Thieves

[Demivrgvs]

Going all the way back to the original proposal: I'm actually unconvinced that it makes design sense to try to make the original, unkitted classes competitive. Aren't kits there, at least in part, to reward characters for not multi-classing? (That was certainly part of the original motivation for them in PnP, for all that it got lost later.)

Kits shouldn't be "rewards" for characters unable to multi-class imo, they should be "specializations" imo. Kits alter the base class to be "specialized" in something giving up to a degree of versatility of the original class. Keeping the discussion on thieves the examples are very clear:

- Assassins are specialized in killing their opponents with a single devastating backstab, but are far less versatile when it comes to all other thieving skills

- Bounty Hunters focus on traps

- Swashbucklers give up backstabbing to focus on combat

True thieves instead (though I'd prefer to call them rogues) are more versatile because they don't give up skills nor backstab, but don't excell at anything.

 

(& yes, I appreciate that dual-class characters also get kits. I'm somewhat inclined to agree with Demi's general view here, though.)

May I ask why you appreciate dual-class characters getting kits?

 

Is it just me, or dual-classing really should be restricted to trueclass characters? Well, it'd solve a lot of problems with balance.

You are not, but too many players would dislike such a drastic solution imo, and it doesn't really fix everything I hate about it (like the very original concept having no roleplaying sense).

 

It quite simply isn't worth taking 1/6th of your team out of action so that the other 5 can enjoy relatively trivial combat bonuses. If we could band together a group of 10, sure, I'd throw a Bard in there, but as the game stands now, Haer'Dalis is mostly just dead weight.

Actually, I think the Blade is a rare exception to the general "bards suck" rule. Because of bard's uber fast lvl ups, Offensive/Defensive Spins, and UAI, Haer'Dalis can actually be the best tank in the game if properly used. How to make bards shine again doesn't belong to this topic, but it surely involve making those "trivial bonuses" less trivial.

[SixOfSpades]

I'm actually unconvinced that it makes design sense to try to make the original, unkitted classes competitive. Aren't kits there, at least in part, to reward characters for not multi-classing?

Yes and no. Yes, kits are good because they grant a Diviner at least one sense of superiority over a Mage, but at the same time there's absolutely no need for the pure Cleric to be completely eclipsed by its own kits. It's about trying to make ALL of the build options into viable choices, or else we might as well just give up and tell everyone to play Kensages or Cleric/Rangers.

The core of the "True Thief" problem is that Duals and especially Multis are so damn powerful, and that's because being part Warrior is so damn essential it's not even funny.

 

 

Is it just me, or dual-classing really should be restricted to trueclass characters? Well, it'd solve a lot of problems with balance.

Eliminating a broken system is not the same as fixing it. The crux of the issue is in the kit design: When I write up a kit, I make sure to carefully weigh its checks and balances not just against its core class and other kits of that class, but against related Multis and the kit's possible Duals. Clearly, this did not happen for builds like the Kensai->Thief with UAI. This is not a problem with Dual-Classing, per se, or even with Dual-classing a kit; it is a problem with the Kensai kit being allowed to choose UAI.

[DeathKnight1728]

Since the assassin is suited towards one shot kills, and the bounty hunter is suited to traps, the swash is suited towards not getting hit, why not for thief-give them evasive abilities

 

-AC bonus of 1 every six levels due to heightened senses which starts at +1 at lvl 1 (Due to swash already getting this, thief will not receive damage bonus)

 

-Bonus to trap saves (like everyone else has said) This is critical in case you mess up, this has your back. I cannot tell you how annoying it is to get 1 shotted by a trap due to carelessness. Then having to load the game again.

 

-I know this might sound like a weird implement but maybe giving thieves a bonus of 'just' to hit with daggers of +1 per 6 levels with a 1+ bonus starting at lvl 1. This makes perfect sense. Thieves rarely wielded swords or anything big. They went with dagger and knive type weapons that worked well when disarming traps. Keep in mind this is just a bonus chance to hit, no damage.

 

The reason those 3 addons are ideal is that while the assassin is all offense, the bounty hunter is defense, and the swash is mostly offense, the thief is a balance like was said of all. They dont need a damage bonus, just a better chance to hit, stay away from getting hit, and stay safe from traps. I'd take that class with those addons anyday over the dual class powergamers choices.

[Ardanis]

IIRC it was agreed somewhere else that Swashies should not receive damage bonus, or perhaps I simply feel so because that's how RR does it.

I would probably say that a Swash is supposed to be a thief equivalent of Blade - neither pure melee offense nor defense, but a blend of both, and maybe be even with similar stance-like abilities. Whereas BH relies on subterfuge.

 

ToBEx allows to incur Assassin/BH's skill points penalty to other kits. Shove it to Swash, and we have the base class able to enjoy the greater range of developed skills.

 

 

To-hit bonus with daggers - nice and good.

[Demivrgvs]

Since the assassin is suited towards one shot kills, and the bounty hunter is suited to traps, the swash is suited towards not getting hit, why not for thief-give them evasive abilities

 

-AC bonus of 1 every six levels due to heightened senses which starts at +1 at lvl 1 (Due to swash already getting this, thief will not receive damage bonus)

AC bonus should really be Swash-only for many reasons imo. Not to mention you'd be giving a free AC bonus to all multiclass thieves, on top of their armors in case of fighter/thieves.

 

-Bonus to trap saves (like everyone else has said) This is critical in case you mess up, this has your back. I cannot tell you how annoying it is to get 1 shotted by a trap due to carelessness. Then having to load the game again.

I though this wasn't a big deal, but fine with me, it surely fits the class (though BH should probably have it too).

 

-I know this might sound like a weird implement but maybe giving thieves a bonus of 'just' to hit with daggers of +1 per 6 levels with a 1+ bonus starting at lvl 1. This makes perfect sense. Thieves rarely wielded swords or anything big. They went with dagger and knive type weapons that worked well when disarming traps. Keep in mind this is just a bonus chance to hit, no damage.

Well daggers fit rogues as much as short swords, short bows and light crossbows imo. I don't see any way to implement this within the class itself, but it should be doable by patching all itm files to grant it via EFF files...though this would force a very late install. I'm not too much into it but it's not a bad idea per se.

 

On a side note, I was going to suggest allowing Assassins to specialize in daggers (eventually as an HLA, or part of an HLA) because I thought they are the most likely to focus on such weapons.

 

IIRC it was agreed somewhere else that Swashies should not receive damage bonus, or perhaps I simply feel so because that's how RR does it.

I would probably say that a Swash is supposed to be a thief equivalent of Blade - neither pure melee offense nor defense, but a blend of both, and maybe be even with similar stance-like abilities. Whereas BH relies on subterfuge.

Did we? I can surely live without it, but I thought such dmg bonus was there to simulate PnP bonus based on INT (aka Insightful Strike).

 

ToBEx allows to incur Assassin/BH's skill points penalty to other kits. Shove it to Swash, and we have the base class able to enjoy the greater range of developed skills.

Mmm, no backstab already is a very unique and effective hindrance for swashies, but lowering their skill points rate to 20% can be a nice way to enhance the appeal of true thieves. Otoh, Bounty Hunter kit should have more than a simple -5% skill per lvl disadvantage imo, but it all depends on what we can "take out" from true thieves, which right now is almost nothing.

[DeathKnight1728]

You make a good point on assassins. Maybe this might work-

 

Thief New Perks-Trap Saves, Bonus to hit with daggers at every 6 (or 7) levels, and a 1+ bonus to ac at creation, which increases to another +1 at lvl 5. From there no more ac bonuses are given. That way, the swashbuckler is still the king of ac as +2 ac overall is not a killer. The bonuses to hit still increase which is the best part of this build. I also would suggest a small increase to trap saves with levels. With this mindset for the thief class, this character will still be viable as a good class to take alone. Why? Because while the assassin will be a one shot killer, and the bounty hunter will be a lurer and ranged fighter, the swash will still be tough and a decent tank. What will the thief be? A lone and stealthy wanderer who can get through almost any dungeon due to evasive cautiousness, and uncanny finesse and maneuvers.

[DeathKnight1728]

Next is the Swashbuckler-

 

Swashbuckler New Perks-

 

The only thing I can think of for the swashbuckler is more hp. They need to be more tankish. The swashbuckler in more current rules has d10 health per level. I would suggest doing something with hp per level. Maybe adding 1 hp per every 2 levels would work.

 

The Bounty Hunter-

 

The bounty hunter's traps are up in the air, though I would suggest not messing with them too much. As for the regular build, the bounty hunter is the most diverse of the thief classes as imho, they can be either a ranged fighter or a backstabber when you need to. I would say that the bounty hunter should focus more on ranged fighting as traps are not as useful for meleers. Maybe adding a bonus to bows for them would work. Im not really sure what else to do with this class. Rogue Rebalancing butchered it with paralyzing toxins.

The Assassin-

 

The assassin needs some work, thats for sure. For a class that has the highest backstab multiplier, they can barely hit their target half the time. I would suggest (like you said), giving them specialization in daggers and maybe short swords. Also I know this might be too much, but either give them a small boost to hit every 8 levels, or give them an extra 1/2 attack. The reason being that while the assassin deals a lot of damage and is faster due to the extra 1/2 attack, they lack the finesse of the thief, the patience of the bounty hunter, and the resilience of the swashbuckler.

 

With this setup for all 4, the assassin will usually do the most damage and attack the most, but they wont hit as often as the other 3. The bounty hunter will be good for the long drawn out battles that you fight where patience is important. The BH will also be the ranged thief build that i wanted in the original release of the game. The thief will be the cautious one who good at getting into anywhere. And the swashbuckler will be the overall best melee fighter. Each will have their strengths and weaknesses. I think it might work pretty well.

[Guest Chabba990]

I think that Sneak Attack Should be added. It would make Thieves much more closer to a "really playable melée character". At level they should have +1d6 slashing damage, with a base 51% probability of inflicting it so. There is no saving throw allowed, only resistance against slashing damage. If a target is successfully striken with Sneak Attack, they would gain immunity to it for 1 hour at least, making it technically usable only once on the same foe. Every level thereafter the probability should increase by another 1%, to the maximum of 90% at level 40. The damage would also increase with an additional 1d6 for every for levels, starting at level 4, so finally at level 40 they would inflict 10d6 damage, which is still reasonable I think. Sneak Attack and the Backstab damage are a very good combination, and compared to a warrior, they have to be managed wisely. Of course, this would affect half of enemies in the game, as undead, construct, and other special creatures might have immunity to it. But I think this would make Thieves more usable and fun.

[Demivrgvs]

True Thief

Trap Saves, Bonus to hit with daggers at every 6 (or 7) levels, and a 1+ bonus to ac at creation, which increases to another +1 at lvl 5.

Adding to hit bonuses to a specified type of weapon is not doable, while granting true thief a bonus to AC is too arbitrary imo (not to mention we'd be giving +2 AC to all multi and dual class thieves!), and it overlaps too much with Swahbuckler's most defining feature.

 

When it comes to THAC0, I do thought rogues had really crappy to hit chances within AD&D, and I was thinking about suggesting a slight increase a la 3E (2 points every 3 lvls instead of 1 every 2). That being said, I don't want KR to turn into a "make BG follow 3E", thus I have to think about it. Furthermore Ardanis was partially right to remind me that later on it's kinda easy to hit your targets (AC doesn't get better as much as THAC0), and I don't want to make that happen to rogues too.

 

 

Swashbuckler

The only thing I can think of for the swashbuckler is more hp. They need to be more tankish. The swashbuckler in more current rules has d10 health per level. I would suggest doing something with hp per level. Maybe adding 1 hp per every 2 levels would work.

A Swashy with d10 is a Duelist! Jokes aside, I don't like the idea of a rogue's class with tons of hit points. Swashies are all about agility and if we need them to tank even better then they already do we should increase AC, not hit points.

 

 

Bounty Hunter

The bounty hunter's traps are up in the air, though I would suggest not messing with them too much. As for the regular build, the bounty hunter is the most diverse of the thief classes as imho, they can be either a ranged fighter or a backstabber when you need to. I would say that the bounty hunter should focus more on ranged fighting as traps are not as useful for meleers. Maybe adding a bonus to bows for them would work. Im not really sure what else to do with this class. Rogue Rebalancing butchered it with paralyzing toxins.

Perhaps I'm biased but I actually thought aVENGER did a good job with both non-magical traps and toxin ability.

 

 

The Assassin

The assassin needs some work, thats for sure. For a class that has the highest backstab multiplier, they can barely hit their target half the time. I would suggest (like you said), giving them specialization in daggers and maybe short swords. Also I know this might be too much, but either give them a small boost to hit every 8 levels, or give them an extra 1/2 attack. The reason being that while the assassin deals a lot of damage and is faster due to the extra 1/2 attack, they lack the finesse of the thief, the patience of the bounty hunter, and the resilience of the swashbuckler.

Assassins should be all about daggers, poisons and stealthy backstabs imo. I don't like the idea of granting them higher apr, because they are not supposed to hit you often, they are supposed to kill you in a single fatal strike.

 

 

Sneak Attack

I think that Sneak Attack Should be added. ...

I would indeed like to add a flanking system, but it's not doable without hacking. ToBEx may allow me to do something about it, but I'm not sure. For example, eliminating the need to be invisible, but keeping the "behind target" requirement to backstab, we should be able to implement it as I think no enemy AI would offer you his back unless he's already fighting someone else...but is it a free x5 multiplier on each hit fine when we have F-T with tons of attacks per round? I fear it's not (not to mention Assassin's x7).

 

I'd like to hear some opinions on this whole matter...

 

If a target is successfully striken with Sneak Attack, they would gain immunity to it for 1 hour at least, making it technically usable only once on the same foe.

Something similar would remove my above mentioned fear, but afaik it's not doable.

 

Of course, this would affect half of enemies in the game, as undead, construct, and other special creatures might have immunity to it.

I actually like that AD&D lets you backstab even an undead creature (unlike 3E). Afterall, they do have weak spots you can exploit imo, and the rogue may take time and stealth advantages to decide where to hit, and then strike more precisely to deal more damage. Incorporeal undead otoh are a different story, they should indeed be immune.

[Ardanis]

Assassin

You know, we could make Death Attack much closer to 3E PnP - for three rounds Assassin studies their target, and then they have three more rounds to deliver the fatal blow to the marked victim.

But, I've no idea how to keep the invisibility state (if it was active) after beginning to cast at somebody else.

 

Also, HiPS and spellbook suggest an innate invisibility.

[chabba990]

Hi again, now registered.

One of my favourite base class is the Thief. In my opinion, they are one of the best, if not the best, dualists, but I think they should remain "foe specific". I mean that they shouldn't be sent in front of an Iron Golem, or Dragon... This is the job of a true warrior. Because half of the enemies are organic (humanoid, giant humanoid, demi-humanoid, etc...) they can still be a good addition on the front line. What I'm pointing out is that both Backstab, and Sneak Attack should be effective against living 'lesser' folks. This should be the difference between the Thief and Fighter. In one instance they can duel almost equally, but if it turns to really tough foes, the thief should remain in the backside as a supporter, or tactician. And for game balancing reasons only. Anyway, undead are already dead, thus they don't have any vital points. They are nothing else just rotting flesh, bones, and negative energy. Destroying them can only be possible by really damaging them with a heavy mace or somsuch... not with a dagger.

[chabba990]

Dual-, and Multi-Classing are hard coded things... so it's no use taliking about it, even it is unrealistic. However, we can do something about the "hefty amount of XP in BG2", because I think I saw it, the place where the XP amount is given to the trap disarming, lock picking, and spell learning. It can be lowered, or halvened to solve this little problem. On the other hand, we can still improve the "Dual-classing issue". If most, if not all dualable class would be modified to gain abilities up to level 20, than people might consider leaving them as a true class. For example, the Thief shoul keep upgrading his Backstab multiplier at around level 20, as they do now, or not? Or even to give them the 3rd edition things like Slippery Mind... etc. I think in 3rd edition every class is created up to 20.. so this can't be a big problem. Of course, some things, lesser, or more complicated will still improve beyond level 20. But this way there would be a reason leaving them as they are.

[Demivrgvs]

Assassin

You know, we could make Death Attack much closer to 3E PnP - for three rounds Assassin studies their target, and then they have three more rounds to deliver the fatal blow to the marked victim.

But, I've no idea how to keep the invisibility state (if it was active) after beginning to cast at somebody else.

Can we really make it work as per PnP? Would it be worth? If you ask me, we probably can't, and the end result wouldn't be so much better than just implementing it a la RR. That being said, I though about making it a HLA (I do need unique HLAs).

 

Also, HiPS and spellbook suggest an innate invisibility.

As a quick note: I hate 3E spellcasting Assassins. KR's Assassin should remain more AD&D-esque.

 

I suppose you agree (are you?) as you've said "innate invisibility". It's difficult to draw a line between magic and innate, but I admit I thought about HiPS myself. Anyway, considering we are going to let them create Potions of Invisibility with Alchemy having a x/day invisibility innate could be relatively redundant imo.

 

 

Dual- Multi-Classing

Dual-, and Multi-Classing are hard coded things... so it's no use taliking about it, even it is unrealistic. However, we can do something about the "hefty amount of XP in BG2", because I think I saw it, the place where the XP amount is given to the trap disarming, lock picking, and spell learning. It can be lowered, or halvened to solve this little problem.

I do agree that BG2 ridiculous amount of XP is a problem, but I'm not sure KR is the right place to handle it. It does affect the balance of some classes though.

 

On the other hand, we can still improve the "Dual-classing issue". If most, if not all dualable class would be modified to gain abilities up to level 20, than people might consider leaving them as a true class. For example, the Thief shoul keep upgrading his Backstab multiplier at around level 20, as they do now, or not? Or even to give them the 3rd edition things like Slippery Mind... etc.

Yep, doing this is extremely important imo. If you noticed I tried to do that even with relatively plain classes like fighters. For example taking 7-9 lvls as a Berserker before dualing to thief or cleric allowed to get almost full benefits from it, whereas now even taking 13 lvls (which makes the character almost unplayable for half the game imo) won't allow you to get the "tireless", whihc should keep the true class very appealing. The Assassin kit in particular already worked like that because his backstab bonus continued to improve at mid-high lvls, making the true class almost a must.

 

The problem is finding the abilities to give them, and how to implement them. Fir example most of 3E rogue's feats cannot be implemented without being radically changed (e.g. Slippery Mind within BG can only work as a full Mind Shield, Cripple Strike cannot be limited to sneack attacks, etc) or cannot be implemented at all (e.g. Defensive Roll).

[Jarno Mikkola]

Dual-, and Multi-Classing are hard coded things... so it's no use taliking about it, even it is unrealistic.

We can also disable the whole Dual classing... but that's not the optimal solution, the better is to drink the pipe cleaner until you don't have the opinion. Or try to find ways to make the classes more balanced without takeing anything aways from the dual and multi classed characters that the single classed characters have, and let the balance comes from the mechanics that the game has already.

 

What comes to the XP amounts, you are totally wrong about it, in my opinion. It is given that the original game was balanced to have to XP table it had, you cannot do the last ten enemy encounters with a level 1 character, so it's best not to try to tweak those features with a mod such as Kit Revisions... the BG2 Tweaks pack have the feature you talk, so let it have that and use the things, and let other use what they like. Or use the 10% thing one of the DEFJAM XP v6 mod provides... it gives other options too, by the way.

[Demivrgvs]

Dual- Multi-Classing

I hope this matter doesn't overshadows more important and interesting discussions (see above), but I cannot resist...

 

Dual-, and Multi-Classing are hard coded things... so it's no use taliking about it, even it is unrealistic.

We can also disable the whole Dual classing... but that's not the optimal solution, the better is to drink the pipe cleaner until you don't have the opinion. Or try to find ways to make the classes more balanced without takeing anything aways from the dual and multi classed characters that the single classed characters have, and let the balance comes from the mechanics that the game has already.

I don't understand the whole "pipe cleaner" thing, but whatever. As I said I won't remove the dual classing options simply because I don't want to be a dictator (M.Bison rules though). There are players who favour power-gaming over roleplaying, and it's pointless to ruin their fun unless doing so has a positive impact on roleplayers as well. A broken or overpowered item/spell/ability has to be fixed within Revisions mods because roleplayers need to be able to use it without feeling guilty, but completely removing dual classing probably isn't going to affect those players...they don't abuse the dual system in the first place.

 

Rebalancing the dual classing system is impossible. Example: taking a single fighter lvl allows a thief to achieve grandmastery in any weapon, all at the cost of 2000xp (let's not even discuss 2000xp can be obtained by just disabling a couple of traps )...how the hell can I balance that?

 

With a system like that any human character with a true class would be an idiot to not take few lvls in another class before it (e.g. all true fighters should have a bunch of thief lvls, all true mages should have a bunch of fighter or thief lvls, and so on). Things get even worse with kits.

 

Now, assumed the system is irremediably unbalanced, what I can do is:

- keeping it as balanced as possible, and prevent it from becoming broken (e.g. no more kensai-thief with UAI, no more kensai-mage with better base AC than true kensai, etc.)

- add features to lessen the "munchkin factor" (e.g. making enraged characters unable to use thief's skills and cast spells is both appropriate and rebalancing)

 

Multi classing is a fine system instead (ranger/cleric is an exception simply because it doesn't work as it should), especially if all classes continue to improve behind their mid lvls (as chabba990 was saying) and HLA tables are correctly differentiated.

 

 

XP

What comes to the XP amounts, you are totally wrong about it, in my opinion. It is given that the original game was balanced to have to XP table it had, you cannot do the last ten enemy encounters with a level 1 character, so it's best not to try to tweak those features with a mod such as Kit Revisions... the BG2 Tweaks pack have the feature you talk, so let it have that and use the things, and let other use what they like. Or use the 10% thing one of the DEFJAM XP v6 mod provides... it gives other options too, by the way.

Are you kidding? You need 8mln xp to kill the last bosses? I won an Ascension game (which is extremely harder than a vanilla game) with a very sub-optimal non-tweaked party (Archer, Imoen, Cernd, Jaheira, Valygar, Minsc) and less than 5mln xp per character (I dind't even had HLAs to fight Gromnir). Anyway...

 

Reducing the amount of XP you gain during the game doesn't belong to KR...but it may suit Quest Revisions! Removing the silly amount of XP from reading scrolls and disarming traps is handled by Tweak Pack, and I think it's fine leaving it there.

 

Handling XP tables instead do belongs to KR in case it's needed to rebalance the class system. For example rogues currently get almost twice as much HLAs as fighters, and that may be unbalancing if not taken into account. I'm currently excluding changes to it though just for the sake of preserving the base system as much as I can.