Howdy, Stranger!

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

Categories

New Premium Module: Tyrants of the Moonsea! Read More
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

Something is not right mechanically

I cannot find explanation for this weird thing

The testing is with Zordral

1. I attack with mace speed factor 6, he casts Mirror Image (cast time 1)

I do a swing and left with 4 action points, while he casts a fast spell Mirror Image but he ends his turn as it is a spell. But the round is not over yet as I have not cast a spell and have 4 action points left in this round. So I cast immediately after my swing a Doom spell (a cast time 9) which means I should finish the spell in the next round at 6+9=15 or at half-time of the time of the next round.

Now with auto-pause at turn end activated I can see the game pauses after 6 seconds. And the new round starts.

In the new round he is programmed to cast Horror (cast time 2) while I should be finishing my Doom right after his cast. Indeed so happens.

But now here is the weird stuff half-way through round 2. So he casts Horror and his round is over, and shortly after him I cast Doom. But my round is not over (although technically I have cast a spell too Doom). But maybe the game treats Doom as being started in the previous round so that why my turn does not end (no auto-pause triggers after Doom). So okay, but how about then I make a new mace swing (speed 6). It should not connect before auto-pause. But behold it does. It is not mathematically possible because 6+9=15 + 6=21. So my mace should be executed at round 3 (during 1/10 of round 3 and only after auto-pause of round 2). But it executes before auto-pause 2.

This must be a bug. Reported.

Comments

  • ShinShin Member Posts: 2,320
    I think you misunderstand the mechanics a bit. The speed factor and casting time stats don't correspond to action points (there's no such thing), but rather an attack order priority and fractions of a round it takes to cast, respectively. And these two are independent of each other in this case, i.e. your round doesn't end when you cast a spell, but rather upon spellcasting you enter into a refractory period of around 6 seconds until you can start another cast or use an item. You can still use weapon attacks though -- and likewise, just having attacked with your weapon doesn't mean you can't also cast a spell. If you have 1 weapon attack per round you can attack every round (even if you spend most of it casting a spell), though the higher your speed factor, the later in the round the attack will happen.

    JuliusBorisovStummvonBordwehrThacoBellsarevok57
  • SoidoSoido Member Posts: 47
    But I swear this is what I see when I test it. It is mathematically not possible and math does not lie. I would gladly give you my save right in front of Zordral and you can duplicate my results at your own will.

  • ShinShin Member Posts: 2,320
    Where is the conflict? As stated, casting a spell doesn't mean you can't also do weapon attacks before the round ends.

    JuliusBorisovThacoBell
  • JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 19,347
  • SoidoSoido Member Posts: 47
    No you can't do weapon attack after a spell in a given round. You must wait 6 seconds first. Once you cast spell your turn is over and must wait 6 seconds. My post is not about this by the way but about a different kind of problem.

  • ShinShin Member Posts: 2,320
    This is not so, and your description of the problem stems from you not understanding the mechanics.

    ThacoBell
  • SoidoSoido Member Posts: 47
    edited November 29
    @JuliusBorisov I see your link but it does not answer my post. In your link I see people talking about Dice10 of initiative. Bullocks

    I can replicate the problem. I can make it even worse. But why should I do it given I pose a problem which is openly broken. Why do I have to chase the wild ? My post is very specific

  • SoidoSoido Member Posts: 47
    Here is my Save, because I realize it is difficult for people to test at different stages of the game and different classes5deg5kg62oit.7z

  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 9,801
    Its not a bug. You're just misunderstanding the mechanics.

    StummvonBordwehr
  • chimaerachimaera Member Posts: 947
    Soido wrote: »
    My post is very specific

    Your post doesn't make sense. BG doesn't use "action points". It uses attacks per rounds, which is NOT the same as a weapon's speed factor.

    ThacoBell
  • SoidoSoido Member Posts: 47
    edited December 1
    Deleted the comment

    Post edited by Soido on
  • SoidoSoido Member Posts: 47
    Don't want wo deal with this crap anymore. It has zero tactics, a dice game nothing more. Meta knowledge nothing more. No real time tactics, enemies with 3 Save thros, complete garbage unbalanced. Losing my time with this crap, I am done this is garbage game highly overrated rpg game in fact is archaic dumb broken game

  • ChroniclerChronicler Member Posts: 1,079
    I suggest you go to bed, sober up, and try to approach this problem again when you have all your mental faculties.

    You're clearly having some difficulties right now.

    bob_veng
  • SoidoSoido Member Posts: 47
    Yeah I should do that. Sorry about that. You have a nice weekend too.

    StummvonBordwehrZaghoul
  • ChroniclerChronicler Member Posts: 1,079
    No worries! Happens to us all! Hope tomorrow treats you better!

    StummvonBordwehr
  • DanacmDanacm Member Posts: 707
    Dnd actually is a dice game, as pen and paper full of ramdomness. Not euro style in gaming terms. I dont think its a problem.

    dunbarStummvonBordwehrPokota
  • MaurvirMaurvir Member Posts: 397
    Yeah, that's what is so hilarious about this thread. BG is a 20 year old computer-aided version of a game that is played with dice. Functionally, the biggest difference is the source of entropy (computer RNG vs human hands) It is actually reasonably faithful to the PnP game, with most of the differences being due to the lack of a human DM and the need to keep the story going.

    ThacoBell
  • SoidoSoido Member Posts: 47
    The new generation of players would find the dice system weird. It is okay concept in the damage department but starts looking really weird when rolling dices on level up.

    Saves against spells also start to look suspicious concept. Archaic concept. Artificial unnecessary concept as shown by games like Diablo where dice is eliminated in favor of % resistances. And looks like players like the % system more. It feels more natural indeed.

    I mean BG is really old game. Back then this was the norm. There was nothing new. It is hard indeed to come with new concepts. Even with new games. Like few quality games emerge, we been blessed by Larian recently to play DOS2. Or Wasteland or DAO years ago. You know it, is not easy to come by new rules and make dramatic changes.

    But today things like Saves vs spells/poison/breath are simply dumb. Dice on level up and getting 2 points of health on your hard earned level is too dumb, too broken.

    BG is a dice system. A game of throwing dices with some animations. Back then was okay. Nowadays rpgs are much more improved. I think DnD is even going to the garbage bin slowly. But yet DnD made an important contribution. Some of the bad features are removed forever, some of the good remain even today in games. The dice system is here but just not as intrusive as in BG system.

  • SoidoSoido Member Posts: 47
    The problem with the dice with gamers is that people are not willing to make chances. There is economic theory or observation a century old that people are risk averse individuals.

    So in this sense when I fight a save 3 vs spells enemy I am left with a hard choice. With probability game. And theory suggests that people not like this kind of problem. People would normally chose not to risk. So in game design terms it means that you have to get rid of such a undesirable system and make the game and mechanics more appealing

  • DanacmDanacm Member Posts: 707
    Back in days there were another systems that works better as a pc game. Adnd and dnd systems are never created to use as pc game system. In pnp it was a fine, but with real dm and real players always add more fun than in a pc game. Btw there are better rpg systems now, thats my opinion.
    One thing is not changes after years, the bg-bg2 story is one of the best of all pc games. Dos2, dao and diablo never had such a good story, its full of cliche.

    ThacoBell
  • SoidoSoido Member Posts: 47
    In my rpg experience I remember a period of great scarcity in the scene. Somewhere between Arcanum and DAO there was like a void for years. I thought rpg was dead. Then out of nowhere came DAO and it just rocked. Thanks of course to technological innovation but also they did not just make a new replicate of a dice system, Bioware created something blockbuster in rpg and it was damn good. Then only to see Bioware go downhill for unknown to me reasons, some say EA management to blame and many of the talented rpg guys simply left.

    I mentioned Arcanum and that was an amazing concept and game. The game, nowadays forgotten mostly, stand at the top of all charts to me. It was the first game that introduced me to rpgs. On the other hand in BG I am not impressed at all by the story, a classical bad vs evil and we know which side is better. But of course that is on the grand scheme, while a lot of fun exists on smaller dialogues. I have not advanced the game beyond Cloakwood so what do I know.

    DOS is very similar to BG in dialogues, with choices in between and quests. DAO was more romantic experience and felt epic, like that cutscene with the king crucified really made me cry a tear, was so emotional and sad to see this young king like that. And tactically well made game. I don't remember if there were action points there I think not but remember there was this original concept of threat and there were skills and even spells of threat management which made it very tactical and interesting.

    Storywise most difficult choices are not when you clash good to evil but good to good and when you feel bad when you said something good to a good npc and especially if a bad thing follows out of it. For example a paladin, let's say you are good tief and the paladin is also good npc, but the paladin is a zealot against evil and say he disagrees on a certain evil noc and wants to kill it for his good cause but say you are pragmatic thief and want to exploit the evil forces for a greater good and then you clash with the paladin although both had a good course in mind.

  • PingwinPingwin Member Posts: 228
    How would a percentage resistance involving no dice work against say a charm spell? I can see that it would work, and be very simple to understand against a spell that deals damage - if you have 25% resistance, it absorbs 25% of the damage but a charm spell is an all or nothing effect. Dice have to be involved somewhere and then how is it any different to save vs spells?
    It's always been recognised that it can feel unfair to get 2 or 3 extra hp when say Minsc levels up because the dice aren't going your way. You either play it hardcore and accept it, or you save scum until you get a more favourable result, or change the game mechanics by turning on the max hitpoints on level up option.
    The BG games are classics, and based around a classic, if flawed in many ways, PnP RPG system. Doesn't mean it has to be everyone's cup of tea though. If BG annoys you that much, play something else.

    ThacoBell
  • SoidoSoido Member Posts: 47
    In DOS enemies still can resist. The system there is based on Willpower and Bodybuilding stats which are points from 1 to 6. So in effect you kind of have a probability chance to charm the enemy or not indeed.

    But there is a distinction. If your character has more points in these two stats he becomes more immune and more likely to evade a spell.

    But yes is still a probability. You have a point too. I have to think about it.

    Yes it is probability in both cases but a level 30 fighter will likely have points in these two so is mostly saved from spells. On the other hand in BG no matter your level a dice can still roll bad.

    No wait. Fighters too gain Save throws progressively getting better. So is very similar. Hm, I have to think about it.

    StummvonBordwehr
  • PokotaPokota Member Posts: 567
    edited December 1
    I feel compelled to remind you that Baldur's Gate (a computer game from 1998) uses modified battle mechanics from Advanced Dungeons And Dragons, 2nd Edtion - a Tabletop RPG system written in 1989. You can't avoid the randomness, all you can do is take steps to mitigate it. (And if you're in BG1, there's not many steps you can take)
    Everything you're pointing out as archaic is archaic for that exact reason.

    ConjurerDragonThacoBell
  • SoidoSoido Member Posts: 47
    You are right. The randomness is in every rpg game even in Diablo. It might not be a necessarily d20 randomness but is still similar concept, be it a weapon damage variation or enemy damage etc

  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 9,801
    @Pokota is 99% right. For a normal playthrough, someone isn't going to be able to avoid randomness. But the entire no-reload community is based around tactics that only fail through human error. If you know the game inside and out, you can pretty much eliminate chance from your game.

    StummvonBordwehr
  • PokotaPokota Member Posts: 567
    (he says as I reintroduce randomness with an Item Randomizer)

  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 9,801
    Pokota wrote: »
    (he says as I reintroduce randomness with an Item Randomizer)

    That's a mod. I'm referring to the game.

Sign In or Register to comment.