Thieves

[leania]

We have discussed about some True classes such as Fighter, Ranger, Druid, and Cleric to give individualities. However, we forget to meantion about the weakest True class which is Thief.

 

All of this kits and Dual/Multi classes which includes thief are better than True thief at most situations. Actually, True thief has a unique merit which can get many skill points. Depite of this advantage, because the skills are based on probability according to the value it has little attraction compared with other kits' features.

 

I think that True thief also needs to have more unique abilities which is not allowed to the others though I don't have good idea yet.

 

What do you think about this?

[Demivrgvs]

I do agree with you though the real problem imo is just that the whole dual classing thing is completely broken.

 

A single class thief still has to say his own compared to a multi classed thief imo (though I admit I'd generally prefer the latter), because of much faster level ups and all consequent bonuses (better backstab, much more skill points, etc.) and later on I can keep the difference intact with HLAs (e.g. a fighter/thief will have a quite different HLA table compared to a true thief, unlike vanilla where the former more or less get everything from both classes).

 

When it comes to dual classing instead the balance is broken anyway, because there's no way I can make a single class thief as good as a fighter that duals to thief after a bunch of lvls (you get more hp, better apr, proficiencies and so on, pratically for free). I really don't know how they managed to design such an unbalanced system.

 

That being said, if you have good ideas to make this underused class shine go ahead and suggest it. Right now I have very little ideas. Most of their 3E PnP feats are not implementable (e.g. defensive roll), we can have some of them as HLAs with some heavy adjustments (e.g. slippery mind, evasion, etc.), but very few can be flawlessly added to the mid lvls of the base class.

[Ardanis]

Trap Sense can be implemented, if we take trap SPLs and add a save bonus for thieves.

[Demivrgvs]

Trap Sense can be implemented, if we take trap SPLs and add a save bonus for thieves.

Good idea...though not game changing considering thieves can already detect and disarm them. Otoh making thieves highly resistant to traps set by other thieves is quite cool, but only AI's thieves could benefit from it because players never run into thief's traps (afaik not even with RR installed).

 

That being said, I think leania was talking about something to improve the true class thief, and trap sense would probably suit all kits as well (I can imagine Swashbucklers losing it, but surely not a trap expert like the Bounty Hunter).

 

I thought about suggesting an improved critical chance at mid lvls (great with single weapon style and backstab) but than again, I can see it on any kit.

 

In theory, letting thieves read scrolls as per PnP (I think they can read scrolls with a % failure rate at 10th lvl - though I'd replace the failure with a speed penalty, else I'd never use this feature in my life) could greatly enhance the appeal of thieves, but this requires a huge amount of work, and in the end we would just move a thief HLA to mid lvl thieves. IR already introduces a tweak to let thieves with high INT use wands, we could restrict it to true class thieves (and swashbucklers?), creating an additional disadvantage for the other kits.

[leania]

In theory, letting thieves read scrolls as per PnP (I think they can read scrolls with a % failure rate at 10th lvl - though I'd replace the failure with a speed penalty, else I'd never use this feature in my life) could greatly enhance the appeal of thieves, but this requires a huge amount of work, and in the end we would just move a thief HLA to mid lvl thieves. IR already introduces a tweak to let thieves with high INT use wands, we could restrict it to true class thieves (and swashbucklers?), creating an additional disadvantage for the other kits.

 

I think that's good idea.

 

 

I just mentioned about True Thief because I felt that the other theives, such as Assassin, Bounty Hunter, Swashbuckler, and multi/dual classes, can be balanced and characterized relatively through RR and Refinements.

 

In my opinion dual classes with thief is not so overpowered because they generally become weak when they change their class. Furthermore, the dual classes get the number of HLA less than multi/single classes. Though it may not big disadvantages when playing with only one character It's enough penalties in case of the general playing of BG series with 5~6 fellows.

 

Return to the subject, Refinements not only removes "Use any items" HLA from Thieves to eliminate the unbalanced issues made by the multi/dual classes including thief, and also gives unique and useful HLA to each kits. Additionally, RR allows the single classes to get full proficiency about Two-Weapon Style, and gives some normal abilities to make them unique.

 

Long story short, imo well known balance issues caused by dual/multi classes with thief was completely or partially settled through these two mods. However, even though these mods solved it True Thief is still less attractive even compared with Assassin, Bounty Hunter, and Swashbuckler. So I want to suggest to add a normal ability only for True Thief though this idea isn't based on PnP rule. I give a full explanation here.

 

"When True thief tries to backstab a victim, the target may be frightened/confused/disarmed because of the sudden assault. These additional effects vary according to True Thief's level. Only True Thief gets this passive ability since the thief is perfactly proficient as thief."

 

If we need, this ability may be allowed to multi classes restrictively like fighter's weapon proficiency feature. In fact, it seems the merit is not good enough compared with the other kits/dual/mutli classes' advantages. Some more features may need for True Thief...

[Ardanis]

In theory, letting thieves read scrolls as per PnP (I think they can read scrolls with a % failure rate at 10th lvl - though I'd replace the failure with a speed penalty, else I'd never use this feature in my life) could greatly enhance the appeal of thieves, but this requires a huge amount of work, and in the end we would just move a thief HLA to mid lvl thieves. IR already introduces a tweak to let thieves with high INT use wands, we could restrict it to true class thieves (and swashbucklers?), creating an additional disadvantage for the other kits.

I don't think casting speed penalty is doable. It doesn't affect the 146th opcode.

EDIT The same actually goes for miscast chance as well.

 

I would suggest simply to add the INT requirement of spell level +8 to scrolls. And INT-boosting items will finally find their use.

 

And keeping UAI for pure thieves is... fine? If somebody wants kensai/thief to wear a plate armor, that's their business imo.

[Kalindor]

Personally I think UAI is a good way to make Bards more appealing if it is restricted to their use. It is very thematically appropriate for the bard, also.

[Demivrgvs]

Kits

I just mentioned about True Thief because I felt that the other theives, such as Assassin, Bounty Hunter, Swashbuckler, and multi/dual classes, can be balanced and characterized relatively through RR and Refinements.

In fact KR's Assassin, BH and Swashy will be very very similar to RR's ones, though we may include Ardanis huge work on traps if he wish so (or a less radical revision I had in mind). I plan to make HLA tables more "unique" for each kit than Refinements ones, but yes, that mod is a very good starting point in terms of concept.

 

Dual classing

In my opinion dual classes with thief is not so overpowered because they generally become weak when they change their class. Furthermore, the dual classes get the number of HLA less than multi/single classes. Though it may not big disadvantages when playing with only one character It's enough penalties in case of the general playing of BG series with 5~6 fellows.

I guess by "weak when they change class" you mean the temporary loss of the first class before regaining it, but that doesn't affect the end result of the class which is absurdly more powerful than the single class. That being said, I'm not saying the end result of dual classing is always so overpowered to be considered broken (a fighter-thief isn't as overpowered as a kensage), but that the system per se is "broken", because a dualled character is way more powerful and effective than the single class character (e.g. a Berserker-thief is absurdly better than a plain thief).

 

I don't know what you mean by "dual classes get the number of HLA less than multi/single classes", they actually get more HLAs than multi classed characters afaik and as much as single class characters (perhaps 1 HLA less, but having 64k xp less doesn't make any difference at all in ToB). Unless you're speaking of a character that duals extremely late (e.g. a kensage with 13 fighter lvls), or dualling within BG1, dualling within BG2 is almost free. Dualling a 7th lvl fighter to thief means getting +1/2 apr, more hit points, and the ability to get grandmastery (which is HUGE bonus), at the miserable cost of 64k xp points, which you can get in half an hour within BG2, and later on means absolutely nothing (when there are 250k between each lvl up).

 

Improved Backstab

"When True thief tries to backstab a victim, the target may be frightened/confused/disarmed because of the sudden assault. These additional effects vary according to True Thief's level. Only True Thief gets this passive ability since the thief is perfactly proficient as thief."

I'd love to be able to add different features to thief's backstab but it's not doable.

 

Use Scrolls

In theory, letting thieves read scrolls as per PnP (I think they can read scrolls with a % failure rate at 10th lvl - though I'd replace the failure with a speed penalty, else I'd never use this feature in my life) could greatly enhance the appeal of thieves, but this requires a huge amount of work, and in the end we would just move a thief HLA to mid lvl thieves. IR already introduces a tweak to let thieves with high INT use wands, we could restrict it to true class thieves (and swashbucklers?), creating an additional disadvantage for the other kits.

I don't think casting speed penalty is doable. It doesn't affect the 146th opcode.

EDIT The same actually goes for miscast chance as well.

Too bad. We might be able to make scrolls cast a custom version of each spell via EFF file if used by a thief (excluding multi dual thief/mage), but that would be indeed a monstrous amount of work if doable.

 

I would suggest simply to add the INT requirement of spell level +8 to scrolls. And INT-boosting items will finally find their use.

Like we did for Wands? I'm afraid having low lvl thieves able to use scrolls as much as they want may be a tad too much, both conceptually and in terms of balance. Not to mention it would be an incredible boost for multi and dual fighter-thieves too, which is something we may not want to get (personally I don't). Am I wrong?

 

This is one of those cases where it would be better to have HLA tables open up at a lower lvl (e.g. 10th lvl) to start customizing classes and kits early on (e.g. true thief table would have Use Scroll, fighter-thief table would have another HLA). I know we can reach almost the same goal by making scrolls unusable by fighter-thief and cleric-thief, but it's much less "explainable" if it's an ability every thief gets at 1st lvl instead of a unique feat gained by experienced thief who focused on a single class career.

 

On a side note, another HLA that would probably greatly enhance the appeal of thieves if acquired at mid lvls would be Alchemy. Meh, I'm starting to think the whole "have HLA tables start at 10th lvl" would be really cool.

 

Speaking of HLAs, can someone quickly explain me how Refinements' Use Scroll HLA works? I mean how it's coded, because I've tried to look into it and it's kinda complicated to say the least (and kinda hacky too).

 

Use Any Item

And keeping UAI for pure thieves is... fine? If somebody wants kensai/thief to wear a plate armor, that's their business imo.

Personally I think UAI is a good way to make Bards more appealing if it is restricted to their use. It is very thematically appropriate for the bard, also.

I'm with Kalindor on this, I like how Refinements made this HLA an exclusive advantage of bards.

[Ardanis]

Use Scrolls

Like we did for Wands? I'm afraid having low lvl thieves able to use scrolls as much as they want may be a tad too much, both conceptually and in terms of balance. Not to mention it would be an incredible boost for multi and dual fighter-thieves too, which is something we may not want to get (personally I don't). Am I wrong?

How many scrolls you get early on? And how many are higher than 1-2 level? The picture doesn't significantly change throughout the game. High level scrolls are expensive and rare, and I personally think Scribe Scrolls should take a full cost instead of half (since it doesn't consume XP as in PnP).

 

For FTs, yep, I thought simply to forbid them reading scrolls.

 

Speaking of HLAs, can someone quickly explain me how Refinements' Use Scroll HLA works? I mean how it's coded, because I've tried to look into it and it's kinda complicated to say the least (and kinda hacky too).

It switches the character to another kit, with different usabilities. Complicated indeed.

 

 

Use Any Item

I only use it to wear a jewelry trinket. Or a weapon of the type I'm proficient with.

 

Do you think it can be scaled? Say, there's a small list of items (15-20) which are normally forbidden for use, but can be unlocked by UAI lvl1. Then another list for UAI lvl2. Maybe third one as well.

EDIT Mm, no. If it's refreshable then it's also removable by death/ctrl-r, and if permanent then can't be removed by sectype.

[Salk]

In my opinion dual classes with thief is not so overpowered because they generally become weak when they change their class.

 

This is a very important point, imo.

 

Speaking in genereal here, it's true that in the long run a dual class has often an edge over the true class but people tend to forget that the character is extremely weak for that time needed to develop enough level to catch up with the first class.

 

If we take survival as a parameter for a successful character all through an adventure that include enough level to warrant dual classing, I would say that a single class has more chances of staying alive than any dual class have, just because at his weakest a dual class can be swept away like dust. The fact is, players do not value survival chances in cRPG, the reload button is there at hand, who cares?

 

In this sense, I endorse the game concept of the dual class and I find it an attractive introduction to the game.

[DrAzTiK]

Speaking in genereal here, it's true that in the long run a dual class has often an edge over the true class but people tend to forget that the character is extremely weak for that time needed to develop enough level to catch up with the first class.

Yeah, especially when playing Imoen and Anomen.

 

 

Dual class is more or less ok Imo but the large amount of XP in BG2 and TOB make it broken. Surely nobody dualclass a character in BG1.

[Salk]

Dual class is more or less ok Imo but the large amount of XP in BG2 and TOB make it broken. Surely nobody dualclass a character in BG1.

 

Yes, but that's the problem. It's the game, not the dual class concept.

[Demivrgvs]

Use Scrolls

Like we did for Wands? I'm afraid having low lvl thieves able to use scrolls as much as they want may be a tad too much, both conceptually and in terms of balance. Not to mention it would be an incredible boost for multi and dual fighter-thieves too, which is something we may not want to get (personally I don't). Am I wrong?

How many scrolls you get early on? And how many are higher than 1-2 level? The picture doesn't significantly change throughout the game. High level scrolls are expensive and rare, and I personally think Scribe Scrolls should take a full cost instead of half (since it doesn't consume XP as in PnP).

Ok, you have a point, scroll's availability may keep this feature balanced. That being said, this is still a huge bonus to the class is properly used (e.g. keeping the scrolls for the important encounters), a bonus that I think should be granted later on as per PnP rather than at 1st lvl. Anyway, I'm not so strongly against it, thus if most players agree with you I may be fine with it. Let's hope they contribute to the discussion.

 

For FTs, yep, I thought simply to forbid them reading scrolls.

My issue with this is that we'd create a special case, "breaking" the standard rules applied to multiclassing within BG, which generally get all the abilities and restrictions from both classes. There's an exception to this rule actually: multiclass fighters cannot get grandmastery, but are limited to specialization, unlike dual class fighters, who can instead reach grandmastery. Anyway I don't know why multiclass fighters cannot get grandmastery (especially considering dualled ones can), as well as I don't know how we could "justify" why a 1st lvl fighter-thief doesn't get an ability every 1st lvl thief has.

 

Speaking of HLAs, can someone quickly explain me how Refinements' Use Scroll HLA works? I mean how it's coded, because I've tried to look into it and it's kinda complicated to say the least (and kinda hacky too).

It switches the character to another kit, with different usabilities. Complicated indeed.

Oh my...does this solution cause any issue?

 

Dual Classing

Dual class is more or less ok Imo but the large amount of XP in BG2 and TOB make it broken. Surely nobody dualclass a character in BG1.

Yes, but that's the problem. It's the game, not the dual class concept.

I said myself that the absurd amount of easy xp you get within SoA makes the whole dual classing thing more broken, but I still think it's broken anyway. Do we really think it's fine having a unbalanced end result (e.g. a Kensage, Kensai-Thief+UAI) as long as the character is weakened for a limited amount of time before reaching his full potential? It seems a bad design decision to me, and the end result is that you have a system almost unusable or very annoying within BG1, and too easily exploitable within BG2.

 

More importantly a system that makes absolutely no sense conceptually! So, your character is a fighter who spent years training in martial arts and warfare, he suddenly decide to study some magic and after a minute he can cast his first spell, but he also suddenly forget how to handle a sword! Tehn, after becoming a powerful mage all of a sudden he remembers how to use that sword!! Yeah, that makes sense...

[leania]

Dual Classing

I said myself that the absurd amount of easy xp you get within SoA makes the whole dual classing thing more broken, but I still think it's broken anyway. Do we really think it's fine having a unbalanced end result (e.g. a Kensage, Kensai-Thief+UAI) as long as the character is weakened for a limited amount of time before reaching his full potential? It seems a bad design decision to me, and the end result is that you have a system almost unusable or very annoying within BG1, and too easily exploitable within BG2.

 

More importantly a system that makes absolutely no sense conceptually! So, your character is a fighter who spent years training in martial arts and warfare, he suddenly decide to study some magic and after a minute he can cast his first spell, but he also suddenly forget how to handle a sword! Tehn, after becoming a powerful mage all of a sudden he remembers how to use that sword!! Yeah, that makes sense...

 

The unbalance issue of dualclasses, caused by Kensage, Kensai-Thief, and so on, should be solved by adjusting each kits at KR. For example, Kensai MUST NOT be allowed any armors including robes even if dualing mage as F/C only can use blunt weapons. And in case of Kensai-Thief, we can solve this by replacing UAI with Use Scrolls as Refinements did. I know these may be not perfact solutions, but I think it's the least of the way.

[Salk]

More importantly a system that makes absolutely no sense conceptually! So, your character is a fighter who spent years training in martial arts and warfare, he suddenly decide to study some magic and after a minute he can cast his first spell, but he also suddenly forget how to handle a sword! Tehn, after becoming a powerful mage all of a sudden he remembers how to use that sword!! Yeah, that makes sense...

 

I completely agree with you about dual class being absurd enough conceptually speaking. It was obvious a decision made to introduce a drawback to dual-classing (which has also the human only limitation so that you'd have to select that specific race in order to have this chance and in AD&D humans have no special benefits except that and little other). But I always thought that the overall game concept of dual classing was interesting and original enough.