Howdy, Stranger!

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

Categories

Dark Dreams of Furiae - a new module for NWN:EE! Buy now
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

Nerf the Ammo Belt (Yes I Said It) :-S

I realize it is a game and as such some logic goes out the window (where are you carrying the 150,000 gold you have?). But I think we can agree that missile weapons are *awesome*. The only draw back of them is close range, and you run out of ammo. I think you really eliminate the second drawback if you make it where you can carry enough arrows to sack Rome on an adventure. :smile:

Example: I currently have 1200+ arrows in my Ammo Belt on my current IWD:EE playthrough. The belt is a very cool concept (and a needed one). That said, when you can literally have over a thousand arrows in it... is there really a point anymore? Bags of Holding I can understand (Hey, its magical and costs upwards of 10k gold). But a mundane Ammo Belt should have a capacity of 500 arrows max. And I think that is generous! With a limit it is still a great item, but when you place no limit (or if there is a limit, it is ridiculous) you might as well add in infinite ammo at that point. There is no realistic ammo belt that could fit over 1000 arrows on a person.

Melicamp
«1

Comments

  • deltagodeltago Member Posts: 7,478
    Feel free to sell it, or leave it where it lays if you personally do not wish to use it.

    SkaroseDesiderata
  • HaHaCharadeHaHaCharade Member Posts: 1,580
    deltago said:

    Feel free to sell it, or leave it where it lays if you personally do not wish to use it.

    I understand that stance. I supposed you could also simply use it to a certain capacity. There's a lot of things you can simply do or not do in a game, based on your thoughts on it. But obviously that applies to anything.

  • MelicampMelicamp Member Posts: 240
    It is a tad OP especially if everyone in the party has a bow. Maybe add a couple more into the game and make them hold less?

  • joluvjoluv Member Posts: 2,136
  • Balrog99Balrog99 Member Posts: 6,305
    Technically you could put thousands of arrows into your bag of holding (arrows aren't that big) so what's the difference? I guess you could raise the price to 10000 gp for the ammo bag but with the amount if money in the game that's not much of a deterrent in my opinion...

  • HaHaCharadeHaHaCharade Member Posts: 1,580
    DrakeICN said:

    I played the game back when you could stack max 20 arrows per stack. It worked, just required more micromanaging. The point of I mod that just makes the game more annoying see it I do not.

    P.S. Fairly sure that 100 coppers = 1 silver, 100 silver = 1 gold, 100 gold = 1 precious jewelry. So, carrying 1 precious jewelry = 1000000 (1 million) coppers. 1 gold in BG is actually worth 1 copper, the devs just vent "more micromanaging? Eh screw that, lets just call everything gold, and let the player carry endless amounts of it". Prolly the same reason they added a magic bag in BG2; they wanted to cut micromanaging to let the game to flow better.

    Think of it this way; 100000 basement dwellers spendin 25 seconds micromanaging is... errr... a lot of time wasted for no reason.


    Actually, precious jewelry cost depended on the type of gem obviously (which BG really does a good job maintaining) -- but good breakdown. Honestly, the money thing would simply be micromanagement but the arrow thing to me is a combat resource.... So it is a bit more managing survival at that point. Really when it gets down to it, why even have the quiver? If you run out you can pause in combat and throw something else in. The only reason was if you ran out entirely which made sense in my mind. With 2,000 at the ready... you are not going to run out. Ever. Unless you forgot to buy some lol.

  • HaHaCharadeHaHaCharade Member Posts: 1,580
    edited April 2018
    Balrog99 said:

    Technically you could put thousands of arrows into your bag of holding (arrows aren't that big) so what's the difference? I guess you could raise the price to 10000 gp for the ammo bag but with the amount if money in the game that's not much of a deterrent in my opinion...

    My response to that would be, once you can manage to afford the BoH, you deserve to have that capacity. Making the Ammo Belt cost 10k wouldn't make much sense considering it is not magical and shouldn't have that wondrous ability. Not to mention that you get a great deal of use out of the Ammo Belt before the BoH becomes available to you -- unless you are a grinding for gold maniac lol.

    And if we really want to get technical, I don't think edged objects were even allowed to go into a bag of holding (it can be pierced from the inside per pen and paper 2nd edition AD&D if memory serves) but I understand that being dropped for game simplicity and BoH usefulness.

    Melicamp
  • UnderstandMouseMagicUnderstandMouseMagic Member Posts: 2,142

    It's not th huge capacity to carry what you use, i.e use a bow so you can carry 1000+ arrows.

    It's the capacity to carry all the darts, bullets ect. as well so you can sell them, that spoils things a bit.

    Not sure if I'm explaining this clearly.

    It would be very game enhancing if you were in a large dungeon or area without shops and instead of finding arrows, you only find darts. So then you'd have to use them. Mix up the playstyle a bit.

    Now that's too severe IMO, but say you only found really good darts and then had to leave them all behind?
    That might encourage people to branch out a bit.


    Balrog99Grond0HaHaCharade
  • Abi_DalzimAbi_Dalzim Member Posts: 1,410
    Let's be honest with ourselves, the real limiting factor on IWD ranged weapon use isn't how many normal arrows you can carry, but rather the cost and availability of magical arrows relative to the number of enemies immune to normal weapons. I don't think limiting the ammo you can carry matters too much; it just means you'll have to schlep back to Kuldahar less often.

    Balrog99DrakeICNThacoBell
  • HaHaCharadeHaHaCharade Member Posts: 1,580
    edited April 2018

    Let's be honest with ourselves, the real limiting factor on IWD ranged weapon use isn't how many normal arrows you can carry, but rather the cost and availability of magical arrows relative to the number of enemies immune to normal weapons. I don't think limiting the ammo you can carry matters too much; it just means you'll have to schlep back to Kuldahar less often.



    There's an infinite supply of magic arrows available if you grind in Kresselack's Tomb (upper levels). Camp and you'll encounter skeleton archers who will sometimes drop them. Current playthrough I have x400 Arrows of Fire +1 and x350 Arrows +1.... Yuan-Ti Elites drop the +1 Arrows regularly in Dragon's Eye also.

    Post edited by HaHaCharade on
    semiticgod
  • Abi_DalzimAbi_Dalzim Member Posts: 1,410



    There's an infinite supply of magic arrows available if you grind in Kresselack's Tomb (upper levels). Camp and you'll encounter skeleton archers who will drop them often. Currently playthrough I have x400 Arrows of Fire +1 and x350 Arrows +1.... Yuan-Ti Elites drop the +1 Arrows regularly in Dragon's Eye also.

    Well, as far as I'm concerned, that's way cheesier than the ammo belt itself. I don't grind in general much - these games have enough monsters already as far as I'm concerned, especially IWD.

    ThacoBell
  • bob_vengbob_veng Member Posts: 2,300
    I would be fine with reducing the capacity to something like 40 for the sake of realism

    oh wait

    HaHaCharade
  • HaHaCharadeHaHaCharade Member Posts: 1,580
    edited April 2018



    There's an infinite supply of magic arrows available if you grind in Kresselack's Tomb (upper levels). Camp and you'll encounter skeleton archers who will drop them often. Currently playthrough I have x400 Arrows of Fire +1 and x350 Arrows +1.... Yuan-Ti Elites drop the +1 Arrows regularly in Dragon's Eye also.

    Well, as far as I'm concerned, that's way cheesier than the ammo belt itself. I don't grind in general much - these games have enough monsters already as far as I'm concerned, especially IWD.
    Keep in mind when I say grind, I mean you can camp 2 or 3 times and get some arrows (they don't drop magic ones every time, and you only get a handful each encounter - if you get archers and if they are carrying them). You still have to consistently heal, rest, and journey to and from Kuldahar to sell gear and restock... That's adventuring. It also accomplishes building up levels. I mean we did the same thing in pen and paper, so its not that cheesy really. I even had some characters die from immediate arrow attacks. In truth, the real problem isn't lack of early magic arrows. Its lack of money. That's why you kill 6,000 yeti and 9,000 Skeletal Guardians.. :smile: Wouldn't matter if Orrick's inventory didn't change, but it does... so there you go.

  • SomeSortSomeSort Member Posts: 859
    Honestly I didn’t see what the big fuss was with the ammo belt. I find it annoying enough to go in that I don’t even stick normal arrows in there, I just stash magic ones until needed and keep my normal arrows in inventory. There’s plenty of room to accommodate enough for long adventures.

    But sure, if you’re excessively camp-farming and killing 6000 yetis and 9000 skeleton guardians, I can see how an extra thousand arrows would come in handy. I mean, I think the solution here is more “nerf camp-farming” and less “nerf the ammo belt”, but yeah, that’s probably impacting game balance.

    DrakeICNThacoBellAerakar
  • DrakeICNDrakeICN Member Posts: 623
    In the early days of BG, there was a bug that - in certain areas only, like inside firewine bridge - made enemies replicate each time you saved (unless you were standing on top of their spawn point). Long story short, I had decided to kill every kobold commando and saved after each encounter. Took me a while tl realize why the number of enemies kept increasing, despite me killing so many. I accidentally farmed quite a stash of fire arrows that way.

    HaHaCharadeMERLANCE[Deleted User]
  • HaHaCharadeHaHaCharade Member Posts: 1,580
    edited April 2018
    SomeSort said:

    Honestly I didn’t see what the big fuss was with the ammo belt. I find it annoying enough to go in that I don’t even stick normal arrows in there, I just stash magic ones until needed and keep my normal arrows in inventory. There’s plenty of room to accommodate enough for long adventures.

    But sure, if you’re excessively camp-farming and killing 6000 yetis and 9000 skeleton guardians, I can see how an extra thousand arrows would come in handy. I mean, I think the solution here is more “nerf camp-farming” and less “nerf the ammo belt”, but yeah, that’s probably impacting game balance.

    A good way to nerf "camp-farming" is by making it so you can't hold 2k arrows at a time in one inventory slot. Just sayin. :wink:

    You can purchase infinite arrows as easily as you can farm them. So I don't understand how farming arrows enters into it, really.

    [Deleted User]
  • semiticgodsemiticgod Member, Moderator Posts: 14,380
    Really, the ammo belt's primary function is convenience; it reduces inventory management. The ammo belt always makes the game more convenient, but only in extremely rare cases would it make the party any stronger. The only time I've ever had a fight where I used more arrows than I normally would have been able to carry (that is, without an infinite stacking mod or an ammo belt) was a solo Legacy of Bhaal fight against Belhifet in SoD.

    HaHaCharadeThacoBellAerakar
  • HaHaCharadeHaHaCharade Member Posts: 1,580

    Really, the ammo belt's primary function is convenience; it reduces inventory management. The ammo belt always makes the game more convenient, but only in extremely rare cases would it make the party any stronger. The only time I've ever had a fight where I used more arrows than I normally would have been able to carry (that is, without an infinite stacking mod or an ammo belt) was a solo Legacy of Bhaal fight against Belhifet in SoD.

    I really am not questioning the convenience factor or how cool the item is - and I do agree to a point. If you plan well, you don't run out of ammo often. Very true. But again, I think it is a balance between convenience and feasibility. Increasing the ammo stack size to 80 as they did, and making an ammo belt with a large (but not ridiculous) capacity is to me, logical. I mean honestly if people just want inventory to be convenient to the max, all items (Swords, Pelts, etc.) should be stackable.

    I'm just an "everything within reason" kind of guy. I do still think that if you take 6 missile weapon users, the "running out of ammo" possibility is one of the only real downsides and requires a bit more foresight on the player's end. Maybe I'm too steeped in the encumbrance sheet days of our old pen and paper AD&D, but I think there's some logic to my thought process.

  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 11,425
    Too much logic in any fantasy universe is a bad thing.

    Balrog99Ravenslight
  • booinyoureyesbooinyoureyes Member Posts: 6,162
    You can carry 25 swords if you want to. The arrow belt is not the most bananas part of the game.

    ThacoBellContemplative_HamsterRavenslight
  • lroumenlroumen Member Posts: 2,127
    We should make weapon stacking a feature to compensate for the OPness of the ammo belt ;)

    HaHaCharadeThacoBellbooinyoureyes
  • Lord_TansheronLord_Tansheron Member Posts: 4,198
    edited April 2018
    ThacoBell said:

    Too much logic in any fantasy universe is a bad thing.

    This.

    Also, cherry-picking logical inconsistencies is one of the greatest traps in these arguments.

    You (apparently) accept unquestioningly a flagrant violation of natural laws in all manner of circumstances, but suddenly 1,000 arrows in a box is too much? Please. If you are truly concerned about realism, there's a volume of problems that would need addressing (like how you can keep going for 50 hours without food or water or going to the toilet, for starters).

    Anyway, this is a video game inspired by D&D but it's not exclusive to D&D players nor 100% adherent to D&D rules. Too much "realism" (in very large quotes) is a turn-off for people who aren't too fussed about D&D rules and just want a video game that works without forcing them to jump through ten hoops just to be more "realistic".

    Balrog99ThacoBellRavenslight
  • HaHaCharadeHaHaCharade Member Posts: 1,580

    ThacoBell said:

    Too much logic in any fantasy universe is a bad thing.

    This.

    Also, cherry-picking logical inconsistencies is one of the greatest traps in these arguments.

    You (apparently) accept unquestioningly a flagrant violation of natural laws in all manner of circumstances, but suddenly 1,000 arrows in a box is too much? Please. If you are truly concerned about realism, there's a volume of problems that would need addressing (like how you can keep going for 50 hours without food or water or going to the toilet, for starters).

    Anyway, this is a video game inspired by D&D but it's not exclusive to D&D players nor 100% adherent to D&D rules. Too much "realism" (in very large quotes) is a turn-off for people who aren't too fussed about D&D rules and just want a video game that works without forcing them to jump through ten hoops just to be more "realistic".
    We can agree to disagree, but I don't think the whole natural laws argument makes a great deal of sense here. Going to the bathroom and eating have never been mechanics measured in these games (or any video game I've played). Hell many pen and paper D&D games don't go that far. I do recognize these games aren't 100% adherent to D&D rules.

    Containers and inventory have a capacity in game and are measured already. Folks can only carry so much, and containers can only carry so much in game. That's why we have weight allowances and strength scores. That's why some containers (Bag of Holding) are magical, can carry more, and are more expensive. That's the only point I'm making. Making one point about one container and saying "2,000 is a bit ridiculous, how about 500" isn't cherry picking a game to death for the sake of realism, really. I'm more interested in a bit of balance.

    booinyoureyesMelicamp
  • HaHaCharadeHaHaCharade Member Posts: 1,580
    ThacoBell said:

    Too much logic in any fantasy universe is a bad thing.

    It depends on what the logic is applied to. Logically magic spells don't exist but we suspend disbelief there - that's fantasy. However traveling 1,000 miles in a day by boat, for example, and things unravel. Its realism vs. fantasy. Game of Thrones has had this problem if any of you watch. Just because you suspend disbelief for a dragon, doesn't mean you can get away with chucking realism out the window entirely.

  • HaHaCharadeHaHaCharade Member Posts: 1,580
    edited April 2018
    image

    Post edited by HaHaCharade on
    Balrog99MelicampContemplative_HamsterRavenslight
  • Balrog99Balrog99 Member Posts: 6,305
    edited April 2018
    Maybe Icewind Dale should allow for a pack mule. I tend to think that if I was trekking across the wilderness for hundreds of miles I'd take along a horse or mule (maybe even more than one) to carry everything I might need. I think we can all agree that a horse could easily carry thousands of arrows. How about just imagining that your six characters are smart enough to plan ahead so that they DON'T HAVE TO GO BACK HUNDREDS OF MILES JUST TO BUY SOME MORE ARROWS!

    I find it harder to believe that adventurers would limit themselves to what they could carry on their persons but that's just me...

    HaHaCharadeContemplative_HamsterRavenslight
  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 11,425
    I have solved the ammo belt conundrum. Magic did it.

    Balrog99MelicampContemplative_HamsterRavenslight
  • HaHaCharadeHaHaCharade Member Posts: 1,580
    edited April 2018
    ThacoBell said:

    I have solved the ammo belt conundrum. Magic did it.

    Wrong! >:) I demand an item description update, related quest, and an NPC elf who is tied to it.

    ThacoBellRavenslight
Sign In or Register to comment.