Maybe it was added to BG2 apparantly as a house rule.
You also had far fewer weapon styles in BG1, you could therefore potentially reach grandmastery in 'Large Swords' before dual classeing and have access to 3 weapons with grandmastery. Maybe they changed the grandmastery rules in BG2 to reflect the more specific weapon proficiency system.
So if you want to go back to however it was in vanilla BG1, then bring back the BG1 proficiency system too. Otherwise the changes made to dual class proficiencies in BG2 were a house rule for the new proficiency system.
You couldn't get GM in ANYTHING in BG1, the level cap doesn't allow for it. The complaints here are as much about TuTu/BGT as they are about BG:EE.
I would love to have the old BG1 proficiency system in BG:EE, it makes little sense to have such a specific system in a low level campaign, especially now that weapon style proficiencies are cramping your points.
Grandmastery was possible in BG1, because back then you could put all four starting proficiencies to the same weapon skill. I believe the same was true even with TuTu, though I have no personal experience of BGT so I can't say.
It was also possible with shadowkeeper. Im not even debating that, I'm saying how the change in weapon proficiencies to BG2's style does not suit BG1's dual classed GM restrictions. Either have:
1) BG2 proficiencies + dual class GM (being able to use second class points towards GM)
or
2) BG1 proficiencies + dual class restrictions on GM after taking your second class.
Dont mix and match a GM system that was designed for a different proficiency system.
Maybe it was added to BG2 apparantly as a house rule.
You also had far fewer weapon styles in BG1, you could therefore potentially reach grandmastery in 'Large Swords' before dual classeing and have access to 3 weapons with grandmastery. Maybe they changed the grandmastery rules in BG2 to reflect the more specific weapon proficiency system.
So if you want to go back to however it was in vanilla BG1, then bring back the BG1 proficiency system too. Otherwise the changes made to dual class proficiencies in BG2 were a house rule for the new proficiency system.
Why are you so stubborn? You are simply wrong. When you dual you can no longer advance in the class you dualed from, hence you lose the ability to attain grand master.
BG2 introduced a bug that hasn't been fixed. There are no house rules. It's a simple bug that needs fixing. Stop being stubborn.
You are simply wrong. When you dual you can no longer advance in the class you dualed from, hence you lose the ability to attain grand master.
Well, technically you are the one that would be wrong because you absolutely could do this in the BG2 engine.
I've been reading BG forums for a long time, and I've never seen any complaints about this complete non-issue in BG2, so why are people so suddenly bothered about it now?
The solution already exists and is simple - if you dont like it, then spend your points however else you want to. There is absolutely no need to nerf a feature of the game for however many other players enjoy using it.
No one here has any evidence or backing to support that BG2's dual class proficiency system was a mistake or bugged as opposed to being an intentional change. It doesnt stop the game from working, nor does it break any aspect of the game so it most definitely is not a bug.
Grandmastery was possible in BG1, because back then you could put all four starting proficiencies to the same weapon skill. I believe the same was true even with TuTu, though I have no personal experience of BGT so I can't say.
No you couldn't. In TuTu you could, and I'm pretty sure BGT as well you could, but in REAL BG1, the ACTUAL BG1 game not on the sequel's engine, which apparently nobody played, you could only put two points in any one proficiency at level 1. So your 4 points could get you two specialized profs, and by the level cap you could only get up to 4 slot High Mastery in any one weapon class(3rd slot at level 3, 4th at level 6, level cap in TotSC for Fighters is 8, the 5th slot would come at level 9).
The solution already exists and is simple - if you dont like it, then spend your points however else you want to. There is absolutely no need to nerf a feature of the game for however many other players enjoy using it.
No one here has any evidence or backing to support that BG2's dual class proficiency system was a mistake or bugged as opposed to being an intentional change. It doesnt stop the game from working, nor does it break any aspect of the game so it most definitely is not a bug.
That's like telling people to make stupid moves in Chess on purpose if they think their opponent is too easy. We just want the game to have it's original difficulty. On the contrary if you want to cheat grandmastery onto characters who shouldn't be able to get it, you are free to Shadowkeep it.
Saying we don't have evidence that this is a bug or mistake is ludicrous. Compare the manual to how the game actually functions for either Baldur's Gate game and it should be painfully clear that mistakes in implementing the rules were all over, that adding the functionality added in BG2(especially kits) required them to kludge many aspects of the engine which had tons of unintended consequences that they may not have noticed.
An aspect of the game it breaks is the game balance. Bugs don't necessarily mean the game stops working, it means the game stops working like it's supposed to: reads/writes incorrect values to variables, fails to lock certain values, etc. AKA: exactly what this is, the variable for proficiency state isn't being properly locked when dual-classing to a class with different limits.
I played the original BG1, before TuTu, and I distinctly remember putting all my starting points into long bow.
I'm sorry you distinctly remember something that didn't happen. Perhaps there was a mod for BG1 that did this? I've never heard of it if it exists.
Seriously though, I won't ask you to dig out your discs and reinstall original BG1 just to test and see for yourself, but it's max two points in any one prof at character creation in BG1...
Seriously though, I won't ask you to dig out your discs and reinstall original BG1 just to test and see for yourself,
Well, I did it anyway. because I will not have my impeccable memory insulted like this without getting to the bottom of the matter!
Turns out it was just two points. How weird.
Edit: With that said, I rather prefer how it is. Like I said before, it doesn't really make sense for someone to be the second-best swordmaster in the Sword Coast right off the bat.
@Sazaland if you want the game at its original difficulty then you can still play it on core rules and not use kits or dual classing.
Dual classing and proficiency points are not the biggest factor in making this game easier, why not also complain about the addition of kits, all the new BG2 spell scrolls, and thief traps too which make the entire game simply and easy if you play that way?
If you purposely create an OP character, then thats your choice for an easy game. If you want to play a more difficult game then you also have the choice not to make an OP character, thats the point of this being an RPG game.
If you want to block yourself from reaching grandmastery on dual classes then do it, theres no reason for you to cry for the game to be nerfed because you lack the self will not to abuse such a feature and create OP characters in the first place.
@Sazaland if you want the game at its original difficulty then you can still play it on core rules and not use kits or dual classing.
Dual classing and proficiency points are not the biggest factor in making this game easier, why not also complain about the addition of kits, all the new BG2 spell scrolls, and thief traps too which make the entire game simply and easy if you play that way?
If you purposely create an OP character, then thats your choice for an easy game. If you want to play a more difficult game then you also have the choice not to make an OP character, thats the point of this being an RPG game.
If you want to block yourself from reaching grandmastery on dual classes then do it, theres no reason for you to cry for the game to be nerfed because you lack the self will not to abuse such a feature and create OP characters in the first place.
STOP WASTING EVERYBODYS TIME!!!
'Ahem' This is a bug, that has been conformed. The bug , which you have been exploiting, needs and will be fixed.
It will be fixed, the code will be changed, the error corrected, the bug shall be squashed. You can not stop people fixing it, nor should you try to.
so please stop wasting time and effort by repeating the same arugment over and over while ignoring everything anyone else tells you about the game or it's rule-set.
Something that appears in the game as entirely unintended by the developers. Something none of them deliberately put in there, but rather exists as a misconception and an unexpected reaction between two or more events or pieces of code clashing.
I might not be able to stop people from crying about a complete non issue, but I thought that under the contract beamdog had, they were not allowed to change any of the core rules or features of the game, only add new things.
Its not a bug to me because it doesnt stop the game from working. Its only just barely an exploit, but then again so is find familiar and set snares, neither of which were in the original BG1, but they are now, so why arent you people being so vocal about getting those things removed as well?
I doubt that it will get changed, and I hope that it doesnt. If it was such a serious bug then the modding community would have already fixed it a long time ago in Tutu and BGT, but obviously it isnt because the game carries on working fine regardless of where I place my proficiency points.
so please stop wasting time and effort by repeating the same arugment over and over while ignoring everything anyone else tells you about the game or it's rule-set.
Ok, so maybe other people should also take this advice and stop repeating the same arguments about PnP rules over such an insignificant non-issue.
Something that appears in the game as entirely unintended by the developers. Something none of them deliberately put in there....
Ok, so as I have already asked, please provide confirmation from the developers that this feature was unintended and not deliberate rather than simply believing that is the case.
I might not be able to stop people from crying about a complete non issue, but I thought that under the contract beamdog had, they were not allowed to change any of the core rules or features of the game, only add new things.
Were that true, they couldn't have added things from the Fix Pack or TuTu, but they've added stuff from both. Perhaps the Widescreen mod would count as well.
Its only just barely an exploit, but then again so is find familiar and set snares, neither of which were in the original BG1, but they are now, so why arent you people being so vocal about getting those things removed as well?
Could be for several reasons. Perhaps it's because those things actually make a bit of sense, unlike becoming a grandmaster after having essentially abandoned the way of the warrior. Or perhaps it's because we're not talking about those things in this thread, which is specifically about the grandmastery issue. Perhaps both.
I doubt that it will get changed, and I hope that it doesnt. If it was such a serious bug then the modding community would have already fixed it a long time ago in Tutu and BGT, but obviously it isnt because the game carries on working fine regardless of where I place my proficiency points.
I don't think anyone here is saying it's anything life-threateningly serious. What we're debating about is whether it's an unintended bug in the first place, or maybe an exploit if you would prefer that word - and it is. Perhaps you prefer it that way, but the truth is that it's not supposed to be there.
Bugfixes and widescreen mod are not altering the base content of the games engine, this suggestion however would be.
What does "base content of the game's engine" mean? Why is this particular bit somehow magically in the very base of the engine's content, yet any other bug around in the game not?
Many bugs affect the game, and so does therefore fixing those bugs. Games have history of, for instance, allowing infinite use of something that should not be infinite - and these are nearly always fixed, and therefore it alters the content of the game. This is no exception.
And why does it bother other people so much? It would bother me greatly if this 'bug' was 'fixed'.
I already told you that this is not some world-breaking issue for us. Is it a world-breaking issue for you if it was fixed? Would it ruin the entire game and proclaim that you shall never play it again?
Besides, if it were fixed, then you could still just use Shadowkeeper to give yourself that final proficiency point anyway. Nothing will have changed.
'Ahem' This is a bug, that has been conformed. The bug , which you have been exploiting, needs and will be fixed.
It will be fixed, the code will be changed, the error corrected, the bug shall be squashed. You can not stop people fixing it, nor should you try to.
so please stop wasting time and effort by repeating the same arugment over and over while ignoring everything anyone else tells you about the game or it's rule-set.
It is a bug. It does not *NEED* to be fixed.
For a guy that is undeniably wrong on this issue, Mungri comes across looking like the sensible one. The point he keeps coming back to is, "Why waste time fixing this when it's far easier for the people who don't like the bug to simply choose not to exploit it?" For as much as people seem to be dismissing Mungri, this question really should be answered, and I don't think it has been. Why should the developers fix it? Is it because you lack the willpower to refrain from exploiting the bug, or is it because it bothers you that somebody else might be exploiting the bug?
Normally I don't buy into "not worth the time" or "bigger fish to fry" arguments, but BG:EE clearly has a bunch of serious issues plaguing it right now, with releases on other platforms still to come. And after that, I want them hard at work on BG2:EE.
Plus, I like the bug. Reading this thread, the reasoning behind why it should be considered a bug makes perfect sense (and it has always bothered me that dual-class characters could work towards grand mastery while multi-class characters couldn't), but I think the rule that says that dual-class characters never get any better in their original class is a stupid rule. I prefer it the way it currently works.
What the "fix this bug" crowd seems to want is for me to have to mod my game (or manually modify my character) to have the game work this way... So our options are:
Option A) You don't ask the developers to fix the bug. You refrain from exploiting the bug, requiring no work from anybody, and you allow me and Mungri to keep playing the way we've always played, because it's our game and it doesn't affect you whatsoever.
Option You ask the developers to fix the bug. This requires work. Then you get to play the game in a manner that is not at all different from how you're already able to play the game, because as people who are against this bug, you're obviously not exploiting the bug. But now if I want to exploit the bug, it requires more work to either make a mod that changes it back, or to manually make edits any time I add an "illegal" proficiency (won't be a huge deal in BG:EE, but will be much more trouble in BG2:EE due to the number of additional proficiency points you earn).
I know that's a biased way of writing those options, but you have to understand that this "bug fix" seems very little like a fix, and much more like an excuse to dictate how I play my game. Option A should be the preferred method of dealing with this bug.
OR...
Option C) Make a mod that "fixes" this bug. One of the biggest perks of BG:EE is supposed to be how mod-friendly it is. Why not take advantage of that and put a mod-maker to work, instead of the devs. The added bonus of this is that it shouldn't be terribly difficult to give people choices on how they want masteries to work. You could have one option that eliminates further proficiencies once a character duals. But you could also have an option that allows for mastery/high mastery/grand mastery for multi-class characters (moving the cap, or eliminating it completely). I bet lots of people would be a fan of that idea (and not just powergamers). How about an option that allows certain kits to start with 3 points in certain weapons? I generally agree that a level 1 "master" of a weapon is silly, but I think a level 1 Archer should be allowed to have bow mastery, and a level 1 Kensai should be allowed to have mastery in a weapon (that's pretty much the description of the kit, right?)
Wouldn't Option C make for a better game for everybody who installed it, while not punishing people who wished to continue exploiting the bug, and not requiring any valuable time from the developers?
Heck, I'd do it myself if I knew anything about writing mods. Somebody want to code it for me if I figure out some content for it?
Oh, one final semi-related note. Is there a way to fix the bug that wouldn't screw up a character that duals TO fighter instead of away from it? I'd hate for my Avenger/Fighter to be stuck with Avenger proficiencies.
Curiously, I think the devs have addressed it in a sideways manner. This was most often exploited with Shar-Teel in tutu, and guess what? She now has only one longsword pip at level 2, the other going to a fairly nonsensical dagger proficiency (admittedly, in vanilla she had two pips in short and two in long. It's more the dual wield that is out of left field). Once I figure out how to make Near infinity work properly, I am going to change it to two longsword profs. Because I am a dirty dirty powergamer
I actually just did that, except with Shadowkeeper. I also changed her to a berserker and switched the crossbow proficiency over to long sword as well.
Maybe I'll bring it back once I dual-class her, which I've never done before.
@Rhyme I think I answered it well enough: it's not about willpower it's about playing the game we're given. I'm not going to make stupid moves on purpose just because I think it's too easy. If I have to make the difficulty myself it's not a fun or interesting challenge. This is why mods are usually a hard sell for me, though a small bugfix mod for this sort of thing might be acceptable. However, I don't think this would be a particularly easy bug to fix in a mod, since it's deeper in the engine. Unless ToBEX like modding features are already in BG:EE(quite possible since Ascension64 was involved), I'm not even sure it'd be possible.
Whereas for someone who likes the current behavior it'd be completely easy to keep playing that way even after an official patch: Shadowkeeper! You can already make up your own houserules with regard to exceeding the existing limits, we cannot do the same with imposing stricter limits.
I am also pretty confident a fix wouldn't be that ridiculous to do or end up affecting dual-classing TO Fighter, since the behavior was correct both ways in vanilla BG1, the code is clearly possible in the engine.
@Rhyme I think I answered it well enough: it's not about willpower it's about playing the game we're given. I'm not going to make stupid moves on purpose just because I think it's too easy. If I have to make the difficulty myself it's not a fun or interesting challenge. This is why mods are usually a hard sell for me, though a small bugfix mod for this sort of thing might be acceptable. However, I don't think this would be a particularly easy bug to fix in a mod, since it's deeper in the engine. Unless ToBEX like modding features are already in BG:EE(quite possible since Ascension64 was involved), I'm not even sure it'd be possible.
Whereas for someone who likes the current behavior it'd be completely easy to keep playing that way even after an official patch: Shadowkeeper! You can already make up your own houserules with regard to exceeding the existing limits, we cannot do the same with imposing stricter limits.
I am also pretty confident a fix wouldn't be that ridiculous to do or end up affecting dual-classing TO Fighter, since the behavior was correct both ways in vanilla BG1, the code is clearly possible in the engine.
Sorry, but that answer sums up to, "I can't help myself, and therefore the game needs to be changed for EVERYBODY so that I can't do this thing that I don't want to do." This follow-up post sums up to, "I don't like imposing the challenge on myself, but I think this challenge should be imposed on me, so the game should be changed to my preference, and YOU should be the one who has to use mods." Even though that requires the developers to patch the game, and requires somebody else to make a mod, just so that I can play the game the way I'm accustomed to playing it. You mention Shadowkeeper, but when I get to BG2, that's going to involve saving my game, quitting my game, and loading Shadowkeeper to edit my game A LOT. Again, it's a lot of effort on my part all because you can't bring yourself to not click a button.
...Or you could remind yourself that you are a human being who is in control of his or her own behavior. "The game we're given" also includes a bunch of built-in cheat codes. Do you use ctrl-y to go through the game? If not, isn't that the same as making stupid moves in a chess game on purpose?
If you want a mod that prevents you from adding the extra illegal point, try writing "DON'T DO IT, IT'S CHEATING!!!" on a sticky note and attaching it to your monitor. Congratulations, your game has been successfully patched. If for some reason the patch isn't successful in keeping you from adding that extra point, it'd be completely easy for you to removing that extra point: Shadowkeeper! You can already make up your own houserules with regard to imposing stricter limits. All you need to do is NOT CLICK A BUTTON.
"Doctor, it hurts when I do *this!*" "Well... Stop doing that."
Your inability to refrain from powergaming is your problem. The solution could and should be yours as well.
If you have to make up the rules as you go, it's not a game. In tabletop it can work because the DM is an independent non-player entity.
In approaching the challenges a game generates, the player must not be asked to sandbag or make bad moves just to give the challenges a chance to overcome the player. Cheats are not the same because the console is not enabled by default, or able to be enabled in the game settings proper to my knowledge.
I may be in control of my own behavior, but if my behavior is to seek victory against a challenge, why must I make decisions that run contrary to the goal of my behavior in determining my behavior? You are not asking for control, you are asking people to become insane; to act against their own goals in the process of pursuing them
On the contrary, I'm asking the devs in their travels to fix a bug which causes an incorrect implementation of AD&D rules which was correctly implemented in the original game they purport to be enhancing.
In approaching the challenges a game generates, the player must not be asked to sandbag or make bad moves just to give the challenges a chance to overcome the player.
Why not? Also, that game isn't asking you to do that. You're asking yourself to do that, and then saying, "I must not be asked to do that!" Your argument is "I shouldn't be allowed to do this!" followed by "If I can do it, why shouldn't I do it?"
I may be in control of my own behavior, but if my behavior is to seek victory against a challenge, why must I make decisions that run contrary to the goal of my behavior in determining my behavior? You are not asking for control, you are asking people to become insane; to act against their own goals in the process of pursuing them
If my comparison was hyperbolic, then I'm not sure how to describe the quote "you are asking people to become insane". I'm willing to admit my exaggerations... I hope you'll be willing to admit yours.
The CLUA console was a bad comparison, but here's another: Selling Rasaad's boots for 12k gold.
You can see it all over the forums right now. An NPC who can be recruited very early in the game who has a piece of equipment that sells for an absurd amount of money. There are a fair number of people calling for the boots to be either unsellable, or to sell for much less, but there are also a lot of people who simply refuse to sell the boots. They think that having a free item that sells for 12k gold isn't right, so they refrain, even though that behavior runs contrary to their goal of seeking victory against a challenge.
Are they insane? No. They're making a simple choice that seems perfectly obvious to me. Selling the item affects game balance, so they don't do it. It doesn't feel right from a RP perspective (you'd never be able to convince a guy to sell his special magical boots and then instantly kick him out of the party... It makes no sense), so they don't do it. They don't want to do it, so they don't do it.
If the bug bothers you, treat it like a pair of 12k boots. Just say no. It's really not so hard. Really.
You know what ought to be much more important? Re-balancing some spells/kits that are currently very unbalancing. I would like to be able to use the spell "Find Familiar" without tripling the HP of my level 1 sorceror (not to mention how strong they are in the early game). Balancing that spell isn't something we can do in Shadowkeeper, and it would actually make a significant difference in gameplay.
On the contrary, I'm asking the devs in their travels to fix a bug which causes an incorrect implementation of AD&D rules which was correctly implemented in the original game they purport to be enhancing.
And my problem is, I can't disagree with any of that. I don't deny that it's a bug, I don't deny that it is incorrectly implemented, and I take your word for it that it used to be correctly implemented in the original game (My memory was that mastery was bugged anyway and didn't give the proper bonuses, so the extra points were meaningless - thus I never went for Grand Mastery). Technically, you're right. My argument is just that if it's left alone, it's easy enough for players who wish to police themselves to police themselves (despite your protestation that doing so constitutes "insanity", and that choosing to self-police (or to community-mod the fix) would save the development team from having to do the work, and would allow those who LIKE the bug to keep exploiting it.
But if "It's a bug!" is all that matters to you (instead of "it's easy to work around" and "it's not very important"), then I guess you're right.
Comments
You also had far fewer weapon styles in BG1, you could therefore potentially reach grandmastery in 'Large Swords' before dual classeing and have access to 3 weapons with grandmastery. Maybe they changed the grandmastery rules in BG2 to reflect the more specific weapon proficiency system.
So if you want to go back to however it was in vanilla BG1, then bring back the BG1 proficiency system too. Otherwise the changes made to dual class proficiencies in BG2 were a house rule for the new proficiency system.
I would love to have the old BG1 proficiency system in BG:EE, it makes little sense to have such a specific system in a low level campaign, especially now that weapon style proficiencies are cramping your points.
1) BG2 proficiencies + dual class GM (being able to use second class points towards GM)
or
2) BG1 proficiencies + dual class restrictions on GM after taking your second class.
Dont mix and match a GM system that was designed for a different proficiency system.
BG2 introduced a bug that hasn't been fixed. There are no house rules. It's a simple bug that needs fixing. Stop being stubborn.
This isnt a 'bug' and it doesnt need 'fixing'. Well, technically you are the one that would be wrong because you absolutely could do this in the BG2 engine.
I've been reading BG forums for a long time, and I've never seen any complaints about this complete non-issue in BG2, so why are people so suddenly bothered about it now?
The solution already exists and is simple - if you dont like it, then spend your points however else you want to. There is absolutely no need to nerf a feature of the game for however many other players enjoy using it.
No one here has any evidence or backing to support that BG2's dual class proficiency system was a mistake or bugged as opposed to being an intentional change. It doesnt stop the game from working, nor does it break any aspect of the game so it most definitely is not a bug.
Saying we don't have evidence that this is a bug or mistake is ludicrous. Compare the manual to how the game actually functions for either Baldur's Gate game and it should be painfully clear that mistakes in implementing the rules were all over, that adding the functionality added in BG2(especially kits) required them to kludge many aspects of the engine which had tons of unintended consequences that they may not have noticed.
An aspect of the game it breaks is the game balance. Bugs don't necessarily mean the game stops working, it means the game stops working like it's supposed to: reads/writes incorrect values to variables, fails to lock certain values, etc. AKA: exactly what this is, the variable for proficiency state isn't being properly locked when dual-classing to a class with different limits.
Seriously though, I won't ask you to dig out your discs and reinstall original BG1 just to test and see for yourself, but it's max two points in any one prof at character creation in BG1...
Turns out it was just two points. How weird.
Edit: With that said, I rather prefer how it is. Like I said before, it doesn't really make sense for someone to be the second-best swordmaster in the Sword Coast right off the bat.
Dual classing and proficiency points are not the biggest factor in making this game easier, why not also complain about the addition of kits, all the new BG2 spell scrolls, and thief traps too which make the entire game simply and easy if you play that way?
If you purposely create an OP character, then thats your choice for an easy game. If you want to play a more difficult game then you also have the choice not to make an OP character, thats the point of this being an RPG game.
If you want to block yourself from reaching grandmastery on dual classes then do it, theres no reason for you to cry for the game to be nerfed because you lack the self will not to abuse such a feature and create OP characters in the first place.
'Ahem'
This is a bug, that has been conformed.
The bug , which you have been exploiting, needs and will be fixed.
It will be fixed, the code will be changed, the error corrected, the bug shall be squashed. You can not stop people fixing it, nor should you try to.
so please stop wasting time and effort by repeating the same arugment over and over while ignoring everything anyone else tells you about the game or it's rule-set.
It's pretty easy to define, really.
Its not a bug to me because it doesnt stop the game from working. Its only just barely an exploit, but then again so is find familiar and set snares, neither of which were in the original BG1, but they are now, so why arent you people being so vocal about getting those things removed as well?
I doubt that it will get changed, and I hope that it doesnt. If it was such a serious bug then the modding community would have already fixed it a long time ago in Tutu and BGT, but obviously it isnt because the game carries on working fine regardless of where I place my proficiency points. Ok, so maybe other people should also take this advice and stop repeating the same arguments about PnP rules over such an insignificant non-issue. Ok, so as I have already asked, please provide confirmation from the developers that this feature was unintended and not deliberate rather than simply believing that is the case.
'Then you have an extremely narrow view of what a bug is. It's still a bug, it's just not one that bothers you much.'
And why does it bother other people so much? It would bother me greatly if this 'bug' was 'fixed'.
Many bugs affect the game, and so does therefore fixing those bugs. Games have history of, for instance, allowing infinite use of something that should not be infinite - and these are nearly always fixed, and therefore it alters the content of the game. This is no exception. I already told you that this is not some world-breaking issue for us. Is it a world-breaking issue for you if it was fixed? Would it ruin the entire game and proclaim that you shall never play it again?
Besides, if it were fixed, then you could still just use Shadowkeeper to give yourself that final proficiency point anyway. Nothing will have changed.
For a guy that is undeniably wrong on this issue, Mungri comes across looking like the sensible one. The point he keeps coming back to is, "Why waste time fixing this when it's far easier for the people who don't like the bug to simply choose not to exploit it?" For as much as people seem to be dismissing Mungri, this question really should be answered, and I don't think it has been. Why should the developers fix it? Is it because you lack the willpower to refrain from exploiting the bug, or is it because it bothers you that somebody else might be exploiting the bug?
Normally I don't buy into "not worth the time" or "bigger fish to fry" arguments, but BG:EE clearly has a bunch of serious issues plaguing it right now, with releases on other platforms still to come. And after that, I want them hard at work on BG2:EE.
Plus, I like the bug. Reading this thread, the reasoning behind why it should be considered a bug makes perfect sense (and it has always bothered me that dual-class characters could work towards grand mastery while multi-class characters couldn't), but I think the rule that says that dual-class characters never get any better in their original class is a stupid rule. I prefer it the way it currently works.
What the "fix this bug" crowd seems to want is for me to have to mod my game (or manually modify my character) to have the game work this way... So our options are:
Option A) You don't ask the developers to fix the bug. You refrain from exploiting the bug, requiring no work from anybody, and you allow me and Mungri to keep playing the way we've always played, because it's our game and it doesn't affect you whatsoever.
Option
I know that's a biased way of writing those options, but you have to understand that this "bug fix" seems very little like a fix, and much more like an excuse to dictate how I play my game. Option A should be the preferred method of dealing with this bug.
OR...
Option C) Make a mod that "fixes" this bug. One of the biggest perks of BG:EE is supposed to be how mod-friendly it is. Why not take advantage of that and put a mod-maker to work, instead of the devs. The added bonus of this is that it shouldn't be terribly difficult to give people choices on how they want masteries to work. You could have one option that eliminates further proficiencies once a character duals. But you could also have an option that allows for mastery/high mastery/grand mastery for multi-class characters (moving the cap, or eliminating it completely). I bet lots of people would be a fan of that idea (and not just powergamers). How about an option that allows certain kits to start with 3 points in certain weapons? I generally agree that a level 1 "master" of a weapon is silly, but I think a level 1 Archer should be allowed to have bow mastery, and a level 1 Kensai should be allowed to have mastery in a weapon (that's pretty much the description of the kit, right?)
Wouldn't Option C make for a better game for everybody who installed it, while not punishing people who wished to continue exploiting the bug, and not requiring any valuable time from the developers?
Heck, I'd do it myself if I knew anything about writing mods. Somebody want to code it for me if I figure out some content for it?
Oh, one final semi-related note. Is there a way to fix the bug that wouldn't screw up a character that duals TO fighter instead of away from it? I'd hate for my Avenger/Fighter to be stuck with Avenger proficiencies.
Maybe I'll bring it back once I dual-class her, which I've never done before.
I think I answered it well enough: it's not about willpower it's about playing the game we're given. I'm not going to make stupid moves on purpose just because I think it's too easy. If I have to make the difficulty myself it's not a fun or interesting challenge. This is why mods are usually a hard sell for me, though a small bugfix mod for this sort of thing might be acceptable. However, I don't think this would be a particularly easy bug to fix in a mod, since it's deeper in the engine. Unless ToBEX like modding features are already in BG:EE(quite possible since Ascension64 was involved), I'm not even sure it'd be possible.
Whereas for someone who likes the current behavior it'd be completely easy to keep playing that way even after an official patch: Shadowkeeper! You can already make up your own houserules with regard to exceeding the existing limits, we cannot do the same with imposing stricter limits.
I am also pretty confident a fix wouldn't be that ridiculous to do or end up affecting dual-classing TO Fighter, since the behavior was correct both ways in vanilla BG1, the code is clearly possible in the engine.
...Or you could remind yourself that you are a human being who is in control of his or her own behavior. "The game we're given" also includes a bunch of built-in cheat codes. Do you use ctrl-y to go through the game? If not, isn't that the same as making stupid moves in a chess game on purpose?
If you want a mod that prevents you from adding the extra illegal point, try writing "DON'T DO IT, IT'S CHEATING!!!" on a sticky note and attaching it to your monitor. Congratulations, your game has been successfully patched. If for some reason the patch isn't successful in keeping you from adding that extra point, it'd be completely easy for you to removing that extra point: Shadowkeeper! You can already make up your own houserules with regard to imposing stricter limits. All you need to do is NOT CLICK A BUTTON.
"Doctor, it hurts when I do *this!*"
"Well... Stop doing that."
Your inability to refrain from powergaming is your problem. The solution could and should be yours as well.
If you have to make up the rules as you go, it's not a game. In tabletop it can work because the DM is an independent non-player entity.
In approaching the challenges a game generates, the player must not be asked to sandbag or make bad moves just to give the challenges a chance to overcome the player. Cheats are not the same because the console is not enabled by default, or able to be enabled in the game settings proper to my knowledge.
I may be in control of my own behavior, but if my behavior is to seek victory against a challenge, why must I make decisions that run contrary to the goal of my behavior in determining my behavior? You are not asking for control, you are asking people to become insane; to act against their own goals in the process of pursuing them
On the contrary, I'm asking the devs in their travels to fix a bug which causes an incorrect implementation of AD&D rules which was correctly implemented in the original game they purport to be enhancing.
The CLUA console was a bad comparison, but here's another: Selling Rasaad's boots for 12k gold.
You can see it all over the forums right now. An NPC who can be recruited very early in the game who has a piece of equipment that sells for an absurd amount of money. There are a fair number of people calling for the boots to be either unsellable, or to sell for much less, but there are also a lot of people who simply refuse to sell the boots. They think that having a free item that sells for 12k gold isn't right, so they refrain, even though that behavior runs contrary to their goal of seeking victory against a challenge.
Are they insane? No. They're making a simple choice that seems perfectly obvious to me. Selling the item affects game balance, so they don't do it. It doesn't feel right from a RP perspective (you'd never be able to convince a guy to sell his special magical boots and then instantly kick him out of the party... It makes no sense), so they don't do it. They don't want to do it, so they don't do it.
If the bug bothers you, treat it like a pair of 12k boots. Just say no. It's really not so hard. Really.
You know what ought to be much more important? Re-balancing some spells/kits that are currently very unbalancing. I would like to be able to use the spell "Find Familiar" without tripling the HP of my level 1 sorceror (not to mention how strong they are in the early game). Balancing that spell isn't something we can do in Shadowkeeper, and it would actually make a significant difference in gameplay. And my problem is, I can't disagree with any of that. I don't deny that it's a bug, I don't deny that it is incorrectly implemented, and I take your word for it that it used to be correctly implemented in the original game (My memory was that mastery was bugged anyway and didn't give the proper bonuses, so the extra points were meaningless - thus I never went for Grand Mastery). Technically, you're right. My argument is just that if it's left alone, it's easy enough for players who wish to police themselves to police themselves (despite your protestation that doing so constitutes "insanity", and that choosing to self-police (or to community-mod the fix) would save the development team from having to do the work, and would allow those who LIKE the bug to keep exploiting it.
But if "It's a bug!" is all that matters to you (instead of "it's easy to work around" and "it's not very important"), then I guess you're right.