slots aren't enough IMO.
Edit: I'd Ideally have sets off QS, so they'd work as normal with an up / down arrow next to them to change the current set of 3x12 that's in use. I'd have defensive buffs load'd on one set, Attack spells on a second set and Misc on a third. You could even organise some keyboard shortcuts, we have plenty of keys not in use, this isn't a console game after all.
The radial menu is the best part of the UI... you have 3 rows of hot keys for combat spells and quick items. NWN is heavy on buff spells, most of which get used out of combat.
Comments
I don't understand where people get the idea that just because they don't like something that it shouldn't be an option.
Example of proper attitude:
I prefer permadeath, but I'm not going to ask Beamdog to remove respawn from the game.
If that is true it means that NwN (both 1.69 and EE) already has some house rules built in. That’s OK as all editions of D&D have said that house rules are fine (much to the chagrin of “rules lawyers"). Not only that but NwN comes with the tools (nwscript) to implement additional such house rules. House rules such as resting restrictions or the use of the scripted hard core rule set. Since in PnP D&D the only person who can implement such house rules in the game is the DM it surely means that anyone who creates a module is the DM for that module who just happens to allow a digital proxy to implement them. Now as all editions of the DM guide says for a DM to only allow that which the DM wants I have come to this conclusion.
I have no objection to anyone choosing to create a PC with x number of classes as long as they have no objection to me preventing such PCs being imported into any module that I create should I choose to do so.
With nwscript it is a relatively trivial matter to determine how many classes a PC has. It is also a relatively simple matter to terminate that module early even as early as when the PC enters it.
Now before anyone starts to call me all the names under the sun, I never said that I would do such a thing. It is having the possibility and means to do so should I choose, that swung it for me
TR
I guess that gets us into a realm of module copy protection, or possibly module password for editing, but I mean at that point we're getting away from the liberty with which made NWN1 so legendary.
As far as I'm concerned, players can have as many classes as the game will support, and if that somehow breaks a module, then it's probably got bigger problems.
NWN modules are already collaborative efforts. Players need to want to play the way the builder intended, and want to go along with the story and rules that the builder has established. If there's some compelling reason to limit classes then players will do so, if they think the module is worthwhile. Think of the class-specific modules out there: A Dance with Rogues, Blackguard, Fester Pot's work - these are some of the most popular ones around.
If you prefer players to not have four classes in your module, give them a good reason, and they won't. They can already wreak havoc all over your carefully-crafted scripts and NPC's if they really want to. An extra class is the least of your worries.
My experience is that heavy role play servers decided that taking a single level in another class was too powerful so that a character must instead be forced to take three or four levels. At the time I was very young and impressionable so I agreed with this view. It was only later after understanding how it all worked a bit better that some of us realized it was actually better to take several levels and would result in overall a more powerful character, taking a single level was actually sub-optimal.
On the other hand it adds more options for content creators and also for role playing. If you have more class slots you can take a minor thematic class like Harper and worry less about the impact it has on your character's viability.
1) 3 classes is quite enough to create a jack of all trades character, covering the main skill areas - healing, damage output, traps and locks. You never need a henchman for that, and a fighter/cleric/thief/mage would just suck at all of them.
2) I've never met a module that you actually needed to cover all skill areas anyway. You can steamroller through anything with asingle classed character and no henchman. All a henchman does is add an extra body to the fight.
3) this suggestion has always come with the proviso that module builders should be able to set a soft cap on the maximum classes, so if you wanted your module to have a maximum of 3, or 2, or 1 you would still be able to do that.
You can already host a module server-side if you don't want people to have access to your scripts. This isn't corporate espionage.
In all the 15+ years of NWN modding we haven't had a single instance that I'm aware of where someone stripped out content from one module and tried to pass it off as their own. Especially now adays where the mod volume is extremely low it would be immediately spotted and laughed off the Vault.
All this would accomplish is hurt novice modders who don't know how to do complex things like scripted puzzles and lessen the frequency of quality mods in the future. The only reason the Premium Modules were encrypted was because of how trivially easy it would be to share the paid modules around if not (see: how it was shared after Bioware's authenticator disappeared).
You either believe no one will encrypt their modules because every creator wants to be open and share their source work, in which case why be so against the option if only a small fraction will use it? Or you believe most creators will want to encrypt their work and your now telling them no they cant because you and other people want access to their source work. If most creators will use this then surely it was a feature they wanted?
This is just my opinion and it looks like i'm in the minority which is totally fine with me as its just a suggestion
More choice is good.
That said, the cap at three classes is arbitrary and I don't see why changing the cap to make it four is the right solution. It seems like if this was something that would go forward, the thing that would make the most sense would be to just remove the cap and let people do what they want classwise.
Anything other than that is just trying to lord over the RP experience of others.
It's an actual enhancement to the current package rather than just a pre-installation or re-implementation of existing features. It benefits everyone including those that use Google to find things and those that don't. It's also completely optional for those that prefer fewer class slots.
Unless it's going to costs an exorbitant amount of time, and I don't know why it would, then I don't really understand the arguments that tend towards other features taking priority.
P.S badstrref is / isn't AKA Scarface ?
Edit: I'd Ideally have sets off QS, so they'd work as normal with an up / down arrow next to them to change the current set of 3x12 that's in use. I'd have defensive buffs load'd on one set, Attack spells on a second set and Misc on a third. You could even organise some keyboard shortcuts, we have plenty of keys not in use, this isn't a console game after all.
The added bonus is that modders can make a whole slew of new and innovative things with custom UI scripting.