159 replies to this topic

[Caedwyr]

My post was just random thread derailing. The value's you've proposed look fine to me.

[T.G.Maestro]

As I already posted my opinion about this topic somewhere above, I also think that missile resistances should be re-balanced.
I still say we should modify the base AC modifiers of the various armor types (the specific modifiers vs. different attacks).

What I'd agree to do though, is to increase the level of missile defence provided by shields.

Seconded. I guess we can add shields to Armor Revisions, but only with reduced number of effects. Their AC bonuses should be revised, yes. OTOH. I don't think we should add any DEX, speed or the other modifiers to them, since by that logic, we should add these to weapons as well.

[Littiz]

That's what I meant, just increase a little the protection against missiles granted by shields. Two points, maybe.

[Delight]

IMHO if protection against missiles should be changed, it should be rather lowered.
All missile combat in BG2 takes place at point-blank range, so longbows and crossbows would have greater chance of penetrating armor than at medium and long range.
It is worth noticing that ranged weapons in BG2 are severely hindered because they fire at shorter range and less shots can be fired before the enemy comes to close.

[Littiz]

Right now we're talking just about shields.
I see your points Delight, but I think that there's no need to lower the protection against missiles... such weapons benefit from an amount of bonuses already, there's no real need to make them stronger, imho.

[T.G.Maestro]

Right now we're talking just about shields

We'll take care of shields right after armors were coded - we'll add the shield AC modifications to the component along with the base AC modifications for armors.
These will be discussed here before, of course.

[T.G.Maestro]

For future reference, here are my proposed modifications for shields. As for my comment, I can only say that I intended to further emphasize the effect of shields against missile weapons ? larger shields received a bonus to their AC vs. missiles. I haven?t added DEX penalty (though I still consider it as a valid option), because it might become too much together with the penalties from heavier armors. The same goes for movement penalty, I haven?t included that either.

I?m undecided about Thieving Skills and Miscast penalties though ? while they are absolutely reasonable to be added, it would mean we should add such penalties to weapons as well, which is wrong, again. So I haven?t added them yet. Still, something should be done to show how cumbersome the greater shields are, and the higher STR requirement just won?t do. I heavily consider to add a light DEX penalty after all.

Also, one of the main differences between the Armor System and the shield modifications is that while the first get better stats at higher enchantment level, the latter don?t ? a Large Shield will receive the very same Missile AC bonuses at 0 or +5 EL, only it?s main AC bonus will increase.



Anyway, here are the stats:



Buckler: AC: -1, Missile bonus: 0 (no change)

Small Shield: AC: -1, Missile bonus: 1

Medium Shield: AC: -1, Missile bonus: 2

Large Shield: AC: -1, Missile bonus: 3 (-1 DEX penalty planned)



Special shields:



Shield of the Falling Stars (SHLD07):

AC: -1, Missile bonus: 5



Fortress Shield (SHLD23)

AC: -4, Missile bonus: 8

[Chevalier]

A shields' weight should count as much as it's size should effect movement of the shield and possible Dex penality. Having used some shields (mostly small and med.) they are tiring to swing around. A magicly light shield (large or small) can be swung out of the way to hit and back to block a blow fast. If a shield effects Dex too much, then a magic shield with a +1 Dex would be created as 1 of it's powers.

Edited by Chevalier, 24 June 2005 - 02:46 AM.

[SimDing0]

A few ideas:

I'd suggest that perhaps the Fortress Shield should retain the dexterity penalty where other enchanted large shields might not. I think it'd suit the concept of it.

With your proposal, there's (still) no advantage of a small shield over a medium shield, even allowing for usabilitiy restrictions. (At least bucklers are useful to some classes-- although that too is gonna disappear if you remove spurious usability restrictions.)

I'd also question the rationale behind a large shield giving the same AC bonus as a buckler. Practically, I imagine the difference should be that the buckler actually *requires* dexterity to be used effectively, while the large shield limits mobility but provides automatic protection regardless. This would, perhaps, mean that as the shields get larger, they convey a greater AC bonus, but they also penalize dexterity more severely. The problem is, the stat scale isn't too fine.

I suggest not bothering with miscast and thieving skill penalties. You visibly put anything you're holding away when you cast a spell, and I think we can assume that thieves aren't trying to pick locks while holding their equipment.

Edited by SimDing0, 24 June 2005 - 02:55 AM.

[T.G.Maestro]

@ Sim: these are basically good suggestions, and I can't say I'm against them, but there are a few complicated points.
First, if we add DEX penalties to armors and shields as well, it might become too much in some cases. For example an unenchanted Full Plate reduces DEX by 6 points, and if the character euips a Tower Shield (with 2 DEX penalty for example), it becomes 8 in total. Now, if our character isn't really high in DEX from start (he has 10 DEX for example), this combination effectively reduces it to 2. This brings up a few problems: first, we will have to include a min. DEX requirement for these modified armors to prevent chunking (when DEX reaches 0). Since these penalties have a considerable chance to reduce DEX below these minimum levels, it can easily result in the armor becoming "unuseable" by that character. Also, another problem with this greatly reduced DEX is that there are some rare occasions in the game where abilities and weapons drain DEX - and it would be most unfortunate if heavily armored fighters would fall after 1-2 hits by these weapons...

As for movement penalty, that wouldn't be that problematic as DEX modifiers - but it would result in a much more significant difference in movement rates than with the modified armors only. I'll try to experiment with it a bit though.

I also agree that Large shields should receive some bonus to base AC as well.

OTOH, we will never be able to make bucklers as useful as they were intended to be, since we cannot allow the character to use any 2-handed weapon while wearing a buckler...


Either way, I'll consider these further.

[Delight]

Maybe using a percentage penalty would be the solution of this problem?

[T.G.Maestro]

Maybe using a percentage penalty would be the solution of this problem?

Ehm.. what do you mean? Be a bit more specific please.

[T.G.Maestro]

I kept thinking on shields, since my last ideas were not perfect IMO. While the AC bonuses vs. missiles were good, the fact that Large shields should be very hard to handle haven?t been implemented at all. Also, Sim had a good point by saying that large shields should offer at least a bit better overall protection than other, smaller shields ? they cover the entire body when held correctly.
Note that this system still ignores Enchantment Level, and I wish to keep it that way. Only the "large shield" cathegory has some penalties, and that comes mostly from their sizes, not from their weights - and while a greater enchantment makes them lighter, it won't make them smaller and easier to handle.

Here are my latest, and hopefully final suggestions on how shields should be handled by this component:



Bucklers:
AC bonus: 1
Extra AC bonus vs. missiles: 0
Movement penalty: 0
DEX penalty: 0

Small Shields:
AC bonus: 1
Extra AC bonus vs. missiles: 0
Movement penalty: 0
DEX penalty: 0

Medium Shields:
AC bonus: 1
Extra AC bonus vs. missiles: 1
Movement penalty: 0
DEX penalty: 0

Large Shields:
AC bonus: 2
Extra AC bonus vs. missiles: 2
Movement penalty: -10%
DEX penalty: -1


And here are the special cases, a few unique Large Shields:

Shield of the Falling Stars +1, +4 vs. Missiles (SHLD07)
AC bonus: 3
Extra AC bonus vs. missiles: 4
Movement penalty: -10%
DEX penalty: -1

Large Shield +2 (no unique name) (SHLD19)
AC bonus: 4
Extra AC bonus vs. missiles: 2
Movement penalty: -5%
DEX penalty: 0

Fortress Shield +3 (SHLD23)
AC bonus: 5
Extra AC bonus vs. missiles: 7
Movement penalty: 10%
DEX penalty: -1

Large Shield +2 (no unique name) (SHLD30)
AC bonus: 4
Extra AC bonus vs. missiles: 2
Movement penalty: 0
DEX penalty: 0

Darksteel Shield (SHLD 31)
AC bonus: 6
Extra AC bonus vs. missiles: 2
Movement penalty: 5%
DEX penalty: -1

[Delight]

Maybe using a percentage penalty would be the solution of this problem?

Ehm.. what do you mean? Be a bit more specific please.

Reducing dex to certain percent instead of applying a fixed penalty would stop the armor from chunking its wearer.

[T.G.Maestro]

Reducing dex to certain percent instead of applying a fixed penalty would stop the armor from chunking its wearer

Hmm. As far as I know, you cannot reduce ability scores by percents, only fixed numbers - though I'll have to check.

[Idobek]

Considering the stat range, percentage penalties will make things worse not better.

[Stone Wolf]

Hmmm, there is a setting to reduce stats by a percentage, though I haven't tried it myself. Sadly there is no min stat effect--could have used that myself.

[T.G.Maestro]

Considering the stat range, percentage penalties will make things worse not better.

Yep, that is my problem as well - percentages are far less useful for these effects. Honestly, for the damage reduction part of Armor Revisions, I'd far more use fixed numbers than those percentages. Much more precise and reliable that way.

[PolarBear]

Well, if you really want to add some spellcasting penalty to shields it could be a slight increase in casting time, maybe plus one (probably the time required to put the shield down or something). However I haven't given a thought to possible balance issues yet.

[T.G.Maestro]

Well, if you really want to add some spellcasting penalty to shields it could be a slight increase in casting time, maybe plus one (probably the time required to put the shield down or something). However I haven't given a thought to possible balance issues yet.

No, I truly don't think we will mess with casting times and spell failure for shields. Armors already do this, and if one is desperate, there is the G3 Tweak Pack.