Forgot about this post earlier, Web, sorry, while trying to reply to a dozen or so posts at once.
WebShaman wrote...
MM, no, I wasn't "bragging" - case in point : The Bowman is a BASE Class, not a PrC (Prestige Class).
I think you can do the math from there, right?
I'm trying to do the math here and it definitely is looking unfavorable. Here's what you said earlier (slightly paraphrased for readability):
WebShaman wrote...
MagicalMaster wrote...
Longbow because Arcane Archers have to use bows -- and they're the best archers by far. ~snip~
Oh, that is not true. With the PRC, we can instead go (Bowman stuff). Which, of course, is a much better Archer. I now return you to your regularly scheduled thread.
So you're saying that not only is the Bowman a better archer than Arcane Archer, it's also a base class which is superior to a prestige class dedicated to archery?
And this ISN'T bragging about how powerful it is? What in the world were you trying to say, then?
WebShaman wrote...
C'mon, give me and us all a break here! The Shadowdancer is not broken? Utterly? Either you give your Bosses and M0bs Truesight, or get HiPS to death! No cooldown, nothing, just hit that magic button, queue up your stuff, rinse, repeat!
Yes, can give enemies True Seeing or give them high Spot/Listen. Either will prevent HiPS spam. Is the feat stupidly powerful versus enemies without True Seeing or high detection? Sure. But there are easy solutions (can even do something like give the enemy a spot/listen buff once it sees the stealther for the first time so you can sneak up on them but once you engage you can't use HiPS).
WebShaman wrote...
There is nothing more broken than this! And I distinctly remember debates where you mention things like this in the game (and, of course, Dev Crit comes up as well, because it is also broken).
Dev Crit has workarounds too, from crit immunity to immortality to simply disabling the feat.
WebShaman wrote...
The PRC, however, DOES allow one to at least wrinkle out the Dev Crit problem (because there are ways to deal with the high DC in the PRC NOT available in vanilla, plus the switches, of course). Also, one can put HiPS on a timer (again, switches) if one so chooses.
Fantastic. That doesn't change my original point that the PRC brings in a bunch of brokenly overpowered stuff and thus someone should keep that in mind.
WebShaman wrote...
As for Mods, unbalance, yadda yadda yadda. The ONLY place where this matters in in Multiplayer (Online). In SP, all I have to do is activate the Console, or various other means (trainer for overpowered Character, items, whatever) and that basically is all she wrote! I can even open the Mod, and edit it to my tastes (which I normally do anyway).
The thing is, WebShaman, that simply isn't true (that balance only matters in multiplayer).
Take Mass Effect 2 as an easy example. On "normal" difficulty all six classes were very viable and powerful. But due to how they designed the harder modes, "insanity" left two of the classes (and one in particular) significantly behind the other four. This meant that very few people would play those classes at the top end -- and those who did were typically trying to prove a point about how it was technically doable even if it was twice as hard or whatever. Said people could sleepwalk through "insanity" on the other four classes, though.
So in Mass Effect 3 Bioware learned from their mistake and deliberately avoided the design that left 1/3 of the classes weak on high difficulties in ME2. And the result was much better -- and that's all single player.
And yes, you CAN cheat. But, shockingly enough, most people try to play the game as intended and THEN maybe fiddle around with it for fun. Maybe you don't. That's your choice. But claiming designers shouldn't worry about balance in single player because players can cheat is a terrible argument.
WebShaman wrote...
Normally when you write something, you do it for a reason. So...I think it is easy to see why I come to the conclusion you are "dissing" on the PRC due to your word choice, and "color", not to mention hyperbole.
You entered the conversation by eagerly telling us how the PRC had a BASE class that was better at archery than the PRESTIGE class of Arcane Archer (which is already insanely powerful).
I responded by saying
"I'm pretty sure the PRC has a class that will make the Light Hammer the most powerful weapon in the game. Some people might find it interesting but it's not even remotely balanced (standard NWN certainly isn't close to perfect but PRC makes it far worse)."
So yes, it was some hyperbole, but the point seems quite valid given your statement right before it. Note that I didn't even say "DON'T USE IT!" but rather said that it wasn't remotely balanced. And I even said that some people might find it interesting.
WhiZard wrote...
Looks like 20/- negative vs. a pure level 40 caster, with the fortitude save assumed to be always succeeded due to the boss' high saving throws.
Bingo. I mentioned the 20 resistance to all earlier and, as WhiZard deduced, the boss had very high saving throws as well.
ShaDoOoW wrote...
So do you all say, but you didnt event looked whats there, did you?
No, I never really paid any attention to it prior to this thread. I haven't paid attention to a lot of custom content out there, it's not because I'm actively trying to avoid it. I simply hadn't run into any major bugs or exploits which I felt needed to be patched due to what I was working on so I didn't really look at it. Note that this also means I was NOT condemning it prior to this thread either.
But when you mentioned how you broke Empower Spell? Yes, I started paying more intention. And I skimmed through the spell changes and became very disturbed when it became clear you were going beyond simple, obvious bug fixes. And I started saying not to use it.
I mean, maybe I'm forgetting something, but did I ever say anything at all about your patch prior to this thread?
ShaDoOoW wrote...
And I doesnt care about those discussion on various DnD forums.
Er...
ShaDoOoW wrote...
Quite a good reason to perform the correction based on the DnD then, still to do it, I need more votes/opinions on this regard.
So you want opinions but you don't want opinions?
ShaDoOoW wrote...
Some peoples simply want to see it more powerful despite all the logic in the universe. On DnD forums, nobody cares what these peoples believe, its their game, in NWN this is completely different matter and it matters.
I'm going to say this in caps for emphasis:
SO WHY HAVE YOU BEEN INSISTING THAT THE DEFAULT NWN INTERPRETATION IS INCORRECT
ACCORDING TO ACTUAL DND?
I mean,
remember this post? Especially point #2?
Laying aside point #1 for the moment...
You were WRONG about point #2. DnD disagrees with you.
You were WRONG about point #3. The spells in question were added in SoU and spells added LATER did NOT use that function.
Serious question: what would it take to convince you that you were wrong?
Here's my answer for myself: if the feat description specified otherwise I could accept it. But the description itself (as well as the PHB) clearly state precisely how Magic Missile has the WHOLE thing multiplied.
ShaDoOoW wrote...
Another question: Does Bioware intented to have to have half spells with (in)direct bonus to the damage behave differently than another half?
Presumably not. But given the most recent spells used the +50% flat out formula what does that suggest?
ShaDoOoW wrote...
So. The actual debate whether was this overpowered or not doesnt even matter and Im not willing to continue in it - I got gaming experienced with stacked regeneration and regeneration in general both in low magic and high magic, you doesn't seem to have anyway.
Let's be precise: I have experience in both low magic and high magic exvironments where stacking Regeneration was inferior to simply casting Heal and thus I never stacked Regeneration. But I acknowledged it as an option for those less skilled and not able to heal effectively mid-combat.
And, if people didn't take max HP per level, Regeneration would be more powerful (which may have been the intent). A level 20 cleric with 140 (4.5 + 2 per level plus three levels of max HP) HP will find Regeneration more useful than one with 200 HP (8 + 2 per level) since Heal can't heal that much at once.
ShaDoOoW wrote...
Did this boss had 20/negative and 90/magical? Because the average of 25d8 is imo 112 not 36.
See what WhiZard said.
ShaDoOoW wrote...
Still applies what Ive said - this boss wasnt meant to be killable by an arcane caster in a first place.
So...basically everyone is terrible against him except an arcane caster and thus you assume he wasn't meant to be damaged by an arcane caster? What kind of logic is that?
ShaDoOoW wrote...
Also, a builder must have count with the fact that not every arcane spellcaster has empower magic.
Why? What arcane caster DOESN'T have Empower Magic? Having Maximize and Empower are the two most important feats for arcane casters.
ShaDoOoW wrote...
And this was clearly multiplayer on a PW which 1) never apply CPP 2) will modify anything that they doesnt like if they ever applied CPP in a first place.
Whoa now, I thought you WANTED PWs to use CPP? Wasn't your whole complaint earlier how you wanted PWs to use it?
And thus I imagine most PWs feel like "If we have to go through and fix a bunch of stuff in the CPP, why bother installing it in the first place instead of just fixing the problematic stuff ourselves?"
NWNCX doesn't require you to fix anything.
NWNTX doesn't require you to fix anything.
NWNX doesn't require you to fix anything.
CCP DOES require you to fix things, apparently.
Can you guess why many people might not bother using it or even be against using it?
Modifié par MagicalMaster, 09 février 2014 - 08:09 .
