I, for one, like my character being weak as shit in the beginning. It feels so much better when you reach beyond your peak and start blowing everyone up that used to be stronger...
Only thing we need to do is nerd the overpowered classes in the beginning, like Totemic Druid
Call Lightning is great but situational. How many difficult outdoor fights are there? The most challenging one I can think of are those bounty hunters outside the Cloakwood Mines, and they're not exactly terrifying. Eh, I suppose Werewolf Island could be a possibility. But the spell is overall entirely inferior to Holy Smite, which does less damage but is useful almost everywhere - plus the damage is instantaneous, instead of having to wait 60 seconds between each hit. Flame Blade can be cast by both Clerics and Druids, and it isn't affected by proficiencies. The only Druid exclusives at level two are Charm Mammal (blegh) and Goodberry (worst level 2 spell). Meanwhile, Cleric gets Draw Upon Holy Might as an exclusive, which is easily one of the best spells.
The first spell Druids get that really compete with Clerics is Call Woodland Beings. From there things get even better, with Iron Skins, Insect Plague, Fire Elemental, Creeping Doom and possibly Nature's Beauty (depending on what you're fighting). But until then, Clerics rule. And even at that point, trading off rezzing spells is harsh if you've only got one Priest.
So, maybe this is because you're playing with BGTutu, since Holy Smite is not available in BG1/ToTSC. I would say less than Call Lightning is overall inferior, but rather that the way Holy Smite is implemented is way too good (especially since evil characters in BG2 are waaaaaay too common - I don't know so much about BG1). Holy Smite is pretty much the most effective damage spell in the game - bypasses resistances, scales all the way to level 20, if you have an all-good party, it's party-safe, and it can blind. Obviously an oversight in balance, since priests should not be able to out-damage frail mages.
Similarly, with Charm Mammal. Blegh? Maybe using BG2 engine, but charm is amazing in BG (because you get domination-level control of spells and can also talk to them with a reaction bonus), and freeing up your mage to cast Sleep instead *and* being able to target bears (even if they eventually become trivial to kill) is nice. and Until TOTSC buffed Cure Light Wounds (though I don't think BG2 does), Goodberry is an amazing (if a bit tedious) heal. Heals on average more than cure light wounds (5 vs 4.5) *and* you can divide the healing up between multiple characters.
BTW, Flame Blade *is* affected by proficiencies. It's small sword and also has a +4 bonus (+3 to compensate for characters without proficiency, +1 from spell). Which means if you have small sword proficiency already (only possible for druids), you are basically equipped with a +4 weapon, whereas clerics just get the net of +1. (Try it out - the way the spell is implemented is different from the spell description.)
I won't disagree with you about DUHM - it's pretty amazing. But it's only amazing if you plan on melee/tanking with that character. If you don't, then it's pretty useless.
The issue is more, again, "Why on earth would I ever want to play as a Wizard Slayer?"
Because they seem pretty cool in theory. A fighter that is trained to take on (high-level) mages alone, sounds perfect for BG2. In theory. They should really get a revamp.
I think even small changes to the original kits in BGEE would piss off half the players to no end. Better leave that to mods, or make it optional within BGEE.
I think even small changes to the original kits in BGEE would piss off half the players to no end. Better leave that to mods, or make it optional within BGEE.
Yeah - but... this isn't BG2. It's BGEE. BG2EE is something different. BG is already being heavily modded to be turned into BGEE - Baldur's Gate was nowhere designed to be a balanced or coherent experience with all the stuff in BG2 (again, totemic druids is my favorite example to fall back on).
Yeah - but... this isn't BG2. It's BGEE. BG2EE is something different. BG is already being heavily modded to be turned into BGEE - Baldur's Gate was nowhere designed to be a balanced or coherent experience with all the stuff in BG2 (again, totemic druids is my favorite example to fall back on).
Ok, that is a point. (and I havn't actually tried the druid kits, in tutu or bg2) *I* wouldn't be mad if kits and classes were modified to make them less overpowered/more playable, as long as it doesn't shafe with bg2. Business as usual at 161.000 XP, and I still think it should be optional.
Does not Skald song gives allies +2 to hit and damage and -2 AC right from the start of the game? If yes, it will make the game a breeze, the bonuses are too big for BG1 world.
Don't expect a world of changes in class rebalancing for BGEE because, well, this rebalancing would be basically stripping most kits of their perks (in the case of powerful abilities) or buffing them up so their disadvantages would be brought back to the standards of the classic classes (Kensai, Monk). So basically in the end you'd have most kits back to being just a base class.
There are some things that are simply too powerful, and those may be addressed, but I don't think that Skald song is one of them. Its ok to have some classes be more powerful than others in BGEE, or at least that's my opinion.
blade rules everything allways no need to change anything. just kidding druid kits need rebalancing but removing immunity to normal weapons should be enough. put that to lvl5 or something like that
blade rules everything allways no need to change anything. just kidding druid kits need rebalancing but removing immunity to normal weapons should be enough. put that to lvl5 or something like that
That's the kind of balancing I'm looking forward to
My attitude is this: raise the quality of the 'bad' kits, but keep the quality of the good kits the same. Do not nerf.
I find it disturbing how often a 'balance' change to a skill ends up being a nerf. Take the case of Grandmastery (GM) for fighters. Yes, it was powered and maybe needed some alteration. A reasonable balance change might have been to simply remove the bonus half-attack or the damage bonus. Instead they removed basically removed both, leading to fan discontent. Weapon mastery is now almost pointless.
Yes, make the kits better both mechanically and descriptively. Make them all viable, interesting and different. I would rather have them over-powered than under-powered, myself.
There are some things that are simply too powerful, and those may be addressed, but I don't think that Skald song is one of them. Its ok to have some classes be more powerful than others in BGEE, or at least that's my opinion.
I have played in BGT or EasyTUTU (can't remember) with a Skald and with a full party I played more than half of the game until I got bored how easy the combat was. By the time I stopped playing after reaching the city of Baldur's Gate, the protagonist never died once.
Skald at 1st level gives allies +2 to hit and damage, -2 to AC and at 15th level (never attained in BG1) gives allies +4 to hit and damage, -4 to AC. So for the entire game it would have the same abilities.
It would be good to have some progress, and in the same time not to make the game so ridiculously easy. For example:
Level 1: +1 to hit/damage, -1 to AC Level 5: +2 to hit/damage, -2 to AC Level 9: +3 to hit/damage, -3 to AC Level 15: +4 to hit/damage, -4 to AC
What?? Druids get the best damaging spell in the game (call lightning), the best buff (flame blade along with small sword proficiency), better THAC0 progression than priests, can use a much better weapon (frostbrand, after TOTSC nerfed the electric hammer), and are at least as good as priests for healing and summoning (though priests are better at buffing and tanking). Druids are at least as good as priests and, depending on your playstyle, much better (if you're not as much into melee and tanking). By my reckoning, Druids come into their own the moment they can cast level 2 divine spells.
It's only when they get to BG2 and get frozen at level 14 that they utterly suck. Once they hit 15 (and get a far superior high-level spell progression along with Nature's Beauty) things start to get better again.
Call Lightning is trash in Baldur's Gate because it's so incredibly situational. You pretty much never get an opportunity to utilize it. Level 3 spells for me are basically nothing but Hold Person.
Flame Blade does not utilize weapon proficiency so it doesn't matter if you get small sword proficiency. Attacks are made independant of that boost. As for "can use a much better weapon," oh joy. 1d6+3 slashing damage (slashing being the most difficult attack damage to land, mind you). 4-9 damage a hit. Ooh. Ahh. That is SO much better than the "nerfed" Ashideena's Hammer (which does 5-8 per swing if you factor in the lightning damage, and is crushing, meaning it is significantly easier to land blows with).
I'm not saying druids are bad but they aren't that good either.
Honestly the most underpowered kit in terms of BG1 is Beast Master (ranger). You don't gain a single one of your advantages til you hit the level cap and even then it's simply being able to cast level 1 summon animal with your one or two spell slots you gain at level 9, and you are totally saddled with heaps and heaps of detriments. You are pretty much stuck with clubs and slings and there isn't a single magical club to be found in BG1 to the best of my memory.
@SandmanCCL Trent has already said they're going to be implementing magical clubs into BG1 for that very reason, as an attempt to diversify items.
Personally if I would like to see any Kit buffed or nerfed, it would be the Wizard Slayer. I don't mind the Stalker being a little underwhelming at first, especially when you figure that since its a ranger you're still starting with 2 extra weapon proficiency points simply due to dual wielding. The fact that you can't backstab till later is reasonable enough for me.
On the other hand, a Wizard Slayer gives up almost every item slot to get minuscule amounts of MR and some spell disruption. I've tried them multiple times just in BG2 since the thought of a Dwarven Wizard Slayer is really cool to me. Unfortunately I'm never able to get far because I always feel that I'd be better with a regular fighter, even against wizards. =/
Honestly the most underpowered kit in terms of BG1 is Beast Master (ranger). You don't gain a single one of your advantages til you hit the level cap and even then it's simply being able to cast level 1 summon animal with your one or two spell slots you gain at level 9, and you are totally saddled with heaps and heaps of detriments. You are pretty much stuck with clubs and slings and there isn't a single magical club to be found in BG1 to the best of my memory.
They actually get Find Familiar at level 1, which basically translates to a bit more HP and -1 inventory.
Flame Blade does not utilize weapon proficiency so it doesn't matter if you get small sword proficiency. Attacks are made independant of that boost.
You are 100% wrong about this. Roll a Cleric and a Druid, the latter with small sword proficiency. Equip both with a club or something. Cast Flame Blade. Your Druid will have a bigger boost to THAC0. This may have changed in BG2 engine, but this is not the case in BG1.
EDIT: This is also the exact same case for all other spells that create weapons, at least in BG1. They have a proficiency, but they also give a THAC0 bonus to make up for characters that lack that proficiency. It's a dumb, unintentional buff for these spells since there's no real way in BG1 to have a weapon that ignores proficiency. I know it doesn't say this in the manual, but the first time I played around with Flame Blade I got very confused by the higher-than-expected THAC0 bonus and started to run through all of the spells. More details (and slight self plug): http://www.gamefaqs.com/pc/75251-baldurs-gate/faqs/63205
Call Lightning is trash in Baldur's Gate because it's so incredibly situational.
Here, let me fix that for you: "Call Lightning is trash in Baldur's Gate 2 because it's so incredibly situational." Something like 90% of all fights you ever do are outdoors in BG1, and maybe about 30-40% of all hard fights. That's not situational in my book.
Also, I think a lot of people are missing the point, best exemplifed by this quote:
Yes, make the kits better both mechanically and descriptively. Make them all viable, interesting and different. I would rather have them over-powered than under-powered, myself.
Over-powered and under-powered are relative. If you have over-powered classes, everything else becomes under-powered by definition.
Don't expect a world of changes in class rebalancing for BGEE because, well, this rebalancing would be basically stripping most kits of their perks (in the case of powerful abilities) or buffing them up so their disadvantages would be brought back to the standards of the classic classes (Kensai, Monk). So basically in the end you'd have most kits back to being just a base class.
Unfortunately, I think you're basically right . Even with the base classes, they don't *truly* begin to differentiate until a few levels in, strategy at level 1 for basically all classes is to attack attack attack. still disagree with you about Skald song not being too powerful.
Even so, the beast master and wizard slayer are still under powered, mainly because of the lack of items that they can use. I believe that there is a mod that changes wizard slayer around a bit by letting them use magical items that grant resistances or some type of benefit to destroying wizards. I also recall that there wasn't a pair of bracers in the entire game that fit that...
I don't mind the Stalker being a little underwhelming at first, especially when you figure that since its a ranger you're still starting with 2 extra weapon proficiency points simply due to dual wielding. The fact that you can't backstab till later is reasonable enough for me.
But.... ALL rangers get that proficiency bonus. It's not like Stalkers are the only ones to get hte 2 extra proficiency points and they pay for it by not getting backstab or their other abilities. Stalkers have to put up with penalties on top of the base ranger without getting much (or any) of a payoff for all of BG1. As someone else mentioned, at least Beast Masters get Find Familiar. And frankly for the 2 free weapon proficiency points, rangers needed a buff in BG1 simply because they were underpowered to any other fighter variant.
On the other hand, a Wizard Slayer gives up almost every item slot to get minuscule amounts of MR and some spell disruption. I've tried them multiple times just in BG2 since the thought of a Dwarven Wizard Slayer is really cool to me. Unfortunately I'm never able to get far because I always feel that I'd be better with a regular fighter, even against wizards. =/
+1. Even arguments I've heard considering that you can stack on spell failure through an enemy Stoneskin doesn't matter if you equip any other warrior-type with a weapon that does elemental damage (even just +1 fire) - same effect accomplished, except it's a near-100% interruption instead of 10%, then 20%, then 30%, etc. And that's when they're at levels 7+. Imagine having a piddlingly low magic resistance of like 5% and being considered a "bonus" compared to everything else they lose.
1. Trent mentioned it on twitter last week or the week before. They said they were trying to increase the diversity of magical items, especially magical clubs.
2. That is true. However, Archers will never be anything more than proficient with their melee weapons and beast masters have a limited amount of items to choose from. You can make the argument that they're no better than a regular ranger (in bg1), but the fact remains that they're equal to a ranger in 1 (minus being able to wear medium or heavier armor which is meh) and surpass a regular ranger in 2. Due to how nerfed ranged combat is in BG2, they might end up passing the archer although I'll admit its close especially since longbows suck in 2.
3. I mean it would be nice if we could at least equip the gear, I realize that would just make them basic fighter+ but they still likely wouldn't outpass Berserkers or Kensai. And I think no fighter, not matter how much they hate magic, wizards, etc would gimp themselves so much to say "oh hey a belt that gives me +22 strength. Nah" But then Again I don't hae a problem if kits eventually outshine the base classes.
But then Again I don't hae a problem if kits eventually outshine the base classes.
I agree. I always play a straight lawful (good, neutral or evil) fighter, and I realize how powerful some of the dual-class and multi-class combinations can become. I enjoy it both conceptually and tactically. In a similar way, I don't mind that kits grant exceptional things that may overshadow the base class- at least eventually. One of the fun things about AD&D is how the different classes fall and rise in power as the levels go on. It is fun when playing a wizard begins to pay off at 5th level, and it is fun when the fighter gets a really powerful weapon that causes him to leap forward at the later levels.
+1. Even arguments I've heard considering that you can stack on spell failure through an enemy Stoneskin doesn't matter if you equip any other warrior-type with a weapon that does elemental damage (even just +1 fire) - same effect accomplished, except it's a near-100% interruption instead of 10%, then 20%, then 30%, etc. And that's when they're at levels 7+. Imagine having a piddlingly low magic resistance of like 5% and being considered a "bonus" compared to everything else they lose.
Hrrmm. Sure, the +1 elemental damage work through stoneskin, but it's luck of the draw as to whether you'll interrupt spells with faster cast times, and those weapons ONLY work through Stoneskin, while the Wizard Slayer's spell disrupt gets through everything. Mirror Image, Protection from Magic Weapons, Protection from Normal Weapons, Protection from Normal Missiles. No defensive spell that I'm aware of prevents the Wizard Slayer from applying his disrupt chance on a successful to-hit roll.
Yeah, but the problem is that the immunities granted by the Berserker's Enrage ability already makes it a fantastic anti-mage kit, so the Wizard Slayer ends up having a significantly more specialized advantage with a much heavier disadvantage.
The Wizard Slayer would be great if they'd lighten the load on it. Say, I dunno, cannot drink potions or whatever. That'd be less restrictive than it is now, but still enough of a disadvantage to balance out the wizard-slaying bit.
Case in point - Berserker has no problem going toe-to-toe with a Demi-Lich (arguably the ultimate mage/wizard) whereas the Wizard Slayer would probably get Imprisoned by the first or second round.
I'm not saying the Wizard Slayer is particularly amazing, necessarily, only that you guys are sorely underestimating it. Imprisonment works in favor of the Berserker, but what about Finger of Death, Prismatic Spray, Disintegrate, etc.? A Berserker of any level might get instantly KO'd by any of these, but a Wizard Slayer has a fairly good chance of resisting them.
Yeah, but to have low enough hit dice to be taken down by a lot of instant KO spells, the Wizard Slayer wouldn't have very much magic resistance anyway. With the spells that don't rely on hit dice, they usually have enough of a saving throw that the magic resistance is only a failsafe, anyway.
I agree that the Wizard Slayer has some nice pros, but its cons are ridiculously restrictive for what you get. They need to scale it back a bit. Maybe have the magic resistance apply to friendly spells as well, if that's already in place. Or as I said, just remove potions. But there are plenty of nice magical items out there that the Wizard Slayer doesn't get to benefit from (Gauntlets of Weapon Expertise come to mind)
Comments
Only thing we need to do is nerd the overpowered classes in the beginning, like Totemic Druid
Similarly, with Charm Mammal. Blegh? Maybe using BG2 engine, but charm is amazing in BG (because you get domination-level control of spells and can also talk to them with a reaction bonus), and freeing up your mage to cast Sleep instead *and* being able to target bears (even if they eventually become trivial to kill) is nice. and Until TOTSC buffed Cure Light Wounds (though I don't think BG2 does), Goodberry is an amazing (if a bit tedious) heal. Heals on average more than cure light wounds (5 vs 4.5) *and* you can divide the healing up between multiple characters.
BTW, Flame Blade *is* affected by proficiencies. It's small sword and also has a +4 bonus (+3 to compensate for characters without proficiency, +1 from spell). Which means if you have small sword proficiency already (only possible for druids), you are basically equipped with a +4 weapon, whereas clerics just get the net of +1. (Try it out - the way the spell is implemented is different from the spell description.)
I won't disagree with you about DUHM - it's pretty amazing. But it's only amazing if you plan on melee/tanking with that character. If you don't, then it's pretty useless.
*I* wouldn't be mad if kits and classes were modified to make them less overpowered/more playable, as long as it doesn't shafe with bg2. Business as usual at 161.000 XP, and I still think it should be optional.
But once my game is installed, the floodgates will be open and I'm coming for you all with my solo powergamer charname!
If yes, it will make the game a breeze, the bonuses are too big for BG1 world.
There are some things that are simply too powerful, and those may be addressed, but I don't think that Skald song is one of them. Its ok to have some classes be more powerful than others in BGEE, or at least that's my opinion.
I find it disturbing how often a 'balance' change to a skill ends up being a nerf. Take the case of Grandmastery (GM) for fighters. Yes, it was powered and maybe needed some alteration. A reasonable balance change might have been to simply remove the bonus half-attack or the damage bonus. Instead they removed basically removed both, leading to fan discontent. Weapon mastery is now almost pointless.
Skald at 1st level gives allies +2 to hit and damage, -2 to AC and at 15th level (never attained in BG1) gives allies +4 to hit and damage, -4 to AC. So for the entire game it would have the same abilities.
It would be good to have some progress, and in the same time not to make the game so ridiculously easy. For example:
Level 1: +1 to hit/damage, -1 to AC
Level 5: +2 to hit/damage, -2 to AC
Level 9: +3 to hit/damage, -3 to AC
Level 15: +4 to hit/damage, -4 to AC
Flame Blade does not utilize weapon proficiency so it doesn't matter if you get small sword proficiency. Attacks are made independant of that boost. As for "can use a much better weapon," oh joy. 1d6+3 slashing damage (slashing being the most difficult attack damage to land, mind you). 4-9 damage a hit. Ooh. Ahh. That is SO much better than the "nerfed" Ashideena's Hammer (which does 5-8 per swing if you factor in the lightning damage, and is crushing, meaning it is significantly easier to land blows with).
I'm not saying druids are bad but they aren't that good either.
Honestly the most underpowered kit in terms of BG1 is Beast Master (ranger). You don't gain a single one of your advantages til you hit the level cap and even then it's simply being able to cast level 1 summon animal with your one or two spell slots you gain at level 9, and you are totally saddled with heaps and heaps of detriments. You are pretty much stuck with clubs and slings and there isn't a single magical club to be found in BG1 to the best of my memory.
Personally if I would like to see any Kit buffed or nerfed, it would be the Wizard Slayer. I don't mind the Stalker being a little underwhelming at first, especially when you figure that since its a ranger you're still starting with 2 extra weapon proficiency points simply due to dual wielding. The fact that you can't backstab till later is reasonable enough for me.
On the other hand, a Wizard Slayer gives up almost every item slot to get minuscule amounts of MR and some spell disruption. I've tried them multiple times just in BG2 since the thought of a Dwarven Wizard Slayer is really cool to me. Unfortunately I'm never able to get far because I always feel that I'd be better with a regular fighter, even against wizards. =/
EDIT: This is also the exact same case for all other spells that create weapons, at least in BG1. They have a proficiency, but they also give a THAC0 bonus to make up for characters that lack that proficiency. It's a dumb, unintentional buff for these spells since there's no real way in BG1 to have a weapon that ignores proficiency. I know it doesn't say this in the manual, but the first time I played around with Flame Blade I got very confused by the higher-than-expected THAC0 bonus and started to run through all of the spells. More details (and slight self plug): http://www.gamefaqs.com/pc/75251-baldurs-gate/faqs/63205 Here, let me fix that for you: "Call Lightning is trash in Baldur's Gate 2 because it's so incredibly situational." Something like 90% of all fights you ever do are outdoors in BG1, and maybe about 30-40% of all hard fights. That's not situational in my book.
Also, I think a lot of people are missing the point, best exemplifed by this quote: Over-powered and under-powered are relative. If you have over-powered classes, everything else becomes under-powered by definition. Unfortunately, I think you're basically right
1. Trent mentioned it on twitter last week or the week before. They said they were trying to increase the diversity of magical items, especially magical clubs.
2. That is true. However, Archers will never be anything more than proficient with their melee weapons and beast masters have a limited amount of items to choose from. You can make the argument that they're no better than a regular ranger (in bg1), but the fact remains that they're equal to a ranger in 1 (minus being able to wear medium or heavier armor which is meh) and surpass a regular ranger in 2. Due to how nerfed ranged combat is in BG2, they might end up passing the archer although I'll admit its close especially since longbows suck in 2.
3. I mean it would be nice if we could at least equip the gear, I realize that would just make them basic fighter+ but they still likely wouldn't outpass Berserkers or Kensai. And I think no fighter, not matter how much they hate magic, wizards, etc would gimp themselves so much to say "oh hey a belt that gives me +22 strength. Nah" But then Again I don't hae a problem if kits eventually outshine the base classes.
The Wizard Slayer would be great if they'd lighten the load on it. Say, I dunno, cannot drink potions or whatever. That'd be less restrictive than it is now, but still enough of a disadvantage to balance out the wizard-slaying bit.
Case in point - Berserker has no problem going toe-to-toe with a Demi-Lich (arguably the ultimate mage/wizard) whereas the Wizard Slayer would probably get Imprisoned by the first or second round.
I agree that the Wizard Slayer has some nice pros, but its cons are ridiculously restrictive for what you get. They need to scale it back a bit. Maybe have the magic resistance apply to friendly spells as well, if that's already in place. Or as I said, just remove potions. But there are plenty of nice magical items out there that the Wizard Slayer doesn't get to benefit from (Gauntlets of Weapon Expertise come to mind)