235 replies to this topic

[T.G.Maestro]

I do like the sound of the 8 hour delay though. It would actually be more restrictive than the current setup

Now, you start to get the feeling, right? I'm sure you don't count me a modder who would add something nice without a price, hmm?

[Ieldra]

Skimming over this debate, I have one thing to add: I would like to have True Dweomers restricted to single-class mages and sorcerers (they are intended for sorcerers, too, aren't they?). That would make people really think about whether they want to start out their mages as something else. For MC/DC characters, there are still the "lesser" HLAs.

More thoughts to come after I have thought more about it. But I love the idea of the True Dweomers, and most of the implementation details outlined in one of the above posts.

[Littiz]

Yep, without that little addition of the "cooldown delay", I would have probably opposed this plan.
If we get to do it, it might turn out really nice

[T.G.Maestro]

I would like to have True Dweomers restricted to single-class mages and sorcerers (they are intended for sorcerers, too, aren't they?)

To be honest, I'm very much against to add this to sorcerers. Maybe pieces of it, but definitely not the full scale of 10th level spells.

[Stone Wolf]

Multi-/dual-class wizards should be able to lean true dwoemers the same as regular wizards, just later in the game. I don't know about Sorcs though. TDs require tons of research to figure out, and vast knowledge of magic. Sorcs don't use that, since for them i'ts an innate ability. Maybe reduce the number of options and the number of TDs they can use per time period?

[Jinnai]

I think 2 is good idea, though personally it would up all the intelligence factors for whatever class (charisma is possible for sorcerors) so:

17-19 1 TD
20-22 2 TD
23-24 3 TD
25 4 TD

[Stone Wolf]

I don't think it's possible to get a 25 Int without mods installed though.

[T.G.Maestro]

I don't think it's possible to get a 25 Int without mods installed though

Potions.

[Littiz]

Ok, finally I've decided to give this a little thought.

Level Requirement:
Doesn't work *alone*, but we might give an "alternative" effect for each Dweomer, for example a simple string "you're not experienced enough to make this spell work". (ability wasted)

Other issues: the INT check for picks can't be properly implemented (the problem is similar, or even worse, than the one raised by someone for sorcs).

Anyway, we might alter the concept: the Dweomer base ability simply works as a preparatory work.
Using that one I might run a script (checking INT or something), and add the actual Dweomers as innates (this would solve targeting and menu issues).
When one is fired, all are "used" (similarly to the shapechange effects).

Using the base ability again would require some hours of cooling down, also the base ability would clear the spells available before reapplying them (this to solve resting issues and such).
This way to use 4 TDs in a "day" a mage should:
-use the first one
-wait the cooldown time
-reapply the base spell, to "prepare the availabe TDs
-repeat

[Stone Wolf]

I don't think it's possible to get a 25 Int without mods installed though

Potions.

That might work, though it's cheating (in my mind). You'd have to keep your Int up all the time, or you'd forget any excess TDs you know.

[Ieldra]

About restricting True Dweomers to single-class Wizards:
Consider characters like Imoen and Nalia. They get to be powerful Wizards in TOB, but they are very different from someone like Edwin. They don't have the same passion for their craft, and they might not have the dedication required for TDs. Of course you can imagine different characters. My point is: I would like to see single-class Wizards get a real boost with regard to TDs. They need it compared especially to dual-class Wizards, and it is reflected in those NPCs we know about. Maybe it's too much to ban them from TDs completely, but restricting the number of TDs available and/or especially powerful ones seems desirable to me. By extension, multi-class Wizards should be restricted by rule even more, maybe in number, although it might be a meaningless restriction since they probably won't get the Wizard levels required for the maximum number anyway.

About INT restrictions:
It should be possible to get the maximum number of TDs if you apply all INT increases from the unmodded games to your character, meaning 4 TDs for INT 20. This would also restrict all NPC Wizards to 1-3, depending on their INT and the way the restrictions are implemented at last. So it's not a meaningless choice. With my proposed restriction for MC/DC Wizards (see above), we could expect that some players apply an INT increase to an NPC even if they're playing an arcane spellcaster themselves. I would like to see that.

About Sorcerers:
You can see it two ways: mages are spellcasters with a systematic approach to their craft, implying much research and deep knowledge. On the other hand, Sorcerers have an intuitive connection to the Weave, so it wouldn't make sense to restrict them too much in that regard. Something like Improved Alacrity (or any meta-ability that applies directly to spellcasting) seems to fit the class perfectly. HLA summons (or any high-level summons, if you ask me), on the other side, seem foreign, if we consider the classic picture of summoning, with years of names research, careful inscribing of symbols and suchlike. A Sorcerer with Improved Alacrity may be unbalanced - I haven't played enough Sorcerers for an informed opinion - but it's an extension very much in line with the concept of a Sorcerer.

Edited by Ieldra, 13 October 2004 - 11:47 PM.

[Stone Wolf]

Dual and Multiclass characters are already punished by havving a lower mage level than pure class mages. I can't think of any restriction in 2E for dual and multiclasses other than that one.

[T.G.Maestro]

Level Requirement:
Doesn't work *alone*, but we might give an "alternative" effect for each Dweomer, for example a simple string "you're not experienced enough to make this spell work". (ability wasted)

Yes, I also considered this option. I think we should set a minimum level requirement for the more powerful TDs - of course these should be documented.

Anyway, we might alter the concept: the Dweomer base ability simply works as a preparatory work.
Using that one I might run a script (checking INT or something), and add the actual Dweomers as innates (this would solve targeting and menu issues).
When one is fired, all are "used" (similarly to the shapechange effects).

A very good idea Littiz. In fact, we should add another twist that restricts mages with lower INT(?) to only 1 use of this base ability, as discussed before. It is an essential point of this addition to allow the maximum (4) uses for mages with 20-21 INT only.

Consider characters like Imoen and Nalia. They get to be powerful Wizards in TOB, but they are very different from someone like Edwin. They don't have the same passion for their craft, and they might not have the dedication required for TDs

That's why we need that INT check or something similar in effect.

About Sorcerers:
You can see it two ways: mages are spellcasters with a systematic approach to their craft, implying much research and deep knowledge. On the other hand, Sorcerers have an intuitive connection to the Weave, so it wouldn't make sense to restrict them too much in that regard

I think it would. As you say, sorcerers are intuitive spellcasters. And I think TDs are not something achieveable by intuition: they require extent studies and long years of research. That's why they are only available to mages in full power. Sorcerers take a different path in Refinements, you can get a good picture of that by examining their unique HLA table. While mages learn/research new spells, sorcerers use more and more powerful ways to CAST spells and use their innate arcane energies.

Something like Improved Alacrity (or any meta-ability that applies directly to spellcasting) seems to fit the class perfectly

They already have it Refinements, take a look at Aura Cleansing.

[Ieldra]

Dual and Multiclass characters are already punished by havving a lower mage level than pure class mages.  I can't think of any restriction in 2E for dual and multiclasses other than that one.

Not much of a disadvantage, if you can get 250 points of Thief abilities for less xp than it costs to gain a single mage level at L11 and above - uh, sorry, I meant less xp than half a mage level . And don't get me started about Fighter->Mages. That class combination is an abusive power level in itself. Restricting TDs for dual-class/multi-class mages would offset this somewhat. Level restrictions work well for multi-class characters, but have almost no effect on dual-class mages.

@TGM: I concede the point about the Sorcerer

Edited by Ieldra, 14 October 2004 - 04:22 AM.

[Rathwellin the Bard]

Ieldra if you look back in this thread I think that you will find some earlier discussion about MC characters.

This is just IMO:

Single Class Mage: up to 4 TDs depending on Int or other factors

Multi Class Mage: up to 2 TDs (though I would be OK with just 1 too) depending on Int.

I think that somehow TGM and Littiz will need to think about how to stop the MC chararacters from picking the TD ability before they can naturally cast 9th level spells if this is possible.

However with all that said I could argue that a dual or multi C/M might have a *better* understanding of magic than a single class mage. Similarly a T/M might be better able to make the mystic gestures required. Etc.

The bottom line for me is that I see multi-class characters being vastly underpowered when compared to their single and dual class counterparts with refinements already. I would hate to see that made worse.

[Schatten]

hmm.... a single class mage is a better mage then a multiclass... isnt it natural that a multiclass is not as good in its classes than a single class?

[Littiz]

I think that somehow TGM and Littiz will need to think about how to stop the MC chararacters from picking the TD ability before they can naturally cast 9th level spells if this is possible.

That should be doable.
Multiclass tables are separated from the others, and we might just use the unused "minimum level" field.

A very good idea Littiz.

Thx. I've thought a little more about it, and I think it's the way to go.
Timings are a bit tricky tough....

In fact, we should add another twist that restricts mages with lower INT(?) to only 1 use of this base ability, as discussed before.
It is an essential point of this addition to allow the maximum (4) uses for mages with 20-21 INT only.

As I've said for 4 pages by now, I don't know how to (properly) implement an INT based number of picks (that's why I propose to move the "focus" of the INT check).
But, if you have suggestions, I'm hearing...

Edited by Littiz, 14 October 2004 - 05:17 AM.

[Schatten]

yep, it euqals to experience.
if i am a busy businessman and wrestler, i am not as good as the undertaker who wrestles his whole lifetime.
a 10/10 elf monk/wizard cant cast the same powerfull spells as a 20 wizard. the wizard spends his life for magical research and the monk/wizard not.
i see it that way.

[Ieldra]

I'm not so concerned about the multi-class characters, but mainly about the balance between single-class and dual-class characters. Multi-class Wizards especially lose a lot because of their ultra-slow level progression at L11 and above, I have no problem with them getting 2 TDs max. However, as I said, given the exponential xp progression in low levels, dual-class characters tend to get abusive in higher levels, so I would like them to have that restriction, too. Actually, I would like them to be more restricted than that, but that would mean MC characters, by the same logic, would have to be more restricted as well, which may leave them underpowered. So, if dual-class Wizards get the same restrictions multi-class Wizards get, I'd be content.
My reasoning for restricting dual-class Wizards would be that you learn in a different and more efficient way if you're young, so if you start your mage apprenticeship at age 22 instead of 12, there are some things that you will never learn as well as if you'd started earlier. Languages are a RL example. Hmm, now that I think about it, this could be used to argue that DC Wizards should get less TDs than MC Wizards. It goes against game logic, though, so I doubt we'll see it.

As for the C/M: divine magic is different from arcane magic. I could make the point that a Cleric (excepting, maybe, one of Mystra or Oghma) doesn't really understand what he's doing when he casts a spell, and that most divine spells cannot be understood in the same way as arcane spells, since the deities' energy powers the spell instead of the Weave (am I mistaken? It's been a while since I read about FR background). And Thieves doing the basic research required for TDs, instead of more easily applied research, that sounds very unusual.

Edited by Ieldra, 14 October 2004 - 05:26 AM.