Shapeshifter, Good at Many Forms (Non-MinMax)

[Legacy_Shadooow]

               

Hey, you can play the game like you want. No offence taken. Its just... monk levels are technically not supposed to count as caster levels, you know '>

ITs about how you want to play. If you are fine with it, then it is fine.

yes they shouldn't, but try to fix that, or even better try to suggest your fix to the peoples playing this game, will eat you alive '>

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_WhiZard]

               

Hey, you can play the game like you want. No offence taken. Its just... monk levels are technically not supposed to count as caster levels, you know '>

ITs about how you want to play. If you are fine with it, then it is fine.

 

And in PnP all spellbook spells should be able to be cast when in any polymorph.  The idea to add in spells from a creature and disallow direct casting from a spellbook was NWN's design, not PnP

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Waschlaff Duschmann]

               

Limits of the engine. But compared to other crpgs NWN does a fairly good job at porting the PNP system to a computer game. Its not perfect, certainly. And on top of that the D&D ruleset is not perfect to begin with. No system truly is, its a totally subjective thing to begin with.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_WhiZard]

               

yes they shouldn't, but try to fix that, or even better try to suggest your fix to the peoples playing this game, will eat you alive '>

 

Solution is simple.  If the spell is cast from a polymorph (and is allowed for that polymorph)  use the character level for the caster level, and do not recognize metamagic (empower/maximize).  This would better reflect NWN's focus of representing the ability as being natural to the form and would not allow the spellbook spellcasting exploitation which NWN tries to avoid.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_MagicalMaster]

               

To those claiming the shifter class is overall weak i have to say PVP shifters have been done and done well. The problem is that you really need to know what you are doing and documentation is virtually not existant.

 

I think we've *repeatedly* pointed out how it's completely environment dependent (both in terms of magic level and potential modifications).

 

However, *most* environments are high enough magic with few enough changes done to shapeshifting that shapeshifters tend to be weak.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Shadooow]

               

Solution is simple.  If the spell is cast from a polymorph (and is allowed for that polymorph)  use the character level for the caster level, and do not recognize metamagic (empower/maximize).  This would better reflect NWN's focus of representing the ability as being natural to the form and would not allow the spellbook spellcasting exploitation which NWN tries to avoid.

 

hmm yes I guess this would be adequate for most peoples, as it keeps the exploit and makes it even better '> but we wanted to remove the "exploit" thus caster level to be shifter+druid+wizard+sorcerer+cleric+bard, which for your build gives you 15 instead of 25...

Limits of the engine. But compared to other crpgs NWN does a fairly good job at porting the PNP system to a computer game. Its not perfect, certainly. And on top of that the D&D ruleset is not perfect to begin with. No system truly is, its a totally subjective thing to begin with.

well, engine is capable of doing that... it just needs a little help

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Waschlaff Duschmann]

               

I think we've *repeatedly* pointed out how it's completely environment dependent (both in terms of magic level and potential modifications).

 

However, *most* environments are high enough magic with few enough changes done to shapeshifting that shapeshifters tend to be weak.

 

Yes, yes, of course, of course. Still i have trouble labeling something that can cast unlimited ice storms as "weak". What we are comparing here is melee prowess, mostly to-hit and dodging, but that is a far too one dimensional approach to do the class judgment. I have played many shifters and i never had any trouble whatsoever. On the other hand, what happened quite frequently were comments like "you know this area is supposed for characters ten levels higher?" (courtesy of build-in damage reduction). It doesn't really strike me as lackluster in any way, also in high magic environments. Stacking bonuses are not the only things available in a high magic environment. Yes, that hips-sneak attack rogue/weapon master will do more damage. So what?

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_MagicalMaster]

               

Still i have trouble labeling something that can cast unlimited ice storms as "weak". What we are comparing here is melee prowess, mostly to-hit and dodging, but that is a far too one dimensional approach to do the class judgment.

 

Just to make sure I'm understanding the argument correctly, considering gear merging for most shapes, AC, AB, and damage is too one dimensional but "unlimited ice storms with a build specifically designed to maximize their power through arguably exploitative measures" isn't? '>

 

Yes, that hips-sneak attack rogue/weapon master will do more damage. So what?

 

Sometimes servers require certain levels of output due to limits on healing, respawns, or enemy mechanics -- and on many servers you can't rain down ice storms on your party without hurting them.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Waschlaff Duschmann]

               

Short answer is "yes".

 

The long answer...

 

....i don't do exploits. Its against my build philosophy. If somebody wants to break the game, thats their cup of tea - i want to play it. Takes the fun right out of it for me. It works so well you don't have to do it. You don't have to. As i said i don't even take the monk-wis-AC with me anymore, as i don't feel i need it. Haha +10 AC, great! No wait... do i actually really need that? Necessarily? Am i really going to shell out a level for +10 AC? Hmm... i think i get a greater adventurers robe instead...

 

You get so much damage resistance and immunities through the shapes that you can just wade through most encounters in any case even without gear. AC is not your only line of defense, oh no.

 

So i don't even have a problem going below that what i am capable of without breaking the mechanics. See how much i care for non stacking AC boni '>

 

A shifter isn't a rakshasa, period. It IS the only way to play one, however. It is that but it is also soo much more. Thats one of its many faces (but certainly one of the more popular ones with its spell immunity up to and including 8th level spells). Just keep a bolt of rakshasa slaying ready, just in case '>

 

Yes, probably somebody could get hurt if stepping into a dragon's breath...

Yes, your melee damage won't be that of a properly geared fighter (except, of course, HIPS-sneak attack dragons and such). Then again properly geared fighters don't walk around and turn flesh to stone or mind blast people.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_WhiZard]

               

Short answer is "yes".

 

The long answer...

 

....i don't do exploits. Its against my build philosophy. If somebody wants to break the game, thats their cup of tea - i want to play it. Takes the fun right out of it for me. It works so well you don't have to do it. You don't have to. As i said i don't even take the monk-wis-AC with me anymore, as i don't feel i need it. Haha +10 AC, great! No wait... do i actually really need that? Necessarily? Am i really going to shell out a level for +10 AC? Hmm... i think i get a greater adventurers robe instead...

 

The exploit you seem to be after is quickslotting a meta-magic druid spell of icestorm to effectively raise the spell level to 5 (bypassing globe of invulnerability) and dealing more damage.  This is significantly more of an exploit than using another class for a caster level (In the first case BioWare blocked a lot of things to prevent spellbook use by PCs while shifted, in the second BioWare couldn't decide on the best way to determine caster level and left it at the default value).

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_MrZork]

               

To be fair, I am not sure that WD ever mentioned using metamagic for the rakshasa Ice Storm. Of course, that might be the idea, but he never said that's what he was going to do. Whether or not doing so is an exploit in the negative sense that people use the term isn't a settled issue, IMO. If a toon has spent a feat to get the metamagic, why can't he use that knowledge to improve the performance of spells he can cast while shifted, if that spell is also in his spellbook? Maybe it is an exploit, e.g. BW has said, "We didn't want that to be possible, but we couldn't change it." (Which I wouldn't believe, because changing that behavior would be so easy.) Maybe it works differently in PnP, but that doesn't make it an exploit. NWN is not PnP.

 

Meanwhile, I don't see how the fact that druid-cast Ice Storms are level 5 spells is really an exploit at all. That's just a normal consequence of some spells being different levels for different classes.

 

(BTW, I know it's possible that people aren't using the term "exploit" negatively. But, it is commonly used to imply someone is using something to get an advantage in an improper or unfair way or doing a sneaky end-run around intended behavior. I actually think that it's unfortunate that the term has come to have a negative connotation. Really, any time someone uses something to gain some benefit, they are "exploiting" that thing, even though there is nothing wrong with that and, in fact, that's often the only reason for using it.)

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_WhiZard]

               

To be fair, I am not sure that WD ever mentioned using metamagic for the rakshasa Ice Storm. Of course, that might be the idea, but he never said that's what he was going to do. Whether or not doing so is an exploit in the negative sense that people use the term isn't a settled issue, IMO. If a toon has spent a feat to get the metamagic, why can't he use that knowledge to improve the performance of spells he can cast while shifted, if that spell is also in his spellbook? Maybe it is an exploit, e.g. BW has said, "We didn't want that to be possible, but we couldn't change it." (Which I wouldn't believe, because changing that behavior would be so easy.) Maybe it works differently in PnP, but that doesn't make it an exploit. NWN is not PnP.

 

It is correct that WD never stated this, but that seems to be the norm for such builds and is mentioned in Zelle's which he cited.  While there are many things that one person can call an exploit and others wouldn't, there are layers of comparison.  For example, WD took my use of monk levels as an exploit (technically the verbage used was "cheating" and "taking advantage of a bug").  However, if BioWare couldn't figure out a way to calculate caster level, then using one formula over another does not appear to be cheating or taking advantage of a bug.  The spellbook quickslots (since that is the only way to access spells when shifted), may be considered taking advantage of a bug, because Bioware did block all PC routes and blocked all spell slots that didn't have the same spell ID as with the form.  Granted the fix might have been easy, if the coders were aware of it, but it would also cost "zots" as George Zoeller liked to put it.  There were so many fixes to do and not enough cash flow to afford the time to do them.

 

In PNP you can use your spellbook.  In NWN all spellbook abilities have unlimited usage (so that the polymorphs can use their abilities an unlimited number of times).  For this reason NWN blocked all PCs the ability to use their spells (later they blocked the selection of the counter spell mode as well), however this blockage would not apply to NPCs who can still use their spellbooks without ever consuming the casts per day allotment (maybe the reason BioWare shied away from druidic henchmen, or monsters that use polymorphs).  The PC blockage is not failsafe and has been the work of many patches.  The use of spellbook spells with the same spell ID, likely just slipped through the cracks.

 

If there were a formula that BioWare would have used for calculating caster level it probably wouldn't be pure druid level.  If BioWare deemed it a spell of the shifter class (like the many other abilities granted to shifters) it would use only the shifter level to scale with the caster level (granted druid level is used with dragon breaths, but dragon shape is a feat that you could qualify by shifter levels or by druid levels).  If BioWare deemed it to be a property of the form, like a racial ability, the caster level would scale with hit dice.  If BioWare deemed it to be a spell from the Rakshasa's staff, the caster level would be a constant value.  For these reasons, there seem to be little incentive to call use of monk levels instead of druid levels a "cheat,"  while the "cheat" term would better apply to the metamagicked ice storms as there was an intention to completely block PC spellcasting which still has holes even after the patches.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Shadooow]

               

The problem is that peoples incorrectly consider something as an exploit, while technically it is not. I dont know what is a true definition, to me exploit is something thats not possible normally and player must put some effort or knowledge to do this. Like casting epic mage armor with only 5 wizard level, taking bane of enemies without 21 ranger levels, casting a normal spell while polymorphed, uploading a selfmade character on server, passing through door and such.

 

Using a single monk level, single shadow dancer level or casting metamagically enhanced ice storm is not an exploit. Neither (ab)using the caster level calculation for spells cast in polymorph is. Game normally allows this and player doesnt even have to be aware something is wrong. Why would be? Its either bug or an intented design. The game is based on DnD rules, so not everything that doesnt matches with the rules is wrong.

 

Whether is it bug or intent is different discussion, I could find it out in hardcode if I would want but its waste of time to me - I dont think that casting metamagically enhanced icestorm is a problem. It might as well be intented, because each quickslot has a class position assigned to it, so they either overlooked that class have to be compared or intentionally ignored it. Another reason this being intent is that the spell cast from quickslot like this uses a caster level of the original class no matter of the position, thus skipping the caster level bug. So if you make a 21monk 9druid 10shifter, you will be able to cast icestorm with either 21level or 9level. So you can normally make a 28 10 2monk build and start with monk because the caster level bug happens only when casting the icestorm quickslotted from the polymorph.

 

The caster level issue is definitely a bug. Normally each spell has a class it comes from. However polymorph attained spells doesn't because the shifter class is not a source of the spell, the polymorph is, thus no class is found and in such case it retrieves a value of first class. This means that very possible intent was to return shifter class level as caster level.

 

Truth to be told, there are few exploits with this that I fixed in my community patch. For example, it is possible to cast maximized ice storm without having the actual maximize spell feat and more...

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_MagicalMaster]

               

You get so much damage resistance and immunities through the shapes that you can just wade through most encounters in any case even without gear. AC is not your only line of defense, oh no.

 

Yes, your melee damage won't be that of a properly geared fighter (except, of course, HIPS-sneak attack dragons and such). Then again properly geared fighters don't walk around and turn flesh to stone or mind blast people.

 

If you're able to wade through encounters without gear, you're definitely playing on a lower magic world.

 

And your melee damage will be like 15-20% of a fighter -- it's not slightly worse, it's completely awful.

 

If a toon has spent a feat to get the metamagic, why can't he use that knowledge to improve the performance of spells he can cast while shifted, if that spell is also in his spellbook?

 

Meanwhile, I don't see how the fact that druid-cast Ice Storms are level 5 spells is really an exploit at all. That's just a normal consequence of some spells being different levels for different classes.

 

(BTW, I know it's possible that people aren't using the term "exploit" negatively. But, it is commonly used to imply someone is using something to get an advantage in an improper or unfair way or doing a sneaky end-run around intended behavior. I actually think that it's unfortunate that the term has come to have a negative connotation. Really, any time someone uses something to gain some benefit, they are "exploiting" that thing, even though there is nothing wrong with that and, in fact, that's often the only reason for using it.)

 

1. because he's casting it as a Rakshasa, not a druid.

 

2. because Rakshasa are arcane in nature and would cast it as a level 4.

 

3. that's why I prefer the word "abuse" in these cases.

 

The problem is that peoples incorrectly consider something as an exploit, while technically it is not. I dont know what is a true definition, to me exploit is something thats not possible normally and player must put some effort or knowledge to do this.

Indeed.

 

Using a single monk level to get more AC in shifted forms is an abuse.  "Hacking" the game to get the feat and bonus without even having a monk level is an exploit.

               
               

               
            

[Legacy_MrZork]

               

 

If a toon has spent a feat to get the metamagic, why can't he use that knowledge to improve the performance of spells he can cast while shifted, if that spell is also in his spellbook?


Meanwhile, I don't see how the fact that druid-cast Ice Storms are level 5 spells is really an exploit at all. That's just a normal consequence of some spells being different levels for different classes.


(BTW, I know it's possible that people aren't using the term "exploit" negatively. But, it is commonly used to imply someone is using something to get an advantage in an improper or unfair way or doing a sneaky end-run around intended behavior. I actually think that it's unfortunate that the term has come to have a negative connotation. Really, any time someone uses something to gain some benefit, they are "exploiting" that thing, even though there is nothing wrong with that and, in fact, that's often the only reason for using it.)

1. because he's casting it as a Rakshasa, not a druid.


2. because Rakshasa are arcane in nature and would cast it as a level 4.

 

1. We don't know that he is casting it as a druid. Regardless, the toon still has the feat, regardless of why he can cast the spell. Casting an empowered sorcerer spell and and empowered paladin spell doesn't require a multiclassed sorcerer-paladin toon to have two empower feats. I know there are ways to reason that the feat shouldn't apply, but there are reasons that it should, too. Bioware chose to allow it to.


2. First, as far as I can tell, we don't know that the shifted rakshasa is inherently an arcane caster rather than a divine caster. The shape comes from a spinoff class (shifter) of a divine casting class. There are many ways in which shifted PC rakshasa are different from their non-shifted kin. Second, and more relevant, regardless of which sort of magic the rakshasa casts, it doesn't follow that all arcane casters would cast the same spell at the same level. Bards are arcane casters and don't have all of their spells at the same levels as wizards. And, tellingly, bards are arcane casters and cast Ice Storm as a level 6 spell.