If that's true, god help the UI. Personally I hate it, but I can understand that people who've been using it solidly for a dozen years might get withdrawal symptoms if it was taken away.
If that's true, god help the UI. Personally I hate it, but I can understand that people who've been using it solidly for a dozen years might get withdrawal symptoms if it was taken away.
At this point I feel like it's iconic to Neverwinter Nights. If I recall I only used it to issue attack commands and for things I didn't have quick-slotted like knockdown, Greater Ruin, a few others. I'd like for the radial menu to be more customizable. Oh, and more quickslots. They fill up quickly, especially with a caster class.
you say having it on 3 will stop you from picking 4th class but having a cap of 4 will allow people to keep having 3 classes and other having 4.
but why stop there I can use the same argument for 5-6-7-.... number of classes. where we draw the line? what will be the gameplay reason for having x amount of classes? it should be either allowing to pick as much as we want or someone needs to sit and plan how many classes are good idea and when it will be too much.
I like using the numerical keypad, which doesn't get used in alot of games, but works perfectly with the radial.
That's OK if you're left-handed, but it's the wrong side of the keyboard for us right-handers. Anything that's more than 2 actions away is poor design and the fact that some people have taught themselves key press sequences to get around it only emphasises that fact.
you say having it on 3 will stop you from picking 4th class but having a cap of 4 will allow people to keep having 3 classes and other having 4.
but why stop there I can use the same argument for 5-6-7-.... number of classes. where we draw the line? what will be the gameplay reason for having x amount of classes? it should be either allowing to pick as much as we want or someone needs to sit and plan how many classes are good idea and when it will be too much.
Well, infinite classes is not a feasible option, so you have to stop somewhere. Yet four is still an improvement over what we have now, which is also why nwn2 added that one additional class option.
Let's face it there is a practical limit for several reasons: 1. You have limitations to alignment, stats, feats, etc, which stop you mixing some classes; 2. PrCs require at least 5 levels of base classes (usually more) and often only a small number of classes can achieve their prerequisites; 3. You can't push all the stats, so a monk/wizard/sorcerer/fighter/dwarven defender would have real problems; and 4. If you take too many classes then you are master of nothing.
I kind of think 6 is as many as you could reasonably take by level 40 and even that would be rare.
Let's face it there is a practical limit for several reasons: 1. You have limitations to alignment, stats, feats, etc, which stop you mixing some classes; 2. PrCs require at least 5 levels of base classes (usually more) and often only a small number of classes can achieve their prerequisites; 3. You can't push all the stats, so a monk/wizard/sorcerer/fighter/dwarven defender would have real problems; and 4. If you take too many classes then you are master of nothing.
I kind of think 6 is as many as you could reasonably take by level 40 and even that would be rare.
Occassionaly, playing NWN2, I have thought "I would like just one more class", so I think 5 would probably be sufficient to create an illusion of unlimited classes, as in the PnP rules.
Technically, it's the difference between adding one more button to the menu versus making it infinately extensible. It's probably easier to add one button than completely rework the interface.
Let's face it there is a practical limit for several reasons: 1. You have limitations to alignment, stats, feats, etc, which stop you mixing some classes; 2. PrCs require at least 5 levels of base classes (usually more) and often only a small number of classes can achieve their prerequisites; 3. You can't push all the stats, so a monk/wizard/sorcerer/fighter/dwarven defender would have real problems; and 4. If you take too many classes then you are master of nothing.
I kind of think 6 is as many as you could reasonably take by level 40 and even that would be rare.
Occassionaly, playing NWN2, I have thought "I would like just one more class", so I think 5 would probably be sufficient to create an illusion of unlimited classes, as in the PnP rules.
Technically, it's the difference between adding one more button to the menu versus making it infinately extensible. It's probably easier to add one button than completely rework the interface.
Why would you care you can have 4 classes in singleplayer? And if you do care and you are building module you can prevent it the same way as some builders are restricting certain class or level - OnEnterScript that will either strip excess levels (class in this example) or quit the module.
In multiplayer those who doesn't want to allow 4 classes can again use at least two methods to prevent that.
#1 - OnLevelUp script and delevel player who took 4th class #2 - using cls_pres_* 2das and variables on PC will make it work as if 4th class was never allowed. Ie - if player has 3 classes already, set all other classes not to be available, then in levelup menu he will see only the three classes he already has.
I don't want four classes either because I am also a NWN/NWN2 player and I prefer 3 classes over 4.
IIRC D&D limits characters to just three classes MAXIMUM, so NWN, being a licensed D&D product _should_ adhere to the standards, for that (licensing) if no other reason.
3rd edition PnP rules have no limit on the number of classes a character can have.
Well it does. Xp penalty. The xp penalty is never used however because...
1) On humans (and to a lesser extent half-elves... but I never saw many half-elves on the server apart from a few bard based arcane archers) is that the highest class is ignored when looking at the xp penalty and everyone picks a prestige class that do not give an xp penalty. (mostly... some use a level of monk (for the feats) or rogue (for the skill dump))
2) Most other races are built round their favoured class to avoid the xp penalty. Elvish and Gnome wizards, Half-Orc Barbarians and dwarf fighters spring to mind.
My stance is.
Bring in the official 3.5 D&D ruling bring in as many classes as you like and let the player suffer the consequences through the xp penalty that will become a massive burden.
My only slight concern is that prestige classes do not give a xp penalty and players will be able to take lots of different prestige classes.
Yet! The set limit is 40 levels. No one build is going to be able to gain access to all the goodies gained from epic levels if they splurge levels over a variety of classes. You need 30 levels of Palemaster to summon up a demi-lich buddy like @Shandaxx to turn up (Plus at least 3 levels of wizard just to take the palemaster prestige class... (which in itself can only be taken by any non-good align character... thus I am not going to share the build with a level of paladin for instance...)
...
I think people are casting doubt on the 3.5 D&D system when they do not want more than 3 levels. The system seems to work with great checks to power and play.
...
Although, even I can see everyone taking a level of monk for the giggles... But hey! Aren't most fights in movies with the bad guy at the end just made sweeter when it turns into mutual disarming and a fist fight on top of the edge of a cliff/skyscraper/aeroplane with open door/vat of molten metal... This is just going to be awesome!
3rd edition PnP rules have no limit on the number of classes a character can have.
Well it does. Xp penalty. The xp penalty is never used however because...
1) On humans (and to a lesser extent half-elves... but I never saw many half-elves on the server apart from a few bard based arcane archers) is that the highest class is ignored when looking at the xp penalty and everyone picks a prestige class that do not give an xp penalty. (mostly... some use a level of monk (for the feats) or rogue (for the skill dump))
2) Most other races are built round their favoured class to avoid the xp penalty. Elvish and Gnome wizards, Half-Orc Barbarians and dwarf fighters spring to mind.
My stance is.
Bring in the official 3.5 D&D ruling bring in as many classes as you like and let the player suffer the consequences through the xp penalty that will become a massive burden.
My only slight concern is that prestige classes do not give a xp penalty and players will be able to take lots of different prestige classes.
Yet! The set limit is 40 levels. No one build is going to be able to gain access to all the goodies gained from epic levels if they splurge levels over a variety of classes. You need 30 levels of Palemaster to summon up a demi-lich buddy like @Shandaxx to turn up (Plus at least 3 levels of wizard just to take the palemaster prestige class... (which in itself can only be taken by any non-good align character... thus I am not going to share the build with a level of paladin for instance...)
...
I think people are casting doubt on the 3.5 D&D system when they do not want more than 3 levels. The system seems to work with great checks to power and play.
...
Although, even I can see everyone taking a level of monk for the giggles... But hey! Aren't most fights in movies with the bad guy at the end just made sweeter when it turns into mutual disarming and a fist fight on top of the edge of a cliff/skyscraper/aeroplane with open door/vat of molten metal... This is just going to be awesome!
D&D 3.0 has the XP penalty too. I've played NWN characters with XP penalties, it was only a slight annoyance to me.
@Proont it escalates pretty quick with more classes.
Take that one level of monk...
Now there is no penalty if it is taken close to the other levels, but seriously, who wants to be a level 1 wizard or rogue?
You need the levels in a class to maketh the gnome as I say... (Or is that a weasel? Only @Nimran knows)
A Level 9 Gnome Wiz3/Rog3/Fig3
Why I would do this I do not know... But this is a weak character already, but no xp penalty.
Now bam!
A level of monk...
Suddenly I have Wiz3/Rog3/Fig3/Mon1
I have an xp penalty of -20% from the difference of two levels between the fighter and the monk and then another -20% from the two level difference between the rogue and the monk. The wizard being a favoured class of gnomes is ignored. I'm know where near being able to take a prestige class... -40% xp penalty is horrible.
So I chug on... I get to another level.
What the hey... Lets add a level of paladin... I'm Lawful Good anyhow.
Suddenly I have a Wiz3/Rog3/Fig/Mon1/Pal1
Not only will I get the xp penalties as above but I will have doubled them to a hefty -80% xp penalty. If the player was on the OC that would be their last level.
No that would be stupid. Lets not do that. Lets try to be sensible. My spells are useless. I'm in part of the game where I needed a single class rogue to disarm the traps. The only class giving me any kind of punch is my fighter class. Lets take another level of that...
So... I now have a Wiz3/Rog3/Fig4/Mon1
And I am still screwed as my xp penalty for the difference between my fighter and monk is now three. That equals a -40xp penalty now add the -20% from the two level difference between the rogue and the monk and I'm a little better off with the -60%xp penalty.
This is not about making uber characters at all. You will not make uber characters being able to assign more classes to a player.
This is about giving an adventurer choice in what they want to be!
...
Unless you half-orc... Sorry half-orc, you be barbarian. You be happy.
...
Table-top wise, I never played a 3.0 game of D&D but the system obviously worked for them to put it into 3.5. Good to know.
Are you against NWN being made closer to the table-top equivalent?
I have an xp penalty of -20% from the difference of two levels between the fighter and the monk and then another -20% from the two level difference between the rogue and the monk. The wizard being a favoured class of gnomes is ignored. I'm know where near being able to take a prestige class... -40% xp penalty is horrible"
That should only be a 20% penalty; you shouldn't be getting the penalty for Monk more than once. Similarly, the subsequent examples shouldn't be taking as much in penalties as you describe. If the game is calculating the penalty from both Rogue and Fighter in your example that should be fixed (not at home atm so can't check).
Comments
I don't see this as a value add, but if it gets in, great. I will just have to block it from a scripting standpoint.
you say having it on 3 will stop you from picking 4th class but having a cap of 4 will allow people to keep having 3 classes and other having 4.
but why stop there I can use the same argument for 5-6-7-.... number of classes. where we draw the line?
what will be the gameplay reason for having x amount of classes?
it should be either allowing to pick as much as we want or someone needs to sit and plan how many classes are good idea and when it will be too much.
1. You have limitations to alignment, stats, feats, etc, which stop you mixing some classes;
2. PrCs require at least 5 levels of base classes (usually more) and often only a small number of classes can achieve their prerequisites;
3. You can't push all the stats, so a monk/wizard/sorcerer/fighter/dwarven defender would have real problems; and
4. If you take too many classes then you are master of nothing.
I kind of think 6 is as many as you could reasonably take by level 40 and even that would be rare.
https://www.emotiv.com/brain-controlled-technology/
Technically, it's the difference between adding one more button to the menu versus making it infinately extensible. It's probably easier to add one button than completely rework the interface.
Why would you care you can have 4 classes in singleplayer? And if you do care and you are building module you can prevent it the same way as some builders are restricting certain class or level - OnEnterScript that will either strip excess levels (class in this example) or quit the module.
In multiplayer those who doesn't want to allow 4 classes can again use at least two methods to prevent that.
#1 - OnLevelUp script and delevel player who took 4th class
#2 - using cls_pres_* 2das and variables on PC will make it work as if 4th class was never allowed. Ie - if player has 3 classes already, set all other classes not to be available, then in levelup menu he will see only the three classes he already has.
1) On humans (and to a lesser extent half-elves... but I never saw many half-elves on the server apart from a few bard based arcane archers) is that the highest class is ignored when looking at the xp penalty and everyone picks a prestige class that do not give an xp penalty. (mostly... some use a level of monk (for the feats) or rogue (for the skill dump))
2) Most other races are built round their favoured class to avoid the xp penalty. Elvish and Gnome wizards, Half-Orc Barbarians and dwarf fighters spring to mind.
My stance is.
Bring in the official 3.5 D&D ruling bring in as many classes as you like and let the player suffer the consequences through the xp penalty that will become a massive burden.
My only slight concern is that prestige classes do not give a xp penalty and players will be able to take lots of different prestige classes.
Yet! The set limit is 40 levels. No one build is going to be able to gain access to all the goodies gained from epic levels if they splurge levels over a variety of classes. You need 30 levels of Palemaster to summon up a demi-lich buddy like @Shandaxx to turn up (Plus at least 3 levels of wizard just to take the palemaster prestige class... (which in itself can only be taken by any non-good align character... thus I am not going to share the build with a level of paladin for instance...)
...
I think people are casting doubt on the 3.5 D&D system when they do not want more than 3 levels. The system seems to work with great checks to power and play.
...
Although, even I can see everyone taking a level of monk for the giggles... But hey! Aren't most fights in movies with the bad guy at the end just made sweeter when it turns into mutual disarming and a fist fight on top of the edge of a cliff/skyscraper/aeroplane with open door/vat of molten metal... This is just going to be awesome!
Take that one level of monk...
Now there is no penalty if it is taken close to the other levels, but seriously, who wants to be a level 1 wizard or rogue?
You need the levels in a class to maketh the gnome as I say... (Or is that a weasel? Only @Nimran knows)
A Level 9 Gnome Wiz3/Rog3/Fig3
Why I would do this I do not know... But this is a weak character already, but no xp penalty.
Now bam!
A level of monk...
Suddenly I have Wiz3/Rog3/Fig3/Mon1
I have an xp penalty of -20% from the difference of two levels between the fighter and the monk and then another -20% from the two level difference between the rogue and the monk. The wizard being a favoured class of gnomes is ignored. I'm know where near being able to take a prestige class... -40% xp penalty is horrible.
So I chug on... I get to another level.
What the hey... Lets add a level of paladin... I'm Lawful Good anyhow.
Suddenly I have a Wiz3/Rog3/Fig/Mon1/Pal1
Not only will I get the xp penalties as above but I will have doubled them to a hefty -80% xp penalty. If the player was on the OC that would be their last level.
No that would be stupid. Lets not do that. Lets try to be sensible. My spells are useless. I'm in part of the game where I needed a single class rogue to disarm the traps. The only class giving me any kind of punch is my fighter class. Lets take another level of that...
So... I now have a Wiz3/Rog3/Fig4/Mon1
And I am still screwed as my xp penalty for the difference between my fighter and monk is now three. That equals a -40xp penalty now add the -20% from the two level difference between the rogue and the monk and I'm a little better off with the -60%xp penalty.
This is not about making uber characters at all. You will not make uber characters being able to assign more classes to a player.
This is about giving an adventurer choice in what they want to be!
...
Unless you half-orc... Sorry half-orc, you be barbarian. You be happy.
...
Table-top wise, I never played a 3.0 game of D&D but the system obviously worked for them to put it into 3.5. Good to know.
Are you against NWN being made closer to the table-top equivalent?
If you are playing on a multiplayer server awash with xp, that would be your choice. It totally cripples progression in the OC and the expansions.
I have an xp penalty of -20% from the difference of two levels between the fighter and the monk and then another -20% from the two level difference between the rogue and the monk. The wizard being a favoured class of gnomes is ignored. I'm know where near being able to take a prestige class... -40% xp penalty is horrible"
That should only be a 20% penalty; you shouldn't be getting the penalty for Monk more than once. Similarly, the subsequent examples shouldn't be taking as much in penalties as you describe. If the game is calculating the penalty from both Rogue and Fighter in your example that should be fixed (not at home atm so can't check).