Item Revisions Mod

[Salk]

I have always looked with admiration to Echon's Field of the Dead and I had hoped for a long time to see a TuTu version of it but there was never a plan for a conversion.

 

Even this idea of restrictions for shields by the wearer's size is very welcome.

 

Actually Echon went even ahead of this by making different sizes of armour available.

 

Field of the Dead is really an all-around Mod full of geniality.

[Bursk]

Do you think my suggested changes from Echon's original make sense, Salk?

[Miloch]

Even this idea of restrictions for shields by the wearer's size is very welcome.

Might want to ask Echon before stealing his idea though (Or was it my idea? Not that I'd care, but it's his mod anyway.)

 

I'm a bit ambivalent about this because, once again, it falls under "why put feature X in mod B if it's already in mod A." But as this is a BG2 mod and FotD is BG1/Tutu, and Bursk's suggestion is at least somewhat different than the original (and perhaps closer to my original suggestion) that might be ok.

[Salk]

Bursk,

 

yes, I do think your suggested changes make much sense. Let's see what Demivrgvs will say about it.

 

Miloch,

 

I thougt FotD was BG only mod?

[Miloch]

I thougt FotD was BG only mod?

It was, but Echon's updating it (and I thought I was the one who didn't get over to PPG that often... ).

[2.72]

I know that I'm late, but I'll throw in a few comments.

 

About the Flail of Ages: I'm concerned that a 20% chance to stun, no save, could result in a stun lock (i.e. you could keep a target stunned indefinitely, barring extremely bad luck). If you can't have multiple stun effects stack or renew eachother's duration, this is more minor but still an issue. You could still keep a target with a bad speed factor locked down with some luck, and even a target with a good speed factor could spend much of their time stunned. If the slow increases the speed factor, than this is even more potent.

 

I'd like to see a save on the stun at a small penalty (maybe -2), and a save on the slow at a much larger penalty (-6 sounds about right).

 

Using PfMW or similar effects to simulate parrying: Will this mess the AI up? Normally when SCSII creatures get a "Weapon Ineffective" error they switch targets, which is almost certainly not a good idea here.

 

On Scrolls: I didn't see a section on scrolls. I would very much like Protection from Magic and Protection from Undead nerfed. Pretty please?

 

On Lowered Magic Bonuses: As it is in Vanilla BG, you can normally get a weapon of each class with a good enchantment bonus pretty fast; fast enough to make "Weapon Ineffective" messages less frequent. I understand why you nerfed the magic bonuses in early weapons, but weapon immunities are currently balanced fairly delicately, and I'm concerned that this mod could upset that balance and make some creatures very hard to effect.

[Miloch]

Using PfMW or similar effects to simulate parrying: Will this mess the AI up? Normally when SCSII creatures get a "Weapon Ineffective" error they switch targets, which is almost certainly not a good idea here.

I dunno. If I was up against a master swordsman who kept parrying every other attack of mine, and there was easier prey whacking me from the flanks, I'd probably switch targets too.

[Salk]

Using PfMW or similar effects to simulate parrying: Will this mess the AI up? Normally when SCSII creatures get a "Weapon Ineffective" error they switch targets, which is almost certainly not a good idea here.

I dunno. If I was up against a master swordsman who kept parrying every other attack of mine, and there was easier prey whacking me from the flanks, I'd probably switch targets too.

 

Same here.

 

P.S. I am actually not even so fond of the other suggested changes.

[Demivrgvs]

Sorry guys for taking so long to answer, I was quite busy and I overlooked this thread for some time. Sorry.

 

Bursk,

 

yes, I do think your suggested changes make much sense. Let's see what Demivrgvs will say about it.

I do agree with you, and as I've probably stated somewhere else too, I would extend size-based restrictions to many more items (e.g. polearms, long bows, two-handed swords, and so on shouldn't be usable by short-races). Anyway it's not something so easy to implement and requires some serious plannig. I swear I'll see what I can do for further releases of IR, but I think you agree with me it's not a priority.

 

About the Flail of Ages: I'm concerned that a 20% chance to stun, no save, could result in a stun lock (i.e. you could keep a target stunned indefinitely, barring extremely bad luck). ... I'd like to see a save on the stun at a small penalty (maybe -2), and a save on the slow at a much larger penalty (-6 sounds about right).

You may be right, a save against its effects could be a good idea (though they should be quite good to avoid making the weapon too nerfed). We can make the saves "scalable" with the weapon's upgrades (e.g. -2 penalty for FoA +3, -4 for FoA +4, and -6 for FoA +5), taking into account FoA +3 is available quite soon, the +4 upgrade at the end of SoA (with a Tweak Pack's component) or as soon as you start ToB, while the final upgrade (the one which adds the stun effect) is pratically available at the very end of the game.

 

Using PfMW or similar effects to simulate parrying: Will this mess the AI up? Normally when SCSII creatures get a "Weapon Ineffective" error they switch targets, which is almost certainly not a good idea here.

I dunno. If I was up against a master swordsman who kept parrying every other attack of mine, and there was easier prey whacking me from the flanks, I'd probably switch targets too.

Same here.

 

P.S. I am actually not even so fond of the other suggested changes.

As soon as I work on it, I'll think more about it, and test it. Salk, are you referring to the suggested changes for Yamato here?

 

On Scrolls: I didn't see a section on scrolls. I would very much like Protection from Magic and Protection from Undead nerfed. Pretty please?

Sorry, I forgot to add them to the index, I've worked on them (e.g. Protection from Undead now grants immunity to Level Drain and +2 to AC/saves against undead creatures, instead of vanilla's "un-targetable state" which is way cheesy/overpowered).

 

On Lowered Magic Bonuses: As it is in Vanilla BG, you can normally get a weapon of each class with a good enchantment bonus pretty fast; fast enough to make "Weapon Ineffective" messages less frequent. I understand why you nerfed the magic bonuses in early weapons, but weapon immunities are currently balanced fairly delicately, and I'm concerned that this mod could upset that balance and make some creatures very hard to effect.

I'll look into it, anyway the only real issues are creatures immune to +3/+4 weapons. The first +3 immune creatures you should encounter are Greater Mummies, Iron Golems and the Underdark's Balor, but by the time you have to fight them you should have the adeguate equipment (e.g. Flame Tongue, Mace of Disruption, Lilarcor, Berserking Sword, FoA, Dwarven Thrower, ... and all Drow's weapons are pretty powerful now). Not to mention some underused spells (e.g. Spiritual Hammer, Enchanted Weapon, Phantom Blade, ...) are quite effective too (especially with SR ).

[Salk]

Demivrgvs,

 

I agree with you that those race-based restrictions for weapon size are not a priority. Still something that everntually IR will take care of, I am sure. Perhaps for version 2 or later, it's up to you. What I know is that they do make much sense to me.

 

And no, I didn't refer to the changes to the Yamato (which are very good), I was speaking of the changes suggested by 2.72 on the topic above. The most reasonable is the nerfing of the Scrolls (but then, also some potions that are a bit overpowered - that's why I don't like their massive and constant use of those in SCS).

[Guest Guest]

For the new dual wielding stuff, could we see a list of what weapon falls into which weight category? I was thinking about having Yeslick dual wield a war hammer and mace, and would like to know how this'll affect his THAC0.

[Demivrgvs]

Hi, I'm just back at home and will resume my work on IR asap.

 

Regarding the Dual Wielding changes we've opted for something like this:

 

- Light Weapons: club, dagger, ninja-to, short sword, wakizashi

- Heavy Weapons: bastard sword, flail, katana

 

All the other weapons are considered normal/medium-sized. Actually most crushing weapons (warhammers, maces, and morning stars) should be considered heavy, but at the moment we've decided to penalize only high-damaging one-handed weapons (1D10 - 1D12).

 

Thus a dual wielder Yeslick with hammer+mace will fight at 0/-2 (as in vanilla bg2).

[Guest Guest]

Thanks! Anything worse than 0/-2 and I don't think I'd have bothered.

[Jarin]

Armor's encumbrance (partially optional)

I never liked how wearing light, medium or heavy armor was pratically the same and i also dislike that a warrior can fully benefit from his 18 dexterity while wearing a full plate mail.

- (studded) leather armors: no penalties

- hide armors: 10% movement rate penalty

- chain mail armors: 10% movement rate penalty, 5% dexterity penalty

- plate mail armors: 20% movement rate penalty, 10% dexterity penalty

- full plate mail armors: 30% movement rate penalty, 15% dexterity penalty

Movement rate penalties will surely be optional while dexterity should be mandatory for balance purposes...but nothing is written in stone.

 

About that, could it be made fully optional so we can use Refinements' Armor and Shields along with this mod (unless that really screws up)?

[Demivrgvs]

Yes we can, though Mike is still missing. Refinements uses a cap to prevent too high physical damage resistances thus there shouldn't be technical issues, but that component may create balance issues imo and obviously I would recommend to use IR's similar component. Anyway choice is yours!