87 replies to this topic

[Shaitan]

I can only agree with Salk,

Cheers

[aigleborgne]

I agree with Wisp, Death Knight were more powerful than they should in vanilla.
Many resistances that don't exist in P&P but they should have a spell turning ability.
I think they gave him fire resistances to prevent hurting himself with his own fireball. Something I needed to take care in my own mod

Many hit points, but in P&P, they have 8 HD and more like 15 HD in vanilla
8HD DK would be easier to kill I think. We must keep in mind balance issue, especially for final TOSC boss.
In 3rd edition, there is an advancement HD system.

And finally, for the sword, they gave him a sword a DK should never have !

DK also have 3 APR in vanilla instead of 1 APR in P&P

Beside better scripts, P&P DK are weaker than vanilla DK.
P&P add a few abilities like spell turning, fear aura, wall of ice, but they loose so many things...
Fear aura will be generally useless because resist fear spells are massive and easy to get.
Spell turning is fun but once you know about it and their high magic resistance, you don't cast spells on them.

DK still have a few good magical spells but they are rather limited and after that, their P&P melee abilities is rather weak.

Edited by aigleborgne, 12 February 2012 - 12:38 AM.

[Miloch]

Many hit points, but in P&P, they have 8 HD and more like 15 HD in vanilla

They have 9 10-sided HD in 2nd ed. so 90 HP is accurate. I guess maybe the TotSC one is an uber-death knight or something. Doesn't help they call him a "demon knight."

[aigleborgne]

Demon Knight is another name for Death Knight, it is clearly state in P&P books
You are right about 9 hd, I've just checked.
I don't mind about 9 hd death knight, but considering what they got in vanilla, they will be rather weak.
In my mod, I made them like P&P but with 15 hd. They have 1 APR but I gave them 2 proficiency points in 2 handed sword and 2 handed weapon.
I use Fighter/Mage class so their mage spells are cast at a right level. They end up with 2,5 APR.
They still loose some immunities like fire, but gain a few things + better script.
Overall, they are stronger if they can land their fireball without hurting themselves.

Now, I'm waiting PnP Undead to see how they compare, especially TOSC's Death Knight

Many hit points, but in P&P, they have 8 HD and more like 15 HD in vanilla

They have 9 10-sided HD in 2nd ed. so 90 HP is accurate. I guess maybe the TotSC one is an uber-death knight or something. Doesn't help they call him a "demon knight."

[Andrea C.]

I believe the whole point of a P&P component is to provide as much adherence to the source books as the game engine allows, regardless of whether it makes strategic sense. However, I do realize game balance issues do apply as it makes no sense to develop a mod no one would play because it makes the game too easy or too hard. Hence, it might be a good idea to provide gamers with the option to install either a slavish adaptation of P&P, or a version that tries to adapt P&P to game balance requirements. This would probably make everyone happy, IF Wisp was up for it (I have no idea how much additional work this solution would require).

As for the DK in TotSC, I think it makes perfectly sense for it to be "house ruled", being the "final boss" in a custom designed dungeon. If a P&P mod weakens DK to a point the final fight in Durlag's Tower becomes uninteresting, some if not all of its vanilla special abilities could be kept or restored (and/or its AI could be made especially sharp).

[aVENGER]

As for the DK in TotSC, I think it makes perfectly sense for it to be "house ruled", being the "final boss" in a custom designed dungeon.

This shouldn't be a problem. aTweaks has always allowed for unique creature specimens to be more powerful than their generic PnP counterparts. We don't lower the attribute scores/hit dice of such individuals in case they are better than those of a regular creature of that type.

For example, PnP Fiends allows for Aec'Letec and the Master of Thralls to be stronger than regular Nabassus. Any special powers (such as Aec'Letec's ability to revive from the cultists' bodies) are retained as well.

[Wisp]

I do not think the Death Knight in Durlag's Tower will be too weak. Sure, he has worse stats, but the vanilla AI is a complete joke (and last I looked, not even SCS did much about it). If it had had a decent AI script it would have blown a TotSC party away. The pumped up stats were mainly there to make it challenging despite the AI.

[aigleborgne]

I do agree that vanilla AI is a joke, as any vanilla script anyways.
While a DK has good spells, they only have a few of them : one word, one symbol, one fireball, 2 dispel, detect invisibility (at will), and wall of ice (at will) to sum it up.
Symbols are rather weak : fear and pain, the former is easy to counter, and the latter is weak.
Power word are very good (especially kill), but only one power word that will affect only one target.
Then, there is fireball, his most powerful spell that could decimate a party.

If a party is not packed in a small area, all of these spells will only hit very few people.
After that, he is left with his melee ability : great in vanilla (thanks to his 3 APR), average in P&P (only one APR)

In fact, a DK will be very strong vs a party of mages, but average vs a party of fighters. I assume this is normal given his magic resistance and spell turning abilitiy.

So, I'm not sure he would have blown a TOSC party. A few archers and melee fighters can kill him very quickly.
Archers (even fighters specialized in bows) are a bit too powerful in BG1.

I do not think the Death Knight in Durlag's Tower will be too weak. Sure, he has worse stats, but the vanilla AI is a complete joke (and last I looked, not even SCS did much about it). If it had had a decent AI script it would have blown a TotSC party away. The pumped up stats were mainly there to make it challenging despite the AI.

[Shaitan]

Hurra! Thanks for giving us PnP undeads.

[GeN1e]

Great, and not an hour sooner than I decided I can finally start the game. And it means another round through Infinity Animations' tp2. Damn...

Would you check for

MOD_IS_INSTALLED ~item_rev/item_rev.tp2~ 1030

to not replace the helmet slot on UDDEATH2? We give him HELM02 to wear as a leader, an evil version of Helm of Glory.

[Wisp]

Would you check for

MOD_IS_INSTALLED ~item_rev/item_rev.tp2~ 1030

to not replace the helmet slot on UDDEATH2? We give him HELM02 to wear as a leader, an evil version of Helm of Glory.

Sure thing.

[Salk]

How nice to start a new month and see PnP Undead implemented!

Thanks a lot, Wisp!

[Salk]

Er... Wait a minute... There is no mention of Vampires?

[Demivrgvs]

Congratulations, aTweaks is becoming a really huge project, almost mandatory considering the poor state of vanilla BG creatures. I'm even 2x grateful because it sounds like I won't have to do a Creature Revisions mod after all (or just apply very small tweaks to your work).

I'm really, really, happy to see Greater Mummies will finally be divine spellcasters (aka a sort of cleric version of liches!) and not just tougher mummies. I'm not fond of the whole "it's 11HD but cast spells as a 19th lvl caster" strange AD&D behaviour, but that's one of the very few things I would have done different for an eventual Revisions mod.

Regarding this: "Integration with Spell Revisions is currently subpar. Summoned undead will generally be as per Spell Revisions, while normal undead will be as per aTweaks." It is really not a big deal imo, because after looking at the whole readme I'd say SR's undead creatures are almost identical. Most differences are too subtle to be noticed in-game, and the few noticeable ones (e.g. within aTweak ghast's stench causes only -2 thac0 penalty, SR's one causes -2 thac0 and 20% spell failure) are not so huge to cause a serious consistency issue imo.

[Wisp]

Er... Wait a minute... There is no mention of Vampires?

Yeah, I decided to hold off on Vampires for the initial release. The compatibility situation with SCSII is more complex, so I may opt for a "PnP Vampires" component instead of baking them into PnP Undead.

Regarding this: "Integration with Spell Revisions is currently subpar. Summoned undead will generally be as per Spell Revisions, while normal undead will be as per aTweaks." It is really not a big deal imo, because after looking at the whole readme I'd say SR's undead creatures are almost identical. Most differences are too subtle to be noticed in-game, and the few noticeable ones (e.g. within aTweak ghast's stench causes only -2 thac0 penalty, SR's one causes -2 thac0 and 20% spell failure) are not so huge to cause a serious consistency issue imo.

I agree they are not serious consistency issues, but some of them are probably noticeable, so I thought it best to mention it.

[Salk]

Yeah, I decided to hold off on Vampires for the initial release. The compatibility situation with SCSII is more complex, so I may opt for a "PnP Vampires" component instead of baking them into PnP Undead.

I don't see a reason why Vampires should have their own component. They are undead, aren't they?

And also, I wouldn't worry about PnP Vampires being incompatible with SCS II. Both modifications come with optional components and it's enough to avoid installing them both. I find it normal and somewhat unavoidable to have clashes between SCS and ATweaks.

[Andrea C.]

Thanks Wisp!!!

[Shaitan]

Other undeads like the Crypt King (I assume he's undead) isn't touched by this PnP Undead. Could he be included somehow?

[Wisp]

Yeah, the Crypt King is undead. But he appears to be an original Bioware creation, so I'm not sure what I should to with him. Same goes for other creatures that Bioware created with little to no grounding in PnP sources.

[Shaitan]

I understand.

For a creature worth 12000 xp I find his howl (fear) very pathetic. But what to do?

What about adding this "Death Knights are sometimes followed by a retinue of Skeleton Warriors or other undead." from more sensible encounters? I know he's not a Death Knight, but still?

Perhaps out of the scope of pnP Undead

I love that component BTW.

Cheers