Six's random blatherings.

[SixOfSpades]

I haven't gone over each of the individual items yet, so this is just general, overarching changes I'd like to see. When I've had time to go through the changes made in IRV2 and pore through the suggestions made elsewhere in the forum, then I'll get down to micromanaging you. Won't that be nice?

 

Speed Factor changes by enchantment level

Enchanted weapons are semi-intelligent in that they, of their own accord, adjust their swing in order to be a little more accurate and bite a little deeper. I'm fine with this. But I've never agreed with vanilla's decision that the Speed Factor of a weapon decreases as its enchantment level goes up: Really, the bonuses to THAC0 and Damage are enough. Most importantly, it makes the faster weapons like Daggers and Short Swords obsolete: What's the point of using a Dagger+3 when a Katana+3 hits just as quickly for twice the damage? I for one would like the Speed Factor of all weapons to remain unchanged from their unenchanted versions (except in special cases, like the Answerer), to bring the lighter weapons back into the game.

 

 

Wizard Slayer item restrictions

I know I've mentioned this several times in the past, and I'm effecting this change in the next version of my Kitpack, but that will change only the vanilla items--the usability flags that I place or remove might not be appropriate for the changes that IR makes to the items, so I'd like to request that whenever IR changes an item, it also sets the flag for whether or not a Wizard Slayer would be willing to tolerate the enchantments on that particular item.

 

Enchantments that contribute to an item's Acceptance:

Base enchantment level of melee weapons or ammunition, Magic Resistance, Elemental resistances, Saving Throw bonuses, Immunities to spells & effects commonly used by spellcasters, Weapons that add elemental damage, Attacks that do extended damage over time, Bonuses to Speed Factor, anything designed to prevent spellcasters from casting, anything likely to make a spellcaster more vulnerable to physical attacks.

 

Enchantments that contribute to an item's Rejection:

Base enchantment level of launcher-type weapons, Bonuses to Armor Class, Physical Resistances, Bonuses to THAC0 or Damage, Changes to STR / DEX / CON / INT / WIS / CHA, the casting of any spell that would not be especially useful against spellcasters, any item designed to combat any specific type of enemy other than spellcasters, any spell or effect that would not directly benefit a trueclassed Wizard Slayer.

 

If an item has a fairly even mix of "positive" and "negative" enchantments (e.g., Rings of Protection), I usually allow their use, provided that the items are fairly simple and rather benign. Artifact-level items, however, such as the Ring of Gaxx and Helm of Balduran, are commonly ruled out, as they would be rejected simply due to the large number of powerful enchantments on them. Also, where two spells/effects are very similar, Wizard Slayers will tend to accept one but shun the other: Healing is good, Regeneration is bad. Potions of Explosions are magical, Oils of Fiery Burning are not. Etc.

 

 

Glowing items

Murdok, Assassin of the Shroud- "I have concealed myself well. None shall sense my presence now."

Joe Orc- "Hello. You are holding a FLAMING SWORD."

 

Can we have all items that glow impose a penalty to Move Silently (since the game barely even checks Hide in Shadows), please? Those that are especially bright (like Flame Tongue) might grey out the Stealth button entirely. Conversely, all Thiefy items that glow (even the Short Sword of Backstabbing throbs red, a little) should have that glow removed.

 

 

Item locations

I think it can be accepted as a given that almost all BG1 items that also appear in BG2 must have traveled to Amn with the party: They left Baldur's Gate, were ambushed by Irenicus and the Shadow Thieves, and were abducted to Jon's Dungeon, where Jon (and Bodhi & the Duergar) divided up the party's equipment with the Thieves, as payment for their services. So, ideally, all (unique) BG1 items should be placed a plausible distance away from Waukeen's Promenade: Aran Linvail gives you your Ring of Protection+2 back, that's good, the Ring of Fire Resistance is all the way over in the Windspear Hills, that's a long way but Firkraag could easily have bought it from Ribald and carried it there himself, the Cloak of Displacement has found its way to a merchant in Trademeet--that's a bit of a stretch given the time constraints, but still possible, and thankfully these cases are quite rare.

But the Gauntlets of Ogre Power? Their description states quite plainly that there is only ONE pair of these gauntlets (unless Takkok had four arms or something) in the entire world, and you had them in your possession less than a year ago--so how could they have gotten sealed inside a Sphere that hasn't even been on this plane of existence for hundreds of years?

Solution: Swap the starting location of the GoOP with that of the Hammer of Thunderbolts. The Duergar sold the GoOP to Ribald, who sold it to adventurer who went sewer-crawling with his friends, and promptly got captured by the Temple Sewers Illithids.

The Cloak of Protection+2 is a similar poser (how'd it get locked into a chest in such an inaccessible region of the seafloor so damn quick) but its description does not state that it is unique, so it's almost certainly not the same Cloak that you had when you left BG1 . . . that CoP+2 is probably still floating around somewhere.

Varscona is a different issue entirely. It's carried by Ribald, a couple other characters in vanilla have it, and Weimer gave it to his Improved Twisted Rune as well. Can we limit its instances to just 1 (or even 0), and give everybody else plain Longswords+2?

Mace of Disruption / Firkraag's Anti-Red Dragon Trove: "Hey, these items would be very dangerous when used against us. We should totally just leave them lying around the place for adventurers to pick up." Can we move the more egregious examples of this to other locations in the game? (Naughty idea: The pool of blood in Bodhi's Lair now contains the Vampire's Revenge from BG1, which has become a Mace instead of a Sword . . . you can see where this is going. )

 

 

Stat bonuses

Vanilla's convention of "set stat to X" was lame, and hyper-prone to abuse ("Why SURE I'll use STR and CHA as my dump stats!"). Your conversion to make the stat bonuses incremental (+2 to STR) is much better, but what I think would be even more fun would be to dive into the percentile settings:

Crom Faeyr--Instead of setting STR to 25, now moves STR 50% closer to 25. (Str = Str * .5, then Str = Str + 13.) The Gauntlets of Dexterity now move DEX 50% closer to 18. (Dex = Dex * .5, then Dex = Dex + 9.) I think it's more realistic, it's more interesting in that the items pull you toward a middle ground instead of being a flat bonus, and there no more risk of dying if any of your stats goes over 25.

 

 

Class-appropriate Carsomyr

I'm definitely going to be implementing this (as an optional component) in my Kitpack, so whether you do the same in IR or not is your call. The problem with Carsomyr is that its description says "Paladin," but its enchantments say "Wizard Slayer." So I'm splitting it into 2 weapons:

Carsomyr -

Properties: +4 enchantment, deals 2D6+4 Slashing, plus an additional 4 Magic damage to Evil victims. 4% chance of casting Holy Smite (as per a Level 8 caster) on each hit. Casts Cure Moderate Wounds and Protection from Evil 10' Radius each 4x/day.

Only Usable By: Lawful Good or Neutral Good Paladins

Location: Dropped by Firkraag

 

Kresmahdin -

Properties: +4 enchantment, deals 2D6+4 Slashing. On hit: 40% chance of forcing victim to Save vs. Breath with +4 penalty or be Dispelled & suffer 16% Spell Failure for the next 4 rounds. Casts Dispel Magic (as per a Level 16 caster) 4x/day. Grants +20% Magic Resistance while equipped.

Only Usable By: Non-Chaotic Wizard Slayers, Inquisitors, or Hunters of the Occult

Location: Dropped by Harvidion, a Cowled Enforcer (Wizard Slayer) with Tolgerias in the Planar Sphere--Tolgerias & co. appear in the same room as before, but not until the Sphere has returned to the Prime Material

[Salk]

As usual, interesting stuff from Six. I comment on those that interest me as player.

 

Speed Factor changes by enchantment level

 

Definitely yes. I argue that not only he is right about keeping a better balance among weapon by favouring the small ones when it comes to raw speed but I add that the only other way to change the speed factor should be through weapon proficiency (I did it for myself already, malus to speed when non proficient with a specific weapon type).

 

Glowing items

 

He is right again. Removing the glow from weapons is not funny so I'd rather introduce a penalty. But not so heavy to discourage from using those weapons.

 

Item locations

 

I practically like all his suggestions. Even the wicked ones. They would be fully compatible with BGT, yes?

 

Stat bonuses

 

Yes to this as well. It's a more elegant solution, in my opinion.

[aVENGER_(RR)]

Can we have all items that glow impose a penalty to Move Silently (since the game barely even checks Hide in Shadows), please? Those that are especially bright (like Flame Tongue) might grey out the Stealth button entirely.

 

IIRC, in PnP you can actually switch Flaming Swords on/off with a command word.

 

Varscona is a different issue entirely. It's carried by Ribald, a couple other characters in vanilla have it, and Weimer gave it to his Improved Twisted Rune as well. Can we limit its instances to just 1 (or even 0), and give everybody else plain Longswords+2?

 

The G3 BG2 Fixpack already handles that:

 

Varscona, a unique +2 long sword, is available from many sources throughout the game, most notably amongst several of the Suldanessellar elves. Varscona now only exists on Ribald in the Adventurer's Mart and all other instances have been replaced with generic +2 long swords.

 

However, IR could take this a bit further and move Varscona from Ribald's inventory to his store. It might also be a good idea to restore the unique inventory icon which the sword had in BG1.

[Demivrgvs]

I haven't gone over each of the individual items yet, so this is just general, overarching changes I'd like to see. When I've had time to go through the changes made in IRV2 and pore through the suggestions made elsewhere in the forum, then I'll get down to micromanaging you. Won't that be nice?

Go ahead!

 

Speed Factor changes by enchantment level

I've never agreed with vanilla's decision that the Speed Factor of a weapon decreases as its enchantment level goes up: Really, the bonuses to THAC0 and Damage are enough. Most importantly, it makes the faster weapons like Daggers and Short Swords obsolete: What's the point of using a Dagger+3 when a Katana+3 hits just as quickly for twice the damage? I for one would like the Speed Factor of all weapons to remain unchanged from their unenchanted versions (except in special cases, like the Answerer), to bring the lighter weapons back into the game.

I thought about it too, but I wasn't sure for two reasons:

1) it's a quite noticeable change, and I don't know if it has a wide consensus

2) it slightly changes my internal enhancement table (e.g. a +1 enhancement for me is '+1 to hit +2 to damage' or '+1d4 elemental damage')

 

1) this is actually THE reason. Other than that I do agree with you about this matter.

 

P.S Speaking of speed factor I also have a small thing in mind that players surely wouldn't like...a small penalty while wearing heavy armor.

 

 

Wizard Slayer item restrictions

I'd like to request that whenever IR changes an item, it also sets the flag for whether or not a Wizard Slayer would be willing to tolerate the enchantments on that particular item.

That would actually mean tweaking the WS kit within IR, am I wrong? I'm not sure I can do it.

 

 

Glowing items

Murdok, Assassin of the Shroud- "I have concealed myself well. None shall sense my presence now."

Joe Orc- "Hello. You are holding a FLAMING SWORD."

 

Can we have all items that glow impose a penalty to Move Silently (since the game barely even checks Hide in Shadows), please? Those that are especially bright (like Flame Tongue) might grey out the Stealth button entirely. Conversely, all Thiefy items that glow (even the Short Sword of Backstabbing throbs red, a little) should have that glow removed.

Mike implemented a small part of this in V2 adding a penalty to hide to flaming swords.

 

I'm conflicted about because, as aVENGER points out, most of these glowing effects can probably be turned off in PnP, and because being too strict about this would probably annoy most players instead of being a fun improvement. I'd vote to implement this only to some specific items (e.g. Daystar) instead of all weapons with glowing effects.

 

 

Item locations

I started a dedicated topic about item allocations, and yes, I'm open to suggestions on this.

 

Solution: Swap the starting location of the GoOP with that of the Hammer of Thunderbolts. The Duergar sold the GoOP to Ribald, who sold it to adventurer who went sewer-crawling with his friends, and promptly got captured by the Temple Sewers Illithids.

I'm amenable to moving GoOP, but not to switch it with the Hammer of Thunderbolts. The HoT is a +3 enchanted weapon with additional features within IR, and getting it in the Planar Sphere is too early imo.

 

 

Varscona is a different issue entirely. It's carried by Ribald, a couple other characters in vanilla have it, and Weimer gave it to his Improved Twisted Rune as well. Can we limit its instances to just 1 (or even 0), and give everybody else plain Longswords+2?

The G3 BG2 Fixpack already handles that:

Varscona, a unique +2 long sword, is available from many sources throughout the game, most notably amongst several of the Suldanessellar elves. Varscona now only exists on Ribald in the Adventurer's Mart and all other instances have been replaced with generic +2 long swords.

However, IR could take this a bit further and move Varscona from Ribald's inventory to his store. It might also be a good idea to restore the unique inventory icon which the sword had in BG1.

For some reason I thought it was sold by Ribald, not equipped! I can move it to the store yes, especially since there shouldn't be another unique long sword in his store. Regarding the unique bam, I already restored it since V1 or V2.

 

 

Mace of Disruption / Firkraag's Anti-Red Dragon Trove: "Hey, these items would be very dangerous when used against us. We should totally just leave them lying around the place for adventurers to pick up." Can we move the more egregious examples of this to other locations in the game? (Naughty idea: The pool of blood in Bodhi's Lair now contains the Vampire's Revenge from BG1, which has become a Mace instead of a Sword . . . you can see where this is going. )

Actually I thought this was fine. If I was a red dragon and I slaughter a dragonslayer I wouldn't sell his equipment (which would get back in the hands of dragonslayers), I would keep in a safe place in my cave. One may argue that having such items there seems convenient, which is partially true, but at least to reach the MoD you have to destroy half an entire base of vampires, while having it available elsewhere would mean that an adventurer could have entered the vampire's headquarter already equipping it. If I was Bodhi I would have probably concealed the weapon better, but it's actually a BG limitation, as she did tried to hide it: the room where MoD is kept is a secret room (it's just that secret corridors within BG are not so secret), and in PnP you probably wouldn't put your hand in that blood pool (the DM wouldn't tell you "hey, click there, it will surely happen something!"). Am I wrong?

 

 

Stat bonuses

Vanilla's convention of "set stat to X" was lame, and hyper-prone to abuse ("Why SURE I'll use STR and CHA as my dump stats!"). Your conversion to make the stat bonuses incremental (+2 to STR) is much better, but what I think would be even more fun would be to dive into the percentile settings...

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "50% closer to 18" and "50% closer to 25". The only way to implement this is having the item set the characteristic on a % of the base value. For example a 120% bonus (or +20% if you prefer to name it so) would have a character with str 18 goes up to 21, and a character with 14 to 16.

 

This solution would have the following effects:

1) characters with a higher base value would get better benifits from these items. It seems quite appropriate, and actually it was more or less what I was trying to achieve with the current SR system which works a la 3rd edition.

2) each item taken on its own would probably end up being slightly more powerful in the right hands (e.g. switching a +2 flat bonus with a 20% bonus means anyone with a base 15+ value gets a +3)

3) multiple % bonuses wouldn't stack, which imo would balance 2). If I'm not wrong, this was the main complain of players who didn't liked SR system, because they felt it was making too easy to reach high values with stacking bonuses from different items.

 

Conclusion, I can probably vote for it yes.

 

 

Class-appropriate Carsomyr

I'm definitely going to be implementing this (as an optional component) in my Kitpack, so whether you do the same in IR or not is your call. The problem with Carsomyr is that its description says "Paladin," but its enchantments say "Wizard Slayer." So I'm splitting it into 2 weapons...

Well, the Holy Avenger is a well know paladin weapon within PnP, but I have nothing against creating a weapon appropriate for a WS. Regarding the dispel on hit effect, I dind't removed it from Carsomyr because I fear many players would complain about completely removing it, and nerfing it seemed a good solution.

[Ardanis]

Speed Factor

Yes.

P.S Speaking of speed factor I also have a small thing in mind that players surely wouldn't like...a small penalty while wearing heavy armor.

Ugh, no.

[yarpen]

Speed Factory

Plus for it. After this change warrior who's using staff or dagger isn't an idiot - he just have another fighting style. Also I was always thinking shouldn't weapons like Katana or Scimitar have speed factory around 8 or 10? They aren't easy to handle and.. first one is used to deal very precise hits.

[Salk]

I am very happy to see that everyone likes some of the proposed changes!

 

Great!

 

P.S. And, as Ardanis said, "Ugh, no!" to your little "surprise penalty" to speed factor while wearing armor, dear Demi!

[SixOfSpades]

Thanks for the feedback, everyone! Good to see that my stuff is remotely interesting, at least.

 

Speed Factor changes by enchantment level

Well, there seems to be something of a consensus (so far) that the faster weapons deserve to remain faster. As for heavy armors imposing a SF penalty, I actually wouldn't mind that too much . . . although I can't actually support the idea unless one would also get a SF bonus from having a high STR. (I'm actually more worried by the idea of heavy armors carrying Movement Rate penalties, and the nerfed Boots of Speed. I kinda need to have my Tank out in front, ya know.)

 

 

Wizard Slayer item restrictions

That would actually mean tweaking the WS kit within IR, am I wrong? I'm not sure I can do it.

If by that you mean, "smacking the WS around until its item restrictions make some f#@&ing sense, and thus making the WS a semi-playable kit," then yes. Seriously, the only adjustment to the kit itself would be correcting its description, regarding "Cannot use magical rings, amulets, gauntlets," etc.

 

 

Glowing items

Mike implemented a small part of this in V2 adding a penalty to hide to flaming swords. I'm conflicted about because, as aVENGER points out, most of these glowing effects can probably be turned off in PnP, and because being too strict about this would probably annoy most players instead of being a fun improvement. I'd vote to implement this only to some specific items (e.g. Daystar) instead of all weapons with glowing effects.

Goody for Mike, then. You were proposing that either Flame Tongue or the Sword of Flame (don't remember which) would deal pure Fire damage, no Slashing? If so, turning the fire "off" would nullify the sword completely . . . and I'm not sure that a Backstab would even work with a weapon composed of pure fire. Either way, yeah, I'm fine with restricting the component to only the most obvious items like the flaming swords and Daystar (and Carsomyr, 'cause that sucker is bright, and Thieves shouldn't care anyway), and/or those whose description states that they emit light (not that I think there are any).

 

 

Item locations

I started a dedicated topic about item allocations

Ah, yes. You might want to start a new thread for V3, though. Just glancing over the first post, though, I notice that you restore several items brought back by UB, Quest Pack, and/or Rogue Rebalancing. I understand your opinion that "not everybody installs [other mod name here]," but frankly it's better to have 0 copies of an item like Spider's Bane than to have multiples. Also, I don't like giving all of the Balduran items to Diedre: "Completing the set" is something that should be done only by an adventurer or a diehard collector / museum curator / crazed fan, not by some shopkeeper who's willing to sell the items individually. Besides, the Cloak of Balduran should be worn by Aran Linvail: When he and Irenicus were dividing up the party's loot, I imagine they took turns picking magical items out of the pile, and since the Duergar have the Helm, the Thieves must have the Cloak.

 

I'm amenable to moving GoOP, but not to switch it with the Hammer of Thunderbolts. The HoT is a +3 enchanted weapon with additional features within IR, and getting it in the Planar Sphere is too early imo.

Well, it is guarded by a pack of very nasty Golems, so I thought it balanced . . . but if you disagree, we could always put the Crom Faeyr scroll in that container, put the GoOP in the care of the Temple Sewers Illithids, and give the HoT to Thax. The total path to Crom Faeyr is still unchanged, its most powerful component is still deep in Chapter 5, the GoOP can still get to their "destination" quickly, and there's now a good (better) reason why the legend of Crom Faeyr lives on only in Dwarven lore.

 

The G3 BG2 Fixpack already handles [Varscona]

Goody. But yes, I would support moving it to Ribald's store: For one thing, the shiniest weapon in BG1 is rather unimpressive in BG2, so its value to the player would be largely sentimental, so the best place to hit the player with it is right at the beginning, when they see how much work they'll have to do to get their favorite toy back. I would also like to move Ribald's Ring of Regeneration into his store too, so my party has a non-metagaming way to get such an important item before Chapter 4.

 

Actually I thought this [the locations of the Mace of Disruption & Firkraag's "Stuff That Kills Me" Emporium] was fine. If I was a red dragon and I slaughter a dragonslayer I wouldn't sell his equipment (which would get back in the hands of dragonslayers), I would keep in a safe place in my cave.

Except that the only real "safe place in my cave" would be in his personal hoard, not in the hands of an Air Elemental, a Ruhk Transmuter, and a few "Guardians" that Firkraag could easily have defeated. The secret room in Bodhi's Lair isn't secret at all--I'm pretty sure that 1 of the 3 Vampires you have to kill to make her appear is located there, so opening at least 1 of those secret passages is absolutely required. At the very least, if the Vampires were to have the MoD at all, they would have placed it in one of the little rooms downstairs. Of course, all this depends on the idea that Firkraag and Bodhi have an ounce of sense in their pointy little heads--which they obviously do not, or else they would each fight you at the very start of their respective dungeons, instead of making sure that you slaughtered every last one of their followers first.

 

 

Stat bonuses

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "50% closer to 18" and "50% closer to 25". The only way to implement this is having the item set the characteristic on a % of the base value. For example a 120% bonus (or +20% if you prefer to name it so) would have a character with str 18 goes up to 21, and a character with 14 to 16.

Actually, what I suggested was setting the stat to the mean between its original value and the value that the item originally set it to. For example, the vanilla Stone Giant Girdle sets STR to 20, so my suggestion would do the following:

Starting STR of 8: (STR*.5, then STR+10) = Increases STR to 14

Starting STR of 16: (STR*.5, then STR+10) = Increases STR to 18

Starting STR of 22: (STR*.5, then STR+10) = Decreases STR to 21

So characters with higher starting values would actually recieve smaller benefits, so you may want to reassess your opinion of the idea. Either way, your idea of adding a 120% (exact value determined by the magnitude of the enchantment on each specific item) is interesting as well . . . I'm just worried that a character who's already strong might pick up Crom Faeyr, set his STR above 25, and thus kill himself. (I know that's what happens if any stat reaches 0, I don't know if it occurs at the other end of the spectrum. If it does, perhaps Taimon could block it? Best not to push him, though.) Besides, my solution for the Girdle of Stone Giant Strength . . . actually moves the wearer's STR closer to that of a Stone Giant.

 

 

Class-appropriate Carsomyr

I have nothing against creating a weapon appropriate for a WS. Regarding the dispel on hit effect, I dind't removed it from Carsomyr because I fear many players would complain about completely removing it, and nerfing it seemed a good solution.

Yes, I too decided to weaken it, and chose "40% of Save vs. Breath with +4 penalty" because Breath is a Wizard's worst Save, but there's still a decent chance that the effect wouldn't fire at all. But the main reason I removed the anti-magic enchantments from Carsomyr is because the Wizard Slayer doesn't need anyone, let alone the entire Paladin class, stomping all over his bailiwick. Of note is the fact that, unless the PC plays a Paladin, there's almost no change at all, as the only (BioWare) NPCs would could use vanilla Carsomyr are exactly the same ones who can use my Carsomyr and Kresmahdin. (Sorry, Valygar, you're Chaotic.)

 

Well, the Holy Avenger is a well know paladin weapon within PnP

Well and good--but if its enchantments would render the Wizard Slayer obsolete, then let it stay within PnP.

[SixOfSpades]

Another load of stuff! Whoopee!

 

New Weapon Types (and a couple of tweaks to existing ones)

Composite Short Bows: I saw some mention of these in the other threads, but the Item Index doesn't mention any of the Short Bows as being Composite. Anyway, IMO all Composite bows should be usable by Warriors only, and add their user's STR bonus damage. CLongbows should require 16 STR to use (the point at which you start having a STR bonus to damage), and CShortbows require 15 STR.

 

Heavy Crossbows: Should also add their user's STR bonus to damage. You probably already do this, in fact I may very well suggest many things that have already been done.

 

Poleaxe/Greataxe: Two-handed, uses the Axe proficiency and the Halberd paperdoll/animation. Outsize: Does more damage than a 2-Handed Sword or Halberd, but doesn't carry as much of a THAC0 bonus as its enchantment level would suggest. The item most in need of this weapon class is Frostreaver: The former favored weapon of a Frost Giant is not something that a Halfling can casually tote around in his offhand.

 

Greatclub: Same idea, using the Staff animation. I would expect considerably less demand for this type of weapon, though (except those wishing to play an Order of the Stick party), so it probably won't be worth the bother.

 

Odachi: Again, a two-handed sword that uses the Katana proficiency. You should probably skip it, I'm just including it here for completeness.

 

Katanas/Bastard Swords: Will IR be implementing their dual nature, in that each weapon's 1-handed version has the ability to destroy itself & create its 2-handed version? I strongly like the idea of the 2-handed incarnation having much lower STR requirements and a quicker Speed Factor.

 

Short Staff: A similar idea, a 4-foot-long staff that can be wielded with either one or both hands. Will require the Club animation for its 1-handed version. Finally Jaheira's weapon proficiencies in both Staff and Sword & Shield Style make sense!

 

Nunchaku: Uses the Flail proficiency & animation, will require editing Weapprof.2da to allow all Thieves and Monks to put the appropriate number of proficiency points in Flail. Can also be used either 1-handed or 2-handed: Single-handed grants +1 ApR, using both hands gives +2 ApR.

 

Mace: Part of the appeal of using a real-life Mace is that it can tear open holes in your enemy's Plate armor. Perhaps a penalty to victim's AC could be applied to all Maces, counterbalanced by a damage/speed factor penalty?

 

Rapier: A Long Sword that grants +1/2 ApR, a quicker Speed Factor, and a slightly longer range, but only does 1D6 Piercing and does not add the user's STR damage.

 

Thrown weapons: All Throwing Axes/Daggers should also be dual-version, so that the melee one can be Dual-Wielded, and the Thrown one cannot be used by Cavaliers/Kensai. I'm pretty sure you already do this, but I must reiterate that it makes no sense whatsoever for a Throwing Dagger to do double the amount of damage of a regular Dagger. If that's the way it is in the source material, then the source material is wrong.

 

Throwing Spears/Javelin: Why the hell not? If they're non-Returning, they should wind up in their victim's Inventory, and are thus reusable (spears that missed their target probably hit a rock or something, and shattered). They should NOT automatically grant +1 ApR, no matter what Weimer says.

 

War Pick: These were actually quite popular. 1-handed, Warhammer proficiency and animation, does Piercing damage and penetrates (Plate & Chain) armor like nobody's business. Not usable by vanilla Cleric.

 

 

Size Matters

I understand that, in D&D, magical armor shrinks & expands to fit the wearer. Even so, the very idea of Mazzy wearing the suit of Full Plate just dropped by a Fire Giant is just ridiculous--she'd be more likely to set up camp in it than anything else. While it would probably be too much of a pain in the ass to set up 2 or 3 sizes of each of the various types of armor, I do think we can do something for weapons & shields:

2-Handed Swords: Usable by Large (Half-Orc, Human, Half-Elf, Elf) and Medium (Dwarf).

Bastard Swords/Katana/Short Staff: 1-handed version usable by Large and Medium. 2-handed version usable by all.

Long Staff/Halberd: Not usable by Small (Halfling, Gnome).

Longbow: Not usable by Small.

Composite Longbow: Not usable by Small or Medium.

Large (Tower) Shield: Not usable by Small or Medium.

Medium Shield: Not usable by Small.

As far as the Shields are concerned, we may give the Small & Medium races an AC bonus to balance things out--but this bonus should be only against Missile and Piercing: Yes, they are a smaller target, but if you've got a Blunt or Slashing weapon, you're going to be swinging down on them, which gives you an advantage.

[mercurier]

New Weapon Types

Composite Short Bows: I saw some mention of these in the other threads, but the Item Index doesn't mention any of the Short Bows as being Composite. Anyway, IMO all Composite bows should be usable by Warriors only, and add their user's STR bonus damage. CLongbows should require 16 STR to use (the point at which you start having a STR bonus to damage), and CShortbows require 15 STR.

 

Heavy Crossbows: Should also add their user's STR bonus to damage. You probably already do this, in fact I may very well suggest many things that have already been done.

Imo composite bows and heavy xbows should not apply user's STR bonus to damage, but have fixed +x to dmg according to their STR requirement: their capacity are set upon manufacturing.

 

Odachi: Again, a two-handed sword that uses the Katana proficiency. You should probably skip it, I'm just including it here for completeness.

I suppose you mean nodachi (odachi is a similar blade, but used most in ceremonies, not in battlefield). I disagree nodachi shares the same proficiency type with katana, just greatsword and long sword. Although katana can be 2-h wielded, the way to swing a katana and nodachi are quite different due to the significant size and weight of the latter one. Besides, in 3E they have different proficiency types.

 

Thrown weapons: All Throwing Axes/Daggers should also be dual-version, so that the melee one can be Dual-Wielded, and the Thrown one cannot be used by Cavaliers/Kensai. I'm pretty sure you already do this, but I must reiterate that it makes no sense whatsoever for a Throwing Dagger to do double the amount of damage of a regular Dagger. If that's the way it is in the source material, then the source material is wrong.

Very nice idea!

 

Longbow: Not usable by Small.

Composite Longbow: Not usable by Small or Medium.

Why medium (drawf) can use longbow but not composite longbow?

 

PS: When speaking new item types like rapier and nunchaku, are you going to create brand new items for them or change vanilla items to these new types?

[Mike1072]

Another load of stuff! Whoopee!

Wowie, lots here. I'll just comment on a few things:

 

Composite Short Bows

 

Rogue Rebalancing has a nice monopoly on this item type currently, with 4 generic ones (unenchanted and +1 through +3) and one magical one. If we were to introduce a new weapon type, it would probably best be done similar to this (but I don't think we should duplicate this component since Composite Short Bows already roam free in Faerûn).

 

As adding a completely new unique magical item is something we only do once every so often, I think we'd only go with a new type if 1) one or more existing magical items would fit well into the new category / there was a really good idea for a weapon complete with abilities and backstory and 2) the weapon type would be a popular addition, not just something we do because we can (cough Halberds Can Slash, Too cough cough). I think I can safely say that it's unlikely that we'd be able to add 5 new weapon types in the next version, we'd probably want to do 1 well or none at all.

 

The mentions you heard of Composite Short Bows here were probably about a compatibility update between IR and RR that was completed but I think got pushed into the "waiting for v3" pile.

 

Size Matters

A couple interesting of ideas here. Can't say yet whether I'd support the idea as a whole or not.

[Salk]

Item locations

Just glancing over the first post, though, I notice that you restore several items brought back by UB, Quest Pack, and/or Rogue Rebalancing. I understand your opinion that "not everybody installs [other mod name here]," but frankly it's better to have 0 copies of an item like Spider's Bane than to have multiples.

 

I agree here.

 

 

Stat bonuses

Actually, what I suggested was setting the stat to the mean between its original value and the value that the item originally set it to. For example, the vanilla Stone Giant Girdle sets STR to 20, so my suggestion would do the following:

Starting STR of 8: (STR*.5, then STR+10) = Increases STR to 14

Starting STR of 16: (STR*.5, then STR+10) = Increases STR to 18

Starting STR of 22: (STR*.5, then STR+10) = Decreases STR to 21

So characters with higher starting values would actually recieve smaller benefits, so you may want to reassess your opinion of the idea. Either way, your idea of adding a 120% (exact value determined by the magnitude of the enchantment on each specific item) is interesting as well . . . I'm just worried that a character who's already strong might pick up Crom Faeyr, set his STR above 25, and thus kill himself. (I know that's what happens if any stat reaches 0, I don't know if it occurs at the other end of the spectrum. If it does, perhaps Taimon could block it? Best not to push him, though.) Besides, my solution for the Girdle of Stone Giant Strength . . . actually moves the wearer's STR closer to that of a Stone Giant.

 

I don't agree here instead. I interpreted Six's former words exactly as Demi did. It doesn't make sense to me that a Strenght enhancing weapon can in any case end up decreasing it. Also, it seems a rather convoluted setting overall.

 

Conclusion, I am all for Demi's % modifier to Strenght and I hope he will go for it.

[Salk]

New Weapon Types

Size Matters

 

This in general sounds much less interesting to me.

 

For one thing, I like the fact that IR doesn't mess with introducing new items, including weapons.

 

Also the proposed changes of weapon use based on size would not be much consistent with the fact that armors would still be used by anyone no matter the size.

[SixOfSpades]

Imo composite bows and heavy xbows should not apply user's STR bonus to damage, but have fixed +x to dmg according to their STR requirement: their capacity are set upon manufacturing.

Yes. I remember reading that in PnP, each new Composite bow is based on the person who commisioned it: It's made to add an amount of damage equivalent to his STR damage, and requires the wielder to be at least as strong as the original user. So, in essence, they already do add the wielder's STR damage, with the only difference being that if your STR is greater than that needed to draw the bow, that extra damage is "wasted". It's only a minor change, but it helps make the Composite bows more distinct from their base versions, so I thought it interesting.

 

Why medium (drawf) can use longbow but not composite longbow?

Mostly to draw another (albeit small) line of distinction between the LBow and CLBow. Besides, Dwarves using Longbows at all is a bit of a stretch, so using a (slightly) larger and stiffer bow should be just beyond the realm of plausibility. Or some such.

 

New Weapon Types

When speaking new item types like rapier and nunchaku, are you going to create brand new items for them or change vanilla items to these new types?

I have some ideas for all-new items, but of course those don't belong in IR. As I said before, Frostreaver needs to be a Greataxe (failing that, a Halberd, but a Greataxe would be more fun, more interesting, and just as easy to do), and the Blade of Roses would make a wonderful Rapier . . . maybe Ras, too. The Bow of Arvoreen might make a nice Composite Shortbow (and also help keep it Mazzy-specific, by locking out Halfling Thief PCs). None of the unique Flails in the game seem conducive to being made into Nunchaku, true . . . but (this is for you, Mike) just try telling me that Nunchaku won't be a popular weapon option. We can always just make a couple plain ones, from +0 to +3, and give them to a few scattered Shadow Thieves that already have a Kara-Turan flavor, like Sansuki.

Ummm . . . the Rift Hammer's armor-piercing strike sounds like it might make a good War Pick, but "Rift Pick" doesn't exactly have a good ring to it. I see that Halcyon is already a Throwing Spear, and it makes sense for Ixil's Spike to be one as well: When using a spear in melee, you aren't stabbing downward with it, so the idea of pinning your target to the ground doesn't really work that well. But when you throw the spear, it goes UP and then comes DOWN--possibly going all the way through the victim and into the ground. Of course, this raises the question of whether or not Ixil's will only have the Pin effect when thrown, not used in melee.

The Staff of Curing and Cleric's Staff might make good Short Staves, considered that it's implied they're for classes that usually wear Shields, and it might be argued that the Staff Mace is already a Shortstaff. That leaves only the Greatclub and the (N)odachi, and as I said I'm not married to either one of those.

 

 

Stat bonuses

New Weapon Types

Size Matters

This in general sounds much less interesting to me.

That's fine, I'm ok with that. Frankly, I expected to be getting a lot more negative feedback about the Size Matters than I have (so far), because I'm suggesting locking the shorter races away from a lot of good equipment, but I'm not penalizing the tallfolk at all. But hey, I'm just trying to be realistic; when you're three feet tall, you're simply not going to have much luck--or leverage--swinging a sword that weighs more than you do, or trying to draw a Composite Longbow when you have to stand on a box put your shoulder level with the handle, and your arms aren't long enough to get the full draw.

 

As for the two different interpretations of percentile stat changes, we can always try one method, see if we like it, and maybe try the other. True, my method can sometimes result in characters with exceptional stats having those stats lowered by an otherwise beneficial item, but I think you'll find that not only is there precedent for that (vanilla items & potions set user's stats to X, even if it was already higher, the spell Magic Resistance can lower your MR, etc.), but it's also pretty much unavoidable: I have a sneaking suspicion that no matter what math Demi implements for his method, if it follows a pattern then part of that pattern will be detrimental to the subject.

 

Also the proposed changes of weapon use based on size would not be much consistent with the fact that armors would still be used by anyone no matter the size.

True. But, as I said, in an ideal world I'd do this for armor, too . . . for now, I'm grudgingly content with the idea that most armor automatically resizes itself to fit the wearer, meaning Mazzy can easily strap on a breastplate that in "real life" she'd be tempted to use as a Quonset hut.

[Demivrgvs]

New Weapon Types

As adding a completely new unique magical item is something we only do once every so often, I think we'd only go with a new type if 1) one or more existing magical items would fit well into the new category / there was a really good idea for a weapon complete with abilities and backstory and 2) the weapon type would be a popular addition, not just something we do because we can. I think I can safely say that it's unlikely that we'd be able to add 5 new weapon types in the next version, we'd probably want to do 1 well or none at all.

I think Mike said pretty much what I would have said.

 

 

Size Matters

A couple interesting of ideas here. Can't say yet whether I'd support the idea as a whole or not.

I second this too. If it's not a pain to code I may support the shield revision, but it actually has some drawbacks too imo, because the item description may become a pain to watch when you have a small shield which actually works as a medium shield when wielded by a halfling or when a medium shield has to be described as a large shield for gnomes/halflings.

 

Restricting short races from using halberds and two handed swords makes sense imo, though it may not add much to the game becasue I suppose most of you already don't do this even if you're allowed to.

 

 

Stat bonuses

Actually, what I suggested was setting the stat to the mean between its original value and the value that the item originally set it to. For example, the vanilla Stone Giant Girdle sets STR to 20, so my suggestion would do the following:

Starting STR of 8: (STR*.5, then STR+10) = Increases STR to 14

Starting STR of 16: (STR*.5, then STR+10) = Increases STR to 18

Starting STR of 22: (STR*.5, then STR+10) = Decreases STR to 21

So characters with higher starting values would actually recieve smaller benefits, so you may want to reassess your opinion of the idea. Either way, your idea of adding a 120% (exact value determined by the magnitude of the enchantment on each specific item) is interesting as well . . . I'm just worried that a character who's already strong might pick up Crom Faeyr, set his STR above 25, and thus kill himself. (I know that's what happens if any stat reaches 0, I don't know if it occurs at the other end of the spectrum. If it does, perhaps Taimon could block it? Best not to push him, though.) Besides, my solution for the Girdle of Stone Giant Strength . . . actually moves the wearer's STR closer to that of a Stone Giant.

As Salk says this solution seems convoluted and pretty hard both to understand and to describe for players. Some players already found difficult to understand the % values used for armor encumberance penalties (e.g. they don't know the end result until they equip the armor), and your solution is way worse in terms of user-friendliness.

 

Even a flat % value has some small things I have to take into account. For example it becomes more effective in case of additional bonuses, as I suppose it takes into account bonuses from barbarian rage (+4 to str and con) and buffs (e.g. Draw Upon Divine Might). Anyway, for what I've said in my previous post I think the % modifier would probably be better overall compared to the current system.