374 replies to this topic

[T.G.Maestro]

I disagree.

It's thematically good & doesn't seem unbalanced at all. I mean really. How often is a high level F/M getting interrupted anyway? Maybe one or two battles at most.

As Rathwellin said.
Note however, that this opcode (Creature Uninterruptible) was not tested by me before, and I haven't seen it in any other spell/ability. Chances are it doesn't work, or not the way one would imagine. I'll test it tonight.

[T.G.Maestro]

BTW, about Feral Lash: it would work as the wizard spell Lower Magic Resistance, but with different animations. It will be an innate, selectable multiple times. It would reduce elemental (fire/cold/electricity) resisitances by 25% and physical resistances by 10% for 30 seconds (could be increased, if it turns out to be too short), if the victim fails his save vs. spells at -4. Multiple castings are cumulative.

[the bigg]

Adrenaline Rush

Let's not forget Paladins, at least they get Heroic Inspiration in IWDII (while rangers don't)

Creature Uninterruptable

This opcode doesn’t work, and isn’t listed in the IESDP. Ni has made similar errors (say, IESDP’s teleportation (274) is listed in NI as „un-zone of sweet air”). Plus, Use.R.Unfriendly had tried getting Uninterruptible creature to work, to no avail.

Herbalism

Very tuned, but what about the fact that TOB is all in innatural settings, with no erbs (Return to Windspear, Watcher’s keep, Maching Mountains, the innards of Abaz & Sendai strongholds, not to speak about Pocket Plane or Throne of Blood)

[T.G.Maestro]

Let's not forget Paladins, at least they get Heroic Inspiration in IWDII (while rangers don't

Thats exactly what I intended to do - create a slightly modified version of A.Rush and name it Heroic Inspiration - and that would only be available for Paladins. Suggestions?

Plus, Use.R.Unfriendly had tried getting Uninterruptible creature to work, to no avail.

I'll test it today.

Very tuned, but what about the fact that TOB is all in innatural settings, with no erbs (Return to Windspear, Watcher?s keep, Maching Mountains, the innards of Abaz & Sendai strongholds, not to speak about Pocket Plane or Throne of Blood)

First of all we would make it so that it is only useable outdoors (like the Call Lightning spell). This would prevent unexplained herbs indoors. Still, there would be nnumerous places where this ability could be used: The Grove, The Crossroads (or whatever it is called), Forest of Myr (perfect for some mysterious components), Marching Mountains (the same as Forest of Myr); Siege Camp (a bit odd, but still acceptable), the Oasis, Amkethran (this is the worst in addition to Saradush and the enterior of Abazigal's Lair<_< ), the forests around Sendai's Enclave.

[Feanor]

I don't get it why this ability should be useable only outdoors. Even in an innatural setting, you could suppose the druid has herbs in his backpack.

[T.G.Maestro]

Maybe. But if you this from a different angle, and don't expect the druid to have all the rquired components with him every time, it is rather logical to disable its use indoors.

[Rathwellin the Bard]

It actually seems quite illogical to me TGM. A good druid would gather herbs whenever there was a chance.

Plus I want to note that some insteresting AD&D fungi & moss that could be used in Herbalism only grow underground....

The idea solution IMO would be to have a HLA that could only be "charged" underground or outdoors and then used whenever.

[T.G.Maestro]

It actually seems quite illogical to me TGM. A good druid would gather herbs whenever there was a chance

The idea solution IMO would be to have a HLA that could only be "charged" underground or outdoors and then used whenever

I guess it will remain a "normal" ability then, useable everywhere.

[J Beau]

Another idea for Thief-Mages:

Slippery Mind
In a nutshell, the T/M becomes immune to Charm effects.

I'm willing to bet that a good portion of Thief-Mages are elves or halfelves. These are already resistant to charm at level 1. Maybe you could add immunity to confusion and/or stun.

[T.G.Maestro]

Maybe you could add immunity to confusion and/or stun

Um, no, those are very different effects, nothing to do with a "Slippery Mind".

a good portion of Thief-Mages are elves or halfelves. These are already resistant to charm at level 1.

What does this "resistance" mean exactly? Immunity? I never thought about this one before.

[Rathwellin the Bard]

Another idea for Thief-Mages:

Slippery Mind
In a nutshell, the T/M becomes immune to Charm effects.

I'm willing to bet that a good portion of Thief-Mages are elves or halfelves. These are already resistant to charm at level 1. Maybe you could add immunity to confusion and/or stun.

In PnP Elves and Half Elves are. 90% for elves & 30% for half if I remember right. It works like a specialized MR for sleep and charm.

However this was never in unmodded BG or BGII. There are some tweak packs and mods that add this back in (I think aVENGER had one like this). Not sure how these mods impliment this though.

Worst case this is a redundant HLA. However IMO *Immune* is better than *Resistant*.

[T.G.Maestro]

Worst case this is a redundant HLA. However IMO *Immune* is better than *Resistant*.

As you say.

[T.G.Maestro]

I have another idea, though I'm not entirely sure if it is implementable.
How about modifying HLAs that enable the characters to create items (Assassin's Brew Poison, spellcasters Scribe Scrolls, the upcoming Herbalism and Craft Wand HLAs...) so that every single use of them would cost a specified quantity of Gold and maybe even XP (as seen in ToEE for example)? I think this addition would make them a bit more realistic, and would help to balance them at the same time. This way one would have some limits in acumulating waste amounts of these - or to be more precise, it would be possible, but at a significant cost.
BTW I already had the same question in the Help forum, but I ask here as well: is it possible to reduce the XP of the caster by the "Experience(?)" opcode?

Opinions?

[Rathwellin the Bard]

I have another idea, though I'm not entirely sure if it is implementable.
How about modifying HLAs that enable the characters to create items (Assassin's Brew Poison, spellcasters Scribe Scrolls, the upcoming Herbalism and Craft Wand HLAs...) so that every single use of them would cost a specified quantity of Gold and maybe even XP (as seen in ToEE for example)? I think this addition would make them a bit more realistic, and would help to balance them at the same time. This way one would have some limits in acumulating waste amounts of these - or to be more precise, it would be possible, but at a significant cost.
BTW I already had the same question in the Help forum, but I ask here as well: is it possible to reduce the XP of the caster by the "Experience(?)" opcode?

Opinions?

I favor this *ONLY* if the player gets to pick exactly what he wants to make *and* has 100% chance of success each time. XP cost *only* for the most powerful items IMO.

[jester]

How would making anything reduce your XP? If you are a carpenter, are you less and less experienced the more tables you make? I understand the limiting idea, but this take is surreal IMHO.

Edited by jester, 25 September 2004 - 01:47 PM.

[Kish]

In D&D, creating permanent magical items means investing some of your power in them, represented as losing some of your XP and thus moving away from leveling up.

[Stone Wolf]

Is that 3E? It isn't like that in 2E, which is what BG2 is based on. Creating a permanent magical item has a chance of lowering your constitution by 1. Wands, potions, and scrolls won't do that though. Other than material and time costs, there's no penalty to making them.

[jester]

If it is not a unique item, why would I bother to loose Xp (or con) to get a wand of fire? Even before spellhold I have more money than the whole Sword Coast put together.

[Stone Wolf]

You wouldn't lost con on a wand of fire, since it has charges and isn't a permanently item. Even with swords and such, it's only like a 5% chance to lose a point of con, and even then a wish could get that back. Hmmm, that could be coded in fairly easily too....

[T.G.Maestro]

Anyway, I think we'll only go for the Gold loss.