Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories

Neverwinter Nights: Enhanced Edition has been released! Visit nwn.beamdog.com to make an order. NWN:EE FAQ is available.
Soundtracks for BG:EE, SoD, BG2:EE, IWD:EE, PST:EE are now available in the Beamdog store.
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

Iteams to increase str for Viconia

2

Comments

  • DordledumDordledum Member Posts: 184
    I like to give her Drizzt's armor, unless I need that for Monty.

    Aerakar
  • thiefthief Member Posts: 35
    Dordledum said:

    I like to give her Drizzt's armor, unless I need that for Monty.

    +1 on that. If I ever bother to recruit Viconia, Mithril Chain Mail is even lighter than Ankheg Plate (7 vs 25 lbs) with just slightly worse protective qualities, due to AC penalty against crushing damage.

    And it's a bit poetic to hand Drizzt's stuff over to a neutral evil drow.

    DJKajuruAerakar
  • Grond0Grond0 Member Posts: 4,211
    edited January 2
    Drizzt's armor is not quite as competitive as that - it prevents the use of protection items (thus effectively giving a penalty to both AC and saves).

    StummvonBordwehrAerakar
  • thiefthief Member Posts: 35
    Grond0 said:

    Drizzt's armor is not quite as competitive as that - it prevents the use of protection items (thus effectively giving a penalty to both AC and saves).

    I've played BGT with PnP restrictions on magical items (Tweaks) recently. Ankheg Plate didn't allow me to equip Rings of Protection.
    I don't know how it works in BG:EE, but sure as hell I wouldn't like a mere Ankheg Plate to be so much superior to Drizzt's armor, RP-wise.

  • StummvonBordwehrStummvonBordwehr Member, Mobile Tester Posts: 450
    Grond0 said:

    Drizzt's armor is not quite as competitive as that - it prevents the use of protection items (thus effectively giving a penalty to both AC and saves).

    I will second that.

    Drizzts armor is great - but imo mostly for tiax or a ranger - since the armor doesnt impair your thieving/stealth abilities.

    In the ee: era the ankheg armor does allow further magical protection. The armor is light weight, so it is a great asset for the clerics/druid who tend to have strength below 16, who can wear it with rings/cloaks/amulets of protection.

  • Grond0Grond0 Member Posts: 4,211
    thief said:

    Grond0 said:

    Drizzt's armor is not quite as competitive as that - it prevents the use of protection items (thus effectively giving a penalty to both AC and saves).

    I've played BGT with PnP restrictions on magical items (Tweaks) recently. Ankheg Plate didn't allow me to equip Rings of Protection.
    I don't know how it works in BG:EE, but sure as hell I wouldn't like a mere Ankheg Plate to be so much superior to Drizzt's armor, RP-wise.
    I agree the EE decision to change from the vanilla treatment and allow ankheg armor to be used in conjunction with protection items seemed odd to me. No doubt that's partly (or even mainly) due to being used to something different for so many years, but nevertheless I would expect more of an armor penalty on classes like druids ...

  • thiefthief Member Posts: 35
    I think they should either leave it the way it was in BG1, or allow all armors (magical or not) to be used in conjunction with one Ring/Cloak of Protection.

    Tweaks allow to modify this rule and even remove ALL restrictions. It makes some sense in BG1 - there are only so many magical rings/necklaces to choose from. It makes characters a bit stronger, but makes for more exciting playthrough - if you use it sparingly :smile:

  • ChroniclerChronicler Member Posts: 574
    Ankheg plate is nonmagical. It never made any sense that you couldn't wear it with protection jewelry. It should be like any other mundane armor.

    StummvonBordwehrThacoBell
  • thiefthief Member Posts: 35
    On one hand you're right, Ankheg Plate isn't magical the way Fallorain's Plate is...

    On the other, if we leave it as non-magical, easy to get (lvl 1), with better crushing/slashing AC than 90% armors in the game (Drizzt's included), and then we mix it with Ring/Cloak +2 - it becomes overpowered a bit, and using other armors doesn't make much sense (one can get plenty Ankheg Plates).

    For that reason - variety in the game, balance issues - I'd rather have it treated as a magical armor.

    DJKajuru
  • ChroniclerChronicler Member Posts: 574
    Eh, there's lots of stuff like that. You can find the most powerful hammer in the game within two minutes of starting if you know where to look for it. The game doesn't seem to be made with a design philosophy where the most powerful stuff always has to wait until the end.

    ThacoBell
  • Grond0Grond0 Member Posts: 4,211

    Ankheg plate is nonmagical. It never made any sense that you couldn't wear it with protection jewelry. It should be like any other mundane armor.

    @Chronicler is there a particular reason you say it is non-magical? Even if you argue that the base material comes from natural sources (which is a stretch in itself) there's still a need to work it into a suit of armor - and potentially that could only be done using magic.

    Presumably if you think ankheg armor is non-magical, then you would prefer all the dragon armor in BG2 to be changed to non-magical as well (which would then be consistent with the dragonscale armor in SoD). Is that on the cards @JuliusBorisov?

    JuliusBorisov
  • ChroniclerChronicler Member Posts: 574
    edited January 3
    Grond0 said:

    Ankheg plate is nonmagical. It never made any sense that you couldn't wear it with protection jewelry. It should be like any other mundane armor.

    @Chronicler is there a particular reason you say it is non-magical? Even if you argue that the base material comes from natural sources (which is a stretch in itself) there's still a need to work it into a suit of armor - and potentially that could only be done using magic.

    Presumably if you think ankheg armor is non-magical, then you would prefer all the dragon armor in BG2 to be changed to non-magical as well (which would then be consistent with the dragonscale armor in SoD). Is that on the cards @JuliusBorisov?
    It has nothing resembling magical qualities. It doesn't have the telltale +# that usually indicates an item has been enchanted. It was made in a smithy with no enchanters in sight. The man you commission the armor from talks in detail about the craftsmanship that will go into making the armor, never mentions anything magical. Ankhegs themselves are just big insects with hard shells, and bring no intrinsic magic of their own to the table. There is all in all nothing even hinting that ankheg armor is in any way magical.

    I play BG2 less and couldn't tell you off the top of my head what the deal is with any suits of armor in BG2, but dragons are magical creatures, so there is that at a minimum. Like the difference between a Nymph Cloak and a cloak of wolf's hide.

    Grond0ArtonaThacoBell
  • thiefthief Member Posts: 35
    edited January 3
    Anyways, it would be nice if Mithril Chain Mail, literally the most magically enhanced armor in original BG1, had more advantages over a non- (or slightly) magical plate armor made from an oversized beetle.

    Back on topic, I'd rather use Viconia as a supporting spellcaster and wouldn't waste STR items on her. For encounters, level 2 Strength spell should be enough - if you really want to trade your Mirror Image/Invisibility/Blur/Web/Stinking Cloud slots for it.

    Post edited by thief on
  • DordledumDordledum Member Posts: 184
    thief said:

    Anyways, it would be nice if Mithril Chain Mail, literally the most magically enhanced armor in original BG1, had more advantages over a non- (or slightly) magical plate armor made from an oversized beetle.

    I don't see why Mithril chain mail would be magical, it's just made of Mithril.

  • ChroniclerChronicler Member Posts: 574
    edited January 3
    Dordledum said:

    thief said:

    Anyways, it would be nice if Mithril Chain Mail, literally the most magically enhanced armor in original BG1, had more advantages over a non- (or slightly) magical plate armor made from an oversized beetle.

    I don't see why Mithril chain mail would be magical, it's just made of Mithril.
    The specific Mithril Chainmail suit we get is +4 Mithril Chainmail.

    Presumably +0 Mithril would be nonmagical, but I don't think we ever get one of those.

    Edit: Interestingly, the Mithril Chainmail suit doesn't disable thieving abilities, but it's unclear if that's because of its heavy enchantment, or just because of sheer craftsmanship.

    It's chainmail armor that provides almost the AC bonus of Full Plate, and it could be that's all that's magical about it, or it could be it also provides more freedom of movement than it should as well. Its previous owner wasn't much in the mood to explain the particulars when it passed ownership.

    ThacoBell
  • ChroniclerChronicler Member Posts: 574
    Viconia. By the end of BG1 she should know Holy Power anyway, right? That'll give her 18/00 and then she can continue boosting it from there.

  • Grond0Grond0 Member Posts: 4,211
    I agree that the mithril armor should really be non-magical using the same logic as for the ankheg armor. Mithril is not a magical substance in itself, but produces armor that's both extremely tough and very light & pliable. The former is why the AC is so much better than standard chainmail, while the latter allows use of thieving abilities.

    The +4 given to the name of the armor just provides a comparison to standard chain. The same thing could have been done with the ankheg armor, i.e. it could have been described as ankheg hide armor +5 rather than giving it a unique category.

    dunbar
  • ChroniclerChronicler Member Posts: 574
    Grond0 said:

    I agree that the mithril armor should really be non-magical using the same logic as for the ankheg armor. Mithril is not a magical substance in itself, but produces armor that's both extremely tough and very light & pliable. The former is why the AC is so much better than standard chainmail, while the latter allows use of thieving abilities.

    The +4 given to the name of the armor just provides a comparison to standard chain. The same thing could have been done with the ankheg armor, i.e. it could have been described as ankheg hide armor +5 rather than giving it a unique category.

    That's not how it's done anywhere else?

    If that's what they were communicating it would be Chainmail +4: Mithril or something like that. Mithril Chainmail +4 means it's specifically four points of enchantment beyond ordinary Mithril Chainmail.

    ThacoBellSkatan
  • ChroniclerChronicler Member Posts: 574
    Is Full Plate +1 so named because, by nature of being Full Plate, it's that much better than Plate? Or is it because it's enchanted to be better than Full Plate?

  • Grond0Grond0 Member Posts: 4,211

    Grond0 said:

    I agree that the mithril armor should really be non-magical using the same logic as for the ankheg armor. Mithril is not a magical substance in itself, but produces armor that's both extremely tough and very light & pliable. The former is why the AC is so much better than standard chainmail, while the latter allows use of thieving abilities.

    The +4 given to the name of the armor just provides a comparison to standard chain. The same thing could have been done with the ankheg armor, i.e. it could have been described as ankheg hide armor +5 rather than giving it a unique category.

    That's not how it's done anywhere else?

    If that's what they were communicating it would be Chainmail +4: Mithril or something like that. Mithril Chainmail +4 means it's specifically four points of enchantment beyond ordinary Mithril Chainmail.
    What you're arguing is that unenchanted mithril armor provides exactly the same level of protection as standard chain. I don't personally think that's a credible position given that lore tells us how special mithril as a material is.

    Is Full Plate +1 so named because, by nature of being Full Plate, it's that much better than Plate? Or is it because it's enchanted to be better than Full Plate?

    Full plate is a standard armor category - so full plate +1 is an improvement on the standard. The materials themselves are the same, so it's perfectly reasonable to say that is the result of magical enhancement.

    Chronicler
  • ChroniclerChronicler Member Posts: 574
    Grond0 said:

    Grond0 said:

    I agree that the mithril armor should really be non-magical using the same logic as for the ankheg armor. Mithril is not a magical substance in itself, but produces armor that's both extremely tough and very light & pliable. The former is why the AC is so much better than standard chainmail, while the latter allows use of thieving abilities.

    The +4 given to the name of the armor just provides a comparison to standard chain. The same thing could have been done with the ankheg armor, i.e. it could have been described as ankheg hide armor +5 rather than giving it a unique category.

    That's not how it's done anywhere else?

    If that's what they were communicating it would be Chainmail +4: Mithril or something like that. Mithril Chainmail +4 means it's specifically four points of enchantment beyond ordinary Mithril Chainmail.
    What you're arguing is that unenchanted mithril armor provides exactly the same level of protection as standard chain. I don't personally think that's a credible position given that lore tells us how special mithril as a material is.

    Is Full Plate +1 so named because, by nature of being Full Plate, it's that much better than Plate? Or is it because it's enchanted to be better than Full Plate?

    Full plate is a standard armor category - so full plate +1 is an improvement on the standard. The materials themselves are the same, so it's perfectly reasonable to say that is the result of magical enhancement.
    I'd argue that Mithril Chainmail is at a bare minimum presented as its own category. It again, isn't named "Chainmail +4" with a subtitle or description that elaborates on its mithril nature, but I'll have to examine this more thoroughly.

    If the specific Mithril Chainmail suit we find is only 4 points above regular chain, despite its alleged +4 enchantment, then that seems like a discrepancy. Maybe Beamdog should consider buffing it, to more accurately reflect what an enchanted suit of mithril would be, or renaming it, to reflect that it's unenchanted, and allowing Protection Jewelry to be used alongside it.

    Grond0
  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 7,867
    Ankheg armor being super strong makes perfect sense to me. Insect (and especially beetle) is EXTREMELY tough relative to its size. Certain real life insects are almost impossible to crush despite being the size of a small coin, scaled up to the massive size of Ankhegs, I could definitely see it outclassing any non-magical armor out there.

    Grond0StummvonBordwehr
  • ChroniclerChronicler Member Posts: 574
    ThacoBell said:

    Ankheg armor being super strong makes perfect sense to me. Insect (and especially beetle) is EXTREMELY tough relative to its size. Certain real life insects are almost impossible to crush despite being the size of a small coin, scaled up to the massive size of Ankhegs, I could definitely see it outclassing any non-magical armor out there.

    I think strictly speaking it works the opposite way. Square Cube Law and such. The bigger the insect becomes, the easier it is to crush. Like how you can break a big sheet of plastic in your hands, but a tiny shard of plastic is harder.

    The reason there aren't any Ankheg sized insects in real life is because their whole anatomy just doesn't work when you scale it up to that size, but we can suspend our disbelief to imagine that not only could Faerun have 10 foot tall insects, they'd actually be sturdier than the tiny insects we're acquainted with.

  • thiefthief Member Posts: 35
    Hah, I love how the discussion turned into "magical vs non-magical" scholastics and material comparison (between Tolkien invented alloy and big scarab husk) :blush:

    Anyways! Magical mithril stuff should offer a bit (just a bit) more than insect's carapace. At least in this particular setting.

  • QuickbladeQuickblade Member Posts: 663
    thief said:

    Hah, I love how the discussion turned into "magical vs non-magical" scholastics and material comparison (between Tolkien invented alloy and big scarab husk) :blush:

    Anyways! Magical mithril stuff should offer a bit (just a bit) more than insect's carapace. At least in this particular setting.

    But there's a difference between plate armor and chain armor. Chain armor mainly stops you from being cut by a sword slash, but doesn't absorb the impact very well because it's a flexible mesh that just pushes in (although there is the padded gambeson that would generally be worn beneath it). Plate armor spreads the impact over the entire area of the plate. Spreading is good.

    Anyways, I now use the "Full Plate and Packing Steel" mod to add scaling damage resistance while making heavier armor somewhat cumbersome to walk/attack speeds/dexterity and making casting both be slower and having a chance for failure. I've tweaked it a bit.

    In my tuning of it I didn't treat mithril for anything. In both 2E and 3E it doesn't add to AC when made into armor, it is just about half the weight, although it is considered a tougher material in 3E. (My PDF of 2E DMG does not refer to mithril, but "Elven steel")

    Adamantine armor is basically +1 bonus inherently and +10% DR (so instead of 25% Slash DR for chain +0, adamantine chain +0 is 36% Slash DR).

    Elven-crafted chain armor gets the faster AC rate but slower damage resistance from enchanting of leather armor, but starts from a higher base resistance while maintaining the protection of chain, and also has no hindrance to casting. My thinking is that the armor is LIGHTER. That means less mass to absorb blows compared to normal chain. But it's still better than leather armor, because you move and defend as if you're in light leather armor, but have ALMOST the protection of chain.

    ThacoBell
  • SkatanSkatan Member Posts: 3,629
    A bit late to the party, but this was an interresting discussion so can't help myself from jumping in :)

    About ankheg: I too think it's definately non-magical and should be treated as such (can be used with rings/amulets). I also agree that there's no mentioning at all of magic in the making of them. Though if any change should be made it should rather be a downgrade to the AC since it has better AC on the armor than the ankhegs themselves have. I haven't checked the creature file, but I am pretty sure ankhegs, though hard to hit, doesn't have AC1 and making the armor have higher AC than the very material it's made of is weird.

    About mithril chainmail +4 it has the same AC as the elven bladesinger chainmail +4, so it's obviously an enchanted mithril chainmail where the mithril in itself doesn't change the base AC. IMHO, there's little difference between mithril and elven, maybe just a weight difference though I haven't checked. I gotta admit I've always thought of the mithril chain +4 as just a little cooler version of elven chain but with the weird oddity that you can't cast magic while wearing it. So in BG you got the basic unenchanted elven chainmail of AC5 and you got the +4 versions, elven and mithril, with AC1. Makes sense to me, but it should definately enable arcane casting.

    And btw, bards love Drizzt's chain too :) Playing a bard, kitting him with both D's swords and chainmail makes for a pretty great setup. Sucks with arcane though.

    ThacoBell
  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 7,867
    @Chronicler Not necessarily. Some insect shells are still incredibly hard for their small size, and while sizing some up to about palm sized may make them easier to crush compared to a much smaller compact insect, I don't think this would apply to one the size of an elephant.

  • Grond0Grond0 Member Posts: 4,211
    Looking at the 2nd edition books, elven chainmail is described as made from a mithril alloy rather than pure mithril. Even unenchanted elven chainmail is described as magical - reflecting the secrets of the elven smiths - and that explains why spells can be cast when wearing it. Drizzt's mithril armor would appear to be something different - perhaps forged by dwarves - and this presumably explains why spells can't be cast while wearing it.

    The Monstrous Manual describes ankhegs as being AC2, which is the same as in BG. However, the Manual also refers to the ability to make armor from the shell and that such armor would be AC2. It's not clear why the armor in BG is AC1 - I would have thought AC2 would provide better game balance as well as reflecting the source material.

    SkatanAerakarStummvonBordwehrThacoBell
  • SkatanSkatan Member Posts: 3,629
    Grond0 said:

    Looking at the 2nd edition books, elven chainmail is described as made from a mithril alloy rather than pure mithril. Even unenchanted elven chainmail is described as magical - reflecting the secrets of the elven smiths - and that explains why spells can be cast when wearing it. Drizzt's mithril armor would appear to be something different - perhaps forged by dwarves - and this presumably explains why spells can't be cast while wearing it.

    Good find!
    Grond0 said:


    The Monstrous Manual describes ankhegs as being AC2, which is the same as in BG. However, the Manual also refers to the ability to make armor from the shell and that such armor would be AC2. It's not clear why the armor in BG is AC1 - I would have thought AC2 would provide better game balance as well as reflecting the source material.

    I just checked the creature file (9 of them) for BG1 ankhegs and they all have AC2, so AC2 does indeed seem to be the correct AC for an ankheg armor.

    Grond0
  • QuickbladeQuickblade Member Posts: 663
    Grond0 said:

    Looking at the 2nd edition books, elven chainmail is described as made from a mithril alloy rather than pure mithril. Even unenchanted elven chainmail is described as magical - reflecting the secrets of the elven smiths - and that explains why spells can be cast when wearing it. Drizzt's mithril armor would appear to be something different - perhaps forged by dwarves - and this presumably explains why spells can't be cast while wearing it.

    No, Drizzt's mithril armor is DEFINITELY forged by dwarves, specifically one of Clan Battlehammer's armorers while they held Mithril Hall. Forgotten Realms wiki cites it as being in "Siege of Darkness" by R.A. Salvatore.

    Grond0AerakarThacoBell
2
Sign In or Register to comment.