34 replies to this topic

[Qwinn]

Due to some excellent engine fixes by scient that should hopefully be making their way into Fixpack 3.0, morale will work. One of the benefits of this is that the stats of Dak'kon's Zerth blade will be based on how well you've treated Dak'kon. This is a very good thing as regards to the story of the game, because it is a fairly major plot point that Dak'kon's blade is supposed to be as powerful as Dak'kon's sense of *knowing* himself.

Now, there's a bit of an issue with the actual stats in question. Probably because the designers realized that morale wasn't going to work properly and almost all players would wind up with the middle of the road "Chained Blade", the stat progression of the blades is decidedly... unintuitive. For my part, I would much rather have the mid-morale blade than the high-morale blade.

Here are the stats for the blade Dak'kon gets when he reaches 10th level as a fighter, as they exist in the vanilla game:

Low Morale: "Kinstealer": 6-24 Slashing, +3 To Hit, +2 AC, double 1st level spells.
Mid Morale: "Chained": 5-20 Slashing, +3 To Hit, +6 AC, double 1st and 2nd level spells
High Morale: "Streaming": 5-20 Slashing, +3 To Hit, +3 AC, double 1st and 2nd level spells, 1 additional 3rd level spell

The lower level versions show a similar bizarre progression, with better AC at mid morale than at high morale. I don't know about you all, but I'd -much- rather have a permanent +3 AC than 1 additional 3rd level spell, yet that's the tradeoff for bringing Dak'kon to *know* himself.

Note that I do believe the "evil" version of the blade doing higher base damage was intentional. It just fits.


So. What I'd like to know is, given the fix that's going in, what if any changes you would like to see to the progression? (No, I won't be making all options available as a choice during install, so please don't ask):

1. Don't change a thing. I believe the stats are as intended, and not a result of the designers realizing everyone was going to get the chained blade so no need to balance the streaming blade.

2. Minimal changes: Make only the changes necessary to make raising Dak'kon's morale a positive rather than a negative. If we go with this option, this will be the new progression for the 10th level blade:

Low Morale: "Kinstealer": 6-24 Slashing, +3 To Hit, +2 AC, double 1st level spells.
Mid Morale: "Chained": 5-20 Slashing, +3 To Hit, +6 AC, double 1st and 2nd level spells
High Morale: "Streaming": 5-20 Slashing, +3 To Hit, +6 AC, double 1st and 2nd level spells, 1 additional 3rd level spell

Essentially, this just adds +3 AC to the streaming version, so that going from chained to streaming gets you one additional 3rd level spell and that's it. But at least it's not a nerf.

3. Smooth Progression: If we go with this option, the 10th level blade progression will be:

Low Morale: "Kinstealer": 6-24 Slashing, +3 To Hit, +2 AC, double 1st level spells.
Mid Morale: "Chained": 5-20 Slashing, +3 To Hit, +4 AC, double 1st and 2nd level spells
High Morale: "Streaming": 5-20 Slashing, +3 To Hit, +6 AC, double 1st and 2nd level spells, 1 additional 3rd level spell

This essentially nerfs the AC bonus on the mid morale blade a bit in order to make the streaming version more reflective of the plot point that the blade grows much more powerful based on Dak'kon's morale.



Personally, I prefer the latter option - smooth progression. I think it makes more sense and is more consistent with Dak'kon's story. But if there are arguments to the contrary, I'd like to hear 'em, so please vote and please let me know why if you disagree.

I will extrapolate whatever the decision is to the lower level blades. If someone's answer is contingent on seeing how -they- would progress, I'll be happy to design them now and show 'em to you all, but for now I'll work under the assumption that the stats as presented are sufficient to give you the gist of what I'm looking for.

Qwinn

[Qwinn]

Aslain,

Thanks for your thoughts. It's a fair point. Let me see if I can argue effectively for the smooth-progression option.

First, the "evil" option does have significantly higher base damage than the other blades - basically, bonus 1d4 damage every swing, which is a pretty hefty bonus. That's pretty much equivalent to letting him dual wield with a normal dagger. Not all -that- bad a compensation for losing out on the extra AC/spells.

since it makes sense (at least to me) that since Dak'kon *knows* himself better, he wouldn't need so much defense (gameplay-wise is different, I know) and for knowing himself more he gets an extra spell.

Eh... I can sorta kinda see what you're saying here, but it seems more likely to me that it was just considered pointless to balance the blades because the mid-morale version was really the only option available in the game that shipped.

I think my single biggest argument, though, is that leaving it as is has the same problem as what you're stipulating would be wrong with the smooth progression version. Your complaint is that with this change no one would then want to be "evil" toward Dak'kon. But as it stands, no one would want to be evil -or- good toward Dak'kon, the mid-level blade is just way too superior to the other two options.

I'm really not adding much of a difference between the "evil" blade and the best possible blade - only a single 3rd level spell slot, which is hardly a major power boost. If someone was willing to trade +4 AC and doubled 2nd level spells in exchange for +1d4 damage and to roleplay evil, I don't think they're going to change their mind because of losing an additional single 3rd level spell slot. That's pretty insignificant compared to what they'd already be giving up.

If I was creating a significantly bigger gap between the evil blade and the best blade, I'd be more inclined to agree with you - but do you really think widening the gap by one 3rd level spell slot makes that much difference? I think the issue that players are -discouraged- from helping Dak'kon *know* himself is a markedly more serious problem.

As for beefing up the evil blade by adding spells... well, I can appreciate that you'd like to see them totally "balanced", but I don't know that that necessarily makes sense storyline-wise. The plot makes it explicit that as he knows himself better, the karach becomes more powerful. Balancing them perfectly, just with different abilities, kinda makes how well he *knows* himself trivial.

And, again, +1d4 damage is nothing to sneeze at.

Qwinn

Edited by Qwinn, 29 August 2008 - 06:19 AM.

[Qwinn]

Just to add in-game evidence as to why the blades shouldn't really be balanced (minor spoiler, highlight to read, but you can get this information from him with your first dialogue with him):



Dak'kon: "*Karach* is not shaped by heat, but by *knowing* oneself. It is a mirror that reflects the will of the wielder on its surface and in its edge. When one *knows* themselves, the blade is strong -- harder and stronger than steel. When one does not *know* themselves, the blade is as water -- formless and weak."



Qwinn

Edited by Qwinn, 29 August 2008 - 06:25 AM.

[Daulmakan]

I vote for the smooth progression option.

And I'd like to congratulate you and your collaborators for the mindblowingly awesome job you've been doing so far.

Keep at it, your work is most appreciated.

[Qwinn]

Thanks kindly, Daulmakan

On this particular issue, I can't claim any more than 5% of the credit... scient's been working like a dog, and the only thing I'm really bringing to the table is identifying the engine bugs and the WeiDUization of the engine patch. He's doing the hard part.

Qwinn

[Qwinn]

P.S.

Aslain, please feel free to register your "no change" vote in the poll, I'd like to have the results reflect overall opinion as accurately as possible.

Qwinn

[vilkacis]

Dak'kon: "*Karach* is not shaped by heat, but by *knowing* oneself. It is a mirror that reflects the will of the wielder on its surface and in its edge. When one *knows* themselves, the blade is strong -- harder and stronger than steel. When one does not *know* themselves, the blade is as water -- formless and weak."

Shouldn't that be taken to mean that the "happy" blade should do more damage, rather than any other bonus?

How about, rather than boosting the Streaming blade's AC, giving it 6-24 damage?

[Qwinn]

Shouldn't that be taken to mean that the "happy" blade should do more damage, rather than any other bonus?

How about, rather than boosting the Streaming blade's AC, giving it 6-24 damage?

*nod* I thought about this.

I suspect the mid-level blade, which provides the +6 AC boost, was optimized for end of game play to give him the AC he'll need. I'd like to keep that value for the "best" blade.

And yes, storyline wise you're right that the base damage should also probably be smaller for the first blade. This may indeed have been just as much a victim of the "no point in balancing" decision that created this whole issue. I'm willing to leave it as is, though, for the sake of the balance issues Aslain is concerned about.

Besides, I think it is rather fitting that the "evil" Dak'kon is a more offensive fighter-type with less focus on spell-casting, since Dak'kon's spell abilities are also supposedly based on *knowing* himself. Perhaps the higher damage is more a function of Dak'kon focusing more on his fighter abilities rather than his spellcasting, whereas a Dak'kon that *knows* himself would be less fighter-minded and more of a caster. I think it's a good enough excuse to justify leaving it as is for the sake of -some- balance, anyway.

Qwinn

Edited by Qwinn, 29 August 2008 - 09:32 AM.

[KIrving]

I voted minimal changes. 1. Because I prefer minimal changes (mainly obvious bug fixes) to be in a fixpack, otherwise maybe move the change to the tweak pack.
2. In my last playthrough I ended up completing the dialogues and the circle really early, before Dak'kon had done a lot of leveling up. As I maxed out his morale early I ended up going from streaming to chained in his level ups which was annoying, roleplaying wise. Unless that bug gets a fix I'd rather not have the chained blade's AC bonus dropped. Hope I'm making sense. (I haven't really been following the thread so you may have already addressed the streaming to chained blade issue.)

[Qwinn]

KIrving:

Yes, the whole reason for why this change is being debated is that morale WILL be fixed, and you won't lose morale for no reason the way you do in the unmodded game.

I am normally a minimalist about my changes as well - I really do try to go for minimal impact in what I change for the Fixpack. But this is a special case - the bug you're referring to where Dak'kon lost morale made the blade progression irrelevant, and it's entirely plausible that that's why the progression is so illogical, the developers probably didn't bother to balance it once they realized that getting any version of the non-chained blade practically required metagaming knowledge.

Does that change your vote?

Qwinn

Edited by Qwinn, 29 August 2008 - 03:01 PM.

[KIrving]

KIrving:
Does that change your vote?

Qwinn

Heh...halfway. Still kind of tweaky but not a huge change to the game I suppose. It seems that the current vote count is 99% in favour of 'smooth progression' now anyway. As long as Dak'kon's blade accurately reflects his morale I'll be happy.

[Qwinn]

Ok, given the poll results, I'm going to start coding it up as smooth progression. If more people agree or disagree, you've got about 12 hours for your vote to matter (for the next release, that is - I'm always open to changing things for the release after the one being developed, if someone can give me good reason).

When I'm all set, I'll post the new blade progression for all levels of the blade.

Qwinn

Edited by Qwinn, 03 September 2008 - 02:37 PM.

[Qwinn]

Okay, actually going through coding this, I'm actually changing my mind about the original intent a bit. Here's the original, unmodded progression for all 3 blade levels. The only thing that changes based on morale is damage, AC, and spells granted.


Low level:

Low morale (Kinstealer): 3-10 damage, no AC bonus, one 1st level spell
Mid morale (Chained): 2-9 damage, +1 AC bonus, one 1st level spell
High morale (Streaming): 2-9 damage, +1 AC bonus, two 1st level spells

Mid level:

Low morale (Kinstealer): 4-16 damage, +1 AC bonus, one 1st level spell
Mid morale (Chained): 3-12 damage, +4 AC bonus, two 1st level spells, one 2nd level spell
High morale (Streaming): 3-12 damage, +2 AC bonus, double 1st level spell, one 2nd level spell

High level:

Low morale (Kinstealer): 6-24 damage, +2 AC bonus, double 1st level spells
Mid morale (Chained): 5-20 damage, +6 AC bonus, double 1st and 2nd level spells
High morale (Streaming): 5-20 damage, +3 AC bonus, double 1st and 2nd spells, one 3rd level spell


Looking at this, it's looking most to me like the AC bonuses just got -switched- outright. I'm actually thinking the highest level chained blade should be +3 AC, not the +4 I suggested. So the progression on the high level blade is +1 - +4 - +6. And that the mid level blade should go +1 - +2 - +4.

So, this is how it's going in:

Low level:

Low morale (Kinstealer): 3-10 damage, no AC bonus, one 1st level spell
Mid morale (Chained): 2-9 damage, +1 AC bonus, one 1st level spell
High morale (Streaming): 2-9 damage, +1 AC bonus, two 1st level spells

Mid level:

Low morale (Kinstealer): 4-16 damage, +1 AC bonus, one 1st level spell
Mid morale (Chained): 3-12 damage, +2 AC bonus, two 1st level spells, one 2nd level spell
High morale (Streaming): 3-12 damage, +4 AC bonus, double 1st level spell, one 2nd level spell

High level:

Low morale (Kinstealer): 6-24 damage, +2 AC bonus, double 1st level spells
Mid morale (Chained): 5-20 damage, +3 AC bonus, double 1st and 2nd level spells
High morale (Streaming): 5-20 damage, +6 AC bonus, double 1st and 2nd spells, one 3rd level spell



If this would cause someone to change their vote, let me know. But the more I look at it and how it relates to the filenames and how someone could've just misunderstood the filename conventions, I'm -really- thinking this is what it was meant to be.

Really, I kinda consider this to be a "minimal" change - I'm flipping the 2 AC's, that's it, not making up any. So hopefully everyone's happy with that.

Qwinn

Edited by Qwinn, 03 September 2008 - 05:32 PM.

[Qwinn]

On the point of whether or not the base damage for the lowest blade should be higher than the other two blades, here is the description of the "Kinstealer" (low morale) blade:

Dak'kon must be suffering indeed, for his karach blade has become a dead flat black, mirroring Dak'kon's eyes. It has become longer, sharper, and a series of subtle jags, like teeth, now line the edge of the blade.

That does indeed suggest higher damage, so yeah, gotta consider that to be intended.

I actually kinda think the high morale blade should have the same damage, because it's description suggests the same thing:

If so, Dak'kon's mind must be clear, indeed, for his blade has become a brilliant silver. It seems as if the blade has become longer than when you first saw it, and there is no trace of the strange shimmering surface it once had. The edge of the blade tapers almost to a paper-thin line - despite its flimsy appearance, it looks like it could cut through chain armor with ease.

I'm willing to hear arguments to that effect - that the only one that should have the lower base damage is the mid morale blade. But unless I do hear good arguments to that purpose, I'll just leave it as is.

Qwinn

Edited by Qwinn, 03 September 2008 - 05:37 PM.

[vilkacis]

I think the game text speaks quite well for itself. I no longer have PS:T installed, so I can't check the files, but you already posted the relevant quote from Dak'kon where he outright states that the blade will grow stronger if the wielder "knows" himself. I don't really see how there could be any doubt that the blade he uses when he "knows" himself should be more powerful than the one he has when he does not. (And he specifically uses words like "strong" and "hard" here, which definitely implies that its physical attributes will improve.)

I'm not sure if this contradicts the higher damage for the low morale blade, but I suppose he at least "knows" that he is miserable. Of course, the "his mind isn't clear, so he just concentrates on stabbing things" explanation works just as well and it does make sense, given the description of the blade.

[Qwinn]

Okay, here's how it's going in for the test run.

Original, unmodded progression

Low level:

Low morale (Kinstealer): 3-10 damage, no AC bonus, one 1st level spell
Mid morale (Chained): 2-9 damage, +1 AC bonus, one 1st level spell
High morale (Streaming): 2-9 damage, +1 AC bonus, two 1st level spells

Mid level:

Low morale (Kinstealer): 4-16 damage, +1 AC bonus, one 1st level spell
Mid morale (Chained): 3-12 damage, +4 AC bonus, two 1st level spells, one 2nd level spell
High morale (Streaming): 3-12 damage, +2 AC bonus, double 1st level spell, one 2nd level spell

High level:

Low morale (Kinstealer): 6-24 damage, +2 AC bonus, double 1st level spells
Mid morale (Chained): 5-20 damage, +6 AC bonus, double 1st and 2nd level spells
High morale (Streaming): 5-20 damage, +3 AC bonus, double 1st and 2nd spells, one 3rd level spell

New progression

Low level:

Low morale (Kinstealer): 3-10 damage, no AC bonus, one 1st level spell
Mid morale (Chained): 2-9 damage, +1 AC bonus, one 1st level spell
High morale (Streaming): 3-10 damage, +2 AC bonus, two 1st level spells

Mid level:

Low morale (Kinstealer): 4-16 damage, +1 AC bonus, one 1st level spell
Mid morale (Chained): 3-12 damage, +2 AC bonus, two 1st level spells, one 2nd level spell
High morale (Streaming): 4-16 damage, +4 AC bonus, double 1st level spell, one 2nd level spell

High level:

Low morale (Kinstealer): 6-24 damage, +2 AC bonus, double 1st level spells
Mid morale (Chained): 5-20 damage, +3 AC bonus, double 1st and 2nd level spells
High morale (Streaming): 6-24 damage, +6 AC bonus, double 1st and 2nd spells, one 3rd level spell

Changes bolded. They include: 1) Switching AC bonus of Chained and Streaming blades, 2) Setting Streaming blade damage equal to Kinstealer blade damage, based on blade descriptions, and 3) Bumping low level Streaming Blade AC Bonus to +2 to smooth progression.

Translators, no need to worry about this one, I'm just grabbing the descriptions of the blades from the translations I've downloaded and changing the stats.

If there's any remaining objections to this, now's the time.

Qwinn

Edited by Qwinn, 09 September 2008 - 10:21 PM.

[Hannibal]

Hi Quinn,

It's probably way to late to have any influence on this, but I'd still like to voice a minority opinion on this; I've always appreciated that the original item design (at least in theory) gave each blade variant a distinct bonus. While I agree that the original Chained Blade easily was the most powerful thanks to the AC bonus, the underlying opportunity for choice was a good design decision, imho.

Now, with your changes, that gets removed completely. The new Streaming Blade is even more of a no-brainer than the original Chained one ever was. I don't like that at all. I'm very much in favor for 'different, but equal' rewards based on role-playing, i. e. how you treat Dak'kon. I hate it when there's a clear 'best' option when it comes to role-playing rewards. Going out of your way to make him miserable should remain to offer its own unique benefits. Here's an example of the direction I'd take for changing the blades:

Low morale (Kinstealer): 6-24 damage, +2 AC bonus, double 1st level spells - no change, best damage
Mid morale (Chained): 5-20 damage, +4 AC bonus, double 1st and 2nd level spells - still the best AC of all, as was the original design.
High morale (Streaming): 5-20 damage, +3 AC bonus, double 1st and 2nd level spells, add 3 3rd level spells - the bonus to spells is more pronounced, the specific amount would be up to debate. Anything from +2 to double 3rd level spells could work. Even +2 3rd, +1 4th level.

The karrach blade reflects Dak'kon's mental state; as such, your have pain/aggression (Kinstealer, damage), self-control/stoicism (Chained, defense) and clarity and enlightment (Streaming, magic).

It makes sense for the Streaming Blade to be the overall 'best', but it shouldn't be such a clear-cut choice, and both of the other versions should have their own unique benefits.

[Qwinn]

That's a pretty good suggestion for what you're trying to achieve, a balance between the various morale possibilities. If I were to find evidence that balance between the three is what they were going for, rather than giving up on the stats due to the morale reset thing making the various blades rather pointless, I might well go with what you described here.

But while I appreciate your suggestion from a game balance and design perspective (and I'm not just saying that - really, I do), I still have the following reservations:

1) From the game balance/design perspective: You're suggesting that treating Dak'kon like a dog, or just ignoring him, should yield equivalent rewards to the option that required significantly high INT and WIS stats to achieve. The Streaming Blade may be the "best" option via my method, sure, but it also still requires a significant number of stat points spent into INT and WIS. I don't think it's unbalancing that that should have a significant payoff.

2) From a storyline perspective, I do find it odd that treating Dak'kon like a dog, or just ignoring him, should make him equally as powerful as removing the vast majority of his doubt and self-loathing via sorting out Zerthimon's teachings with him. That just strikes me as wrong, somehow. The whole thing about the karach blade is supposed to be strength in *knowing* himself, and I think the path that leads you to having a high morale is most representative of that. Ignoring him will keep you in the Chained Blade, why should that be balanced or equivalent in that respect to resolving his doubts (and, again, when that required significant stats to accomplish)?

Still, this is one of the things I was planning to review with MCA when I get the chance, and I will show him your suggestion and ask if that is more along the lines of what he had in mind.

EDIT: For the record? I'd even still prefer just a permanent one AC for Dak'kon to even doubling all 3rd level spells. There just aren't that many good spells at that level. The spells might be better earlier in the game, possibly, arguably, but later on 3rd level spells are pretty much useless. So would even bonus 4th level spells. I dunno, I just don't see bonus spells possibly offsetting a permanent AC bonus.

Qwinn

Edited by Qwinn, 29 June 2009 - 07:26 PM.

[Hannibal]

That's a pretty good suggestion for what you're trying to achieve, a balance between the various morale possibilities. If I were to find evidence that balance between the three is what they were going for, rather than giving up on the stats due to the morale reset thing making the various blades rather pointless, I might well go with what you described here.

But while I appreciate your suggestion from a game balance and design perspective (and I'm not just saying that - really, I do), I still have the following reservations:

1) From the game balance/design perspective: You're suggesting that treating Dak'kon like a dog, or just ignoring him, should yield equivalent rewards to the option that required significantly high INT and WIS stats to achieve. The Streaming Blade may be the "best" option via my method, sure, but it also still requires a significant number of stat points spent into INT and WIS. I don't think it's unbalancing that that should have a significant payoff.

2) From a storyline perspective, I do find it odd that treating Dak'kon like a dog, or just ignoring him, should make him equally as powerful as removing the vast majority of his doubt and self-loathing via sorting out Zerthimon's teachings with him. That just strikes me as wrong, somehow. The whole thing about the karach blade is supposed to be strength in *knowing* himself, and I think the path that leads you to having a high morale is most representative of that. Ignoring him will keep you in the Chained Blade, why should that be balanced or equivalent in that respect to resolving his doubts (and, again, when that required significant stats to accomplish)?

Still, this is one of the things I was planning to review with MCA when I get the chance, and I will show him your suggestion and ask if that is more along the lines of what he had in mind.

EDIT: For the record? I'd even still prefer just a permanent one AC for Dak'kon to even doubling all 3rd level spells. There just aren't that many good spells at that level. The spells might be better earlier in the game, possibly, arguably, but later on 3rd level spells are pretty much useless. So would even bonus 4th level spells. I dunno, I just don't see bonus spells possibly offsetting a permanent AC bonus.

Qwinn

Thanks for the quick reply Qwinn. It's been a (very, very) long time since I last played P:T, but there's some precedent for what I propose. IIRC, the Practical Incarnation originally saved Dak'kon explicitly for his blade.
Deliberately treating Dak'kon bad is not something a casual player would ever likely do. I very much despise the puppy-kicking school of evil roleplaying that reached its height with KOTOR. But manipulating its wielder in order to make the blade more suitable for certain tasks, stoking Dak'kon's anger and self-loathing to make him a more reckless and offensive fighter is a very PI thing to do.

Yes, getting the Streaming Blade has some prerequisites, (Though there are other ways to boost his morale, I believe. No idea if they'd be sufficient to get the Streaming Blade) but those already have their own rewards. Apart from the XP bonus and being able to learn all spells you run across, you get all the Circle spells, and Dak'kon already gets a significant stat upgrade for the final circle. Your Streaming Blade is the litteral cherry on top.

Maybe balance isn't exactly the right term. But looking at the original stats, each version already has a different strong point. The balance is out of whack because a permanent 3 AC bonus beats a measly 3rd level spell any day of the week, but the core idea is there.

(For the record: I'd probably also take +1 AC over bonus spells ) Here's a different tweak suggestion:

Kinstealer: 6-24 damage, +2 AC bonus, double 1st level spells - as before
Chained: 4-16 damage, +6(/+4) AC bonus, double 1st and 2nd level spells - back to the old AC bonus, but it now has -1d4 damage
Streaming: 5-20 damage, +4(/+3) AC bonus, double 1st and 2nd level spells, one additional 3rd level spell (or more)

I think this comes a lot closer to making the Streaming Blade an obvious best choice, while giving the other two blades their own distinct character.

In any case, if you can actually get an answer to what the original design intent was, that'd be immensely helpful. I concur that some kind of balance change is necessary, but ideally, it should be minimal.