Kit Revisions (Fighters)

[Ardanis]

should the innate +2 bonus to AC be treaded as a base AC 8 to limit its uselfulness while at the same time allowing us to help the class until decent bracers are available?

On one hand that's a good call, especially for BG1. On the other - that bonus gets compelety irrelevant by the time the party can allow AC8 bracers (which happens right in CI).

Maybe that bonus should be split into base and innate, one point here and one there. But again, the base one is going to be effectively lost very soon.

 

Am I the only one who finds quite wrong, if not completely against the rules, having kensai/mage being able to wear mage robes?!

Are those vests really that long to tangle one in themselves? I for one perceive them as not, more like a kimono.

PS Besides, wizards need to have their movements as free as possible, and robes don't seem to hinder them in that way.

[Demivrgvs]

Kensai

should the innate +2 bonus to AC be treaded as a base AC 8 to limit its uselfulness while at the same time allowing us to help the class until decent bracers are available?

On one hand that's a good call, especially for BG1. On the other - that bonus gets compelety irrelevant by the time the party can allow AC8 bracers (which happens right in CI).

Maybe that bonus should be split into base and innate, one point here and one there. But again, the base one is going to be effectively lost very soon.

You are right, pratically it would only be useful at the very beginning of BG1. Actually I'd probably need someone who's played BG1 with a Kensai to help me understand how this kit truly performs at low levels.

 

How important is AC at low levels? I suppose a very bad AC when you have few hit points probably means you have an almost useless melee character.

 

How noticeable is a +1 to hit/damage at low levels? I suppose it's quite noticeable (extremely noticeable imo), but an enraged berserker performs even better thus I'd say having this bonus moved from 3rd to 1st level is a must to avoid having an evidently inferior class in the first few levels.

 

Am I the only one who finds quite wrong, if not completely against the rules, having kensai/mage being able to wear mage robes?!

Are those vests really that long to tangle one in themselves? I for one perceive them as not, more like a kimono.

PS Besides, wizards need to have their movements as free as possible, and robes don't seem to hinder them in that way.

Wizards simply have to be able to move freely, they don't have to perform martial arts, these two things are completely different kind of freedom of movement. You are free to move as you wish in a bathrobe, but practicing swordplay in the same outfit I'm sure it wouldn't be ideal. Regarding mages vests, both in the fantasy world and in BG you could see that they generally are as long as to almost reach the ground (take a look at any paperdoll or avatar in BG, or at most mages depicted in fantasy books), they are comfortable and large instead of essential and tight, and as I already said they often have mantles and/or hoods (again, look at BG paperdolls or avatars). I'm not saying these robes are encumberant, but we're talking about a fighter which is supposed to be the pinnacle of swordplaying, which should be able to perform perfect movements as fast as he can.

 

Anyway I've done an in depth comparison of Kensai vs. Berserker and we do have to slightly help the former a little imo. I'd say the idea we had about an improved chance to score critical hits at mid-high levels (perhaps two separate 5% bonuses) should do the work, and it's also something PnP Weapon Master has. I'll put down a suggested built and then I'm eager to start discussing some other class.

[Icendoan]

Kensai's AC you can knock right down with Bracers (thank you, it was a godsend) and high dexterity. With AC8 bracers, I had an armour class of 1 or 0, so I wasn't getting hit all that much.

 

AC is important, yes, but less so because everyone has such a high Thac0, against a Kensai's quickly lowering Thac0. So, you can get away with an AC of about 3-5 and survive, as long as you have healing potions (d10/12+X from an Ogre hurts), 1-0 means you can get away from most critters. The boots of Avoiding are also amazing for the class, because you can't use ranged weaponry.

 

An evidently inferior class at low levels? You might want to try the Evoker. No sleep, iirc. Also, I think Kensai are meant to be amazing at very high levels, but can't be expected to be able to fight well at low level.

 

By the way, my 'combo Kai' idea would be something like this:

 

Use EFF File: Specific KAI = 0, normal hit, increments KAI.

Use EFF File: Specific KAI = 1, improved hit, increments KAI.

....

Set IDS State: Delayed for (duration), Specific set to a null value.

 

EDIT: You would need multiple KAI entries in Specific.ids, but there ought to be enough space. You only need 10/round, for a different effect each hit.

 

Icen

[Demivrgvs]

Kensai

Kensai's AC you can knock right down with Bracers (thank you, it was a godsend) and high dexterity. With AC8 bracers, I had an armour class of 1 or 0, so I wasn't getting hit all that much.

 

AC is important, yes, but less so because everyone has such a high Thac0, against a Kensai's quickly lowering Thac0. So, you can get away with an AC of about 3-5 and survive, as long as you have healing potions (d10/12+X from an Ogre hurts), 1-0 means you can get away from most critters. The boots of Avoiding are also amazing for the class, because you can't use ranged weaponry.

Thanks for the feedback, than a proposed progression table for Kensai may be something like:

 

Advantages:

- Innate +2 bonus to AC

- Can use Kai ability once per day for every 3 levels.

With this ability the Kensai focuses his Ki for a short time, allowing him to deal maximum damage on each hit for 2 rounds.

- Melee weapons mastery: +1 to hit and damage for every 4 levels, starting with +1 at 1st level.

- At 15th level, Kensai's chance to score critical hits is augmented by 5%, and at 19th level this bonus increases by an additional 5%

 

Disadvantages:

- Cannot wear armors, gauntlets, or helmets, nor use shields.

- Cannot use missile weapons.

 

Note that an improved critical chance is extremely effective with Single Weapon Style and Two-Handed Weapon Style because those styles effectively double the % chance of scoring critical hits. It shoul also indirectly enhance the effectiveness of Kai, as a critical hit with maximum damage is quite lethal.

 

An evidently inferior class at low levels? You might want to try the Evoker. No sleep, iirc. Also, I think Kensai are meant to be amazing at very high levels, but can't be expected to be able to fight well at low level.

Don't worry about mages kits, I'm sure we'll do something about them.

 

By the way, my 'combo Kai' idea would be something like this:

 

Use EFF File: Specific KAI = 0, normal hit, increments KAI.

Use EFF File: Specific KAI = 1, improved hit, increments KAI.

....

Set IDS State: Delayed for (duration), Specific KAI set to 0.

 

EDIT: You would need multiple KAI entries in Specific.ids, but there ought to be enough space. You only need 10/round, for a different effect each hit.

Yeah, but I prefer to avoid complications right now.

[Icendoan]

How about having a bonus proficiency in Single Weapon and Two Handed Weapon, as another incentive for going for those.

 

Icen

[Demivrgvs]

Kensai

How about having a bonus proficiency in Single Weapon and Two Handed Weapon, as another incentive for going for those.

My intention is to make each weapon style as appealing as possible (though it's quite impossible to make single weapon style very appealing) without forcing the player to chose a particular one.

 

P.S I just remembered that at low levels it may be quite effective for a Kensai to invest two points in single weapon style! Than he has all the time and proficiency points to slowly learn to dual wield.

 

 

Wizard Slayer

Let's try to understand if the direction I'd like to take with this class can please most of you or not. My vision of this class is based upon the fact that I look at it as a weakly implemented Forsaken (Masters of the Wild) while it should be more similar to an Occult Slayer (Complete Warrior). What I'm trying to say is that their restriction of not being able to use magic items sucks imo.

 

This character hates so much magical items? Than why on hell should he use magical swords and armors?!! I can answer that for you: simply because else this class would be utterly pathetic in BG. Forsaken class really shunt magic and cannot use any magical equipment, but his abilities make up for it (magic/physical resistances, regeneration, his normal weapon is treated as +1/+5 enchanted as he gains levels similarly to monk fists, and so on). Forsaken would be a pain to code for BG, especially because of the his 'unenchanted weapon is treated as magical' feature, but also because we would have to create a table as complicate as monk's one.

 

If you're familiar with the Occult Slayer class you know what I'd like to do. In summary a warrior with unique abilities to better protect him from spellcasters and to help him fight their hated enemies. Let me know if this rather noticeable change over vanilla character is fine for you.

[yarpen]

There's a lack of one of most important things which can make for fighter have a possibility to win against wizard. Breaching wizards defences - even stupid Stoneskin & Mirror Image combo gives to a mage few rounds of casting spells at him - usually it ends with first fear/chaos/insta-kill spell.

But there's a wizard slayer who's protected with ability similiar to spell turning, whos bolt removes all of wizard's defence and make him vulnerable for the rest of party.

[Demivrgvs]

Wizard Slayer

There's a lack of one of most important things which can make for fighter have a possibility to win against wizard. Breaching wizards defences - even stupid Stoneskin & Mirror Image combo gives to a mage few rounds of casting spells at him - usually it ends with first fear/chaos/insta-kill spell.

But there's a wizard slayer who's protected with ability similiar to spell turning, whos bolt removes all of wizard's defence and make him vulnerable for the rest of party.

Ok, then let's start to analyze all the possibilities and see which direction we should take. To decide the kit "power level" I'd use the Berserker, which is imo the easiest to compare of the fighter kits, and don't use the True Fighter because for the base class we still have to add a few things before considering it on par with its kits.

 

As disadvantages I currently have only two things in mind (we may need more disadvantages depending on how many advantages we want to have on the other hand):

- limited to specialization (++) in any weapon.

- Cannot dual to spellcasting classes. (WS-Mage really doesn't make sense. I'm unsure about priests, but I'd vote for blocking them too)

 

Of the following list of advantages let me know which ones seem to fit the kit best in your opinion. The Occult Slayer PrC ported into AD&D would have the following abilities:

- deals extra damage vs. spellcasters (note: not against all spellcasting creatures, only vs. mages/priests)

- Magical Defense (+1 to saves vs. spell every x level up to +3)

- Spell Turning ability

- Non-detection (in PnP it's much more important, in BG it would be cool only for a WS-Thief)

- Blank Thouhts (immunity to mind affecting spells is too similar to what berserker/barbarian rage grants imo)

 

Other suggested abilities we may decide to use:

- Magic Resistance (I wouldn't use vanilla's progression, something like 10% at 1st level +1%/lvl would be better for BG1 imo)

- Dispel Illusions ability

- Disrupt Spellcasting (as per vanilla WS, but I'd limit the spell failure on hit to 5% and make it affect priests too)

- Breach ability (added to melee/ranged hit, or via innate spell? We should make it not overpowered though)

- Dispelling ability (added to melee/ranged hit, we should make it not overpowered though)

 

I'll leave things like Spell Immunity and Anti-Magic Aura for HLAs.

 

I'd personally vote for Magic Resistance instead of Magical Defense and Blank Thoughts because it seems a little more unique for a kit feature. I'd select only one on-hit effect amongst Disrupt Spellcasting/Breach/Dispel, and I'd probably discard the latter as it seems to have a much wider scope than focusing on fighting spellcasters. Spell Turning and Dispell Illusions are quite appropriate imo, while I'm not sure how well would work Non-detecion for this kit in BG.

 

Let me know your opinions.

 

P.S As paladins have Detect Evil I'll see if I can create a Detect Magic ability, it's mainly a cosmetic feature rather than an truly useful ability, but it would be cool imo.

[yarpen]

I've liked the solution which came from RPG Kitpack revised WS. Item restriction was changed to have a possibility of using all items which are USEFUL at fight against wizards. All of magic resistance effect items etc. Decreasing WS fighting capabilities by reducing him to have proficiency is IMO bad - fighter's main advantage is his grandmastery, and I think all of original kits should have it available. But that's only my opinion.

 

I would also vote for Magic Resistance, Spell Turning and Breach viaHit (ranged or melee - wizard slayer as sniper who's taking down wizards on battlefield using crossbow, that's the point!). Combined with +4 to thaco/damages vs. wizards/sorcerers makes to him not so difficult to beat a wizard with stoneskins and other cool spells. And that's as it should be - because in vanilla game fighter means nothing against wizard with Chaos :/

 

Detect Magic would be interesting for people who are playing first time. It could be something like aura detection - there are weak auras (few levels weaker than WS), strong (1-2 difference) and powefull (few levels more than WS). Then you can know about danger of difficult fight with wizard. Cool

[Ardanis]

Disrupt Spellcasting

Disrupt Spellcasting (as per vanilla WS, but I'd limit the spell failure on hit to 5% and make it affect priests too)

First, it's wizardslayer, if any it's bards who should be affected next, not priests.

Second, how about making the Disrupting into use-per-day ability? And to trade it's total-duration-per-day for higher effectiveness like 50%-100%? Although it might be too high, so here comes yet another tweak - instead of 10% for 1 turn it's 50%-100% for 1-2 rounds.

 

Breach

I'd leave it for HLA.

[Demivrgvs]

WS Restrictions

I've liked the solution which came from RPG Kitpack revised WS. Item restriction was changed to have a possibility of using all items which are USEFUL at fight against wizards. All of magic resistance effect items etc.

Well, I don't like it, but it may be a matter of tastes. I think this solution doesn't make much sense because deciding which items are useful against spellcasters is highly subjective. A few examples: 1) RPG Kitpack considered Vhailor's Helm unusable by WS, but how on hearth would it be not useful for a WS to have an almost perfect double of himself (with all his resistances/abilities) to tear down a group of mages?! 2) Let's take a simple amulet that grants +20hp, would it be usable by a WS? It doesn't seem an item specifically created to fight mages, but I do think 20 more hit points would help against spellcasters throwing at the WS all sort of invocations. Am I wrong?

 

Decreasing WS fighting capabilities by reducing him to have proficiency is IMO bad - fighter's main advantage is his grandmastery, and I think all of original kits should have it available. But that's only my opinion.

This is clearly a matter of tastes, but I may try to convince you.

 

First of all, why WS should master his weapon skills to the top when he's dedicated to fight opponents who are clearly inferior fighters? Even with specialization he would be a better fighter than most other classes, and even slightly better than paladins and rangers (due to faster level ups). Only True Fighters, Berserkers and obviously Kensai (Weapon Masters) would be more competent than Wizard Slayers in weapon skills.

 

Secondly, Barbarian is a fighter kit in BG, and it has the very same disadvantage.

 

Anyway, if you can find other disadvantages that can justify all the advantages we're talking about I'm open to suggestions.

 

WS Disrupt Spellcasting

Disrupt Spellcasting (as per vanilla WS, but I'd limit the spell failure on hit to 5% and make it affect priests too)

First, it's wizardslayer, if any it's bards who should be affected next, not priests.

Second, how about making the Disrupting into use-per-day ability? And to trade it's total-duration-per-day for higher effectiveness like 50%-100%? Although it might be too high, so here comes yet another tweak - instead of 10% for 1 turn it's 50%-100% for 1-2 rounds.

Well, Bards are already affected by WS's spell failure.

 

Regarding the possible changes to Disrupt Spellcasting ability, you do have a point about raising the % and limiting the duration, I have to think about it. I'm not sure about making it usable x/day for two reasons. We are talking about giving him many x/day abilities like Detect Magic, Dispel Illusion and Spell Turning. I fear having this too as innate would make the list a little too long, but it may be just my opinion.

 

WS Breach Ability

I'd leave it for HLA.

I probably agree with you, it's a very effective 5th level spell after all (just like Warrior's Magic Resistance HLA). Refinements used this almost as a standard method by assigning Spell Immunity HLA to Wizard Slayers and Righteous Magic HLA to paladins. Furthermore I'm starting to fear that a on-hit breach effect would make really too easy most fights against spellcasters (especially at low levels) and would be slightly unpractical against high level SCS mages which use PfMW a lot (as the protection spell would block the on-hit effect).

[yarpen]

So there can be a chance for tearing down mage's combat protections. Or they can have saving throw. Etc. ;-)

[Demivrgvs]

WS's Breach Ability

So there can be a chance for tearing down mage's combat protections. Or they can have saving throw. Etc. ;-)

It can be done, but making it balanced throughout the entire game is extremely difficult (I'm not sure an eventual save to avoid it could be made scalable with level, and still it would be blocked by PfMW-like protection spells, making it a strange breach effect). I'll think about it, as always the more players post their opinions the easier it is my choice.

 

Regarding the "restrictions", have I convinced you?

 

True Fighter

I've tried to put down a list of possible combat style abilities we could use as unique features for fighters. None of the following are definitive, I'm really just trying to throw in suggestions, hoping to start a constructive discussion.

 

- Attack Focus (-1/2 apr, +4 bonus to attack rolls)

- Parry (-1/2 apr, +2 bonus to AC)

- Defensive Stance (-x penalty to attack rolls, +y bonus to AC)

- Offensive Stance (+x bonus to attack rolls, -y penalty to AC)

- Counter Attack (-x penalty to attack rolls and/or damage, y% chance to gain an attack in the following round)

 

Feel free to suggest values, expand concepts and so on...

[Ardanis]

Combat Styles

 

Power Attack - roughly as per 3E. There's a HLA with the same name but I guess that shouldn't be an issue, especially since that stuns rather than adds up damage.

 

Maybe lesser (notably so) version of Critical Strike.

 

Offensive/Defensive Stances - +2 for bonus and -4 for penalty if you ask me.

 

Counter Attack - it might be weird when several fighters mob a single enemy. Sounds more like an Attack of Opportunity. x=3 - to both, y=[25;35], due to being a chance based I'd say it ought to be somewhat high enough to be appealing. Of course, I'd prefer a plain +n apr bonus, were it not for barbarians and blades already around.

[yarpen]

Equal trade? And 1 point is 10%?