Kit Revisions (Fighters)

[kreso]

Just a quick note: Helpless condition checks for Unconciussness effect as well. Looking good as so far . Demi, T-up if you decide to give him immunites to Fear and Charm while Raged - I assume that has him covered apart Confusion (imo, this shouldn't be cured anyway but that's just me)

[Demivrgvs]

Demi, I played the new (or "most recent" ) berserker now. I'll report soon about his helpless contingency - he needs a bit more exp for level 5, but for now - seems very good. I am happy.

 

- Offensive Stance lasts 36 seconds. Now, I assume that stances will eventually be made "permanent", no? I tweaked my OS to have a duration of 500 - so he can have it practically until resting, and without me bothering to click the icon every half a minute. I don't think a berserker w/o berserk needs testing. Hope that's ok. I just like him that way.

Yes, the plan was to make the "permanent" and add a "no stance" ability to de-activate it, though I'm not sure if it can really be permanent or rather extremely long. It depends on how resting affects the whole thing.

 

Do you really think there's never a reason to turn it off despite thac0, AC and saves penalty? Or is it just because of your playstyle?

 

- 9 seconds seems ok for berserk. In BG1 sometimes he snaps out due to misses (prevalent issue of BG1 is how AC is the best defence one can have) but that actually helps him to drink up a potion or similar. I doubt this will happen often in BG2, or even in BG1 after a few more levels.

Maybe try it out 12 seconds and see if it still allows good control in terms of snapping out of frenzy relatively quickly when he "switches target".

 

- I use mine with 2-handed weapons (big sword). This is probably a bit sub-optimal for him (he's made for dual-wielding) and he suffers from low initiative greatly - he gets to battle while Enraged, then wastes few precious seconds while attack triggers.

Without IR weapon speed/armor encumberance this probably wouldn't be a big issue, but is with it, even with 2 pips into 2-handed weapon style. Any chance to convince you to grant him a bonus to weapon speed (I've tought about MS, but that's largely irrelevant in the long term) even for a short while (1 round is all he needs), just so he connects the hit before those deadly fast-casting low level disables come flying?

I can confirm that a 2-handed weapon on the Berserker is noticeably too slow in the first half of BG1. I don't think a WS factor increase suits the class, though. Maybe we should just leave as-is?

I'm with Kalindor about it, weapon speed factor really doesn't belong to the class concept imo. Not to mention I actually cannot use it because multiple effects don't correctly stack, and thus it would not work flawlessly with IR's armors (I'm still using it for KR's Kensai because in that case there's no conflict for obvious reasons).

 

Are you having "problems" with the low weapon speed even after reaching 3rd lvl mastery? Between that and 2handed style a greatsword's speed should already go from 10 to something like 4! o.O Are you using Arda's weapon speed penalties for armors?

 

Regarding the "he's made for dual-wielding", he actually shouldn't, that's why OS imposes twice as much thac0 penalty for the off hand. Is that not enough? Even in PnP this feat is supposed to be way more effective for 2handed weapons, and I'd like it to be such. We already have too many classes who favor dual-wielding.

[kreso]

Yes, the plan was to make the "permanent" and add a "no stance" ability to de-activate it, though I'm not sure if it can really be permanent or rather extremely long. It depends on how resting affects the whole thing.

Do you really think there's never a reason to turn it off despite thac0, AC and saves penalty? Or is it just because of your playstyle?

The thing is - if he isn't in OS, he's suddenly very mellow. Like I'm playing vanilla fighter. There are battles where you want control, but encounters such as those within dungeons etc. I like to fight with OS. I know the game quite well so I can "forsee" where berserk can be a pain to deal with, thus I avoid it (areas with neutrals etc.)

Anyhow, I'd rather if he'd had sort of Defensive Stance where he's safe from berserking. Probably just me, don't tweak this on my account.

 

Maybe try it out 12 seconds and see if it still allows good control in terms of snapping out of frenzy relatively quickly when he "switches target".

Will do, and let you know tomorrow. Anyways, a tought occured to me, and maybe this can fix him for good:

Make the melee hit effect which triggers berserk activate only on hitting enemies - this would:

a) keep him much more controlable

b) prevent you from making him berserk by attacking your own, or when he gets involved with summons

 

Not to mention I actually cannot use it because multiple effects don't correctly stack, and thus it would not work flawlessly with IR's armors

Aha..that's why my implementation doesn't work.

 

Are you having "problems" with the low weapon speed even after reaching 3rd lvl mastery? Between that and 2handed style a greatsword's speed should already go from 10 to something like 4! o.O Are you using Arda's weapon speed penalties for armors?

Yes and yes. I think things will improve at level 7 (+1/2 apr, 4 pips in weapon).

For now, he has 3* in swords (I don't know the exact speed bonus, I tought it had no bonus for 3*), -4 for weapon style, +10 factor for 2-handed sword and +4 from Full plate. He has 3/2 apr.

 

Regarding the "he's made for dual-wielding", he actually shouldn't, that's why OS imposes twice as much thac0 penalty for the off hand. Is that not enough? Even in PnP this feat is supposed to be way more effective for 2handed weapons, and I'd like it to be such. We already have too many classes who favor dual-wielding.

He shouldn't, I agree, but just check on those lovely late-game 1-handed swords like Foebane or Blackrazor - these are exactly the weapons he wants. This time, with the tweak to OS, I decided to focus purely on damage instead.

Anyhow, +2 penalty (+additional 2 for off-hand) is plenty. I was going to suggest to drop the base THAC0 penalty for berserker's OS (sorta like a bonus for those willing to risk frenzy) but do as you please.

[Demivrgvs]

True Fighter

Small suggestion for Called Shots/Hits. Make them exclude each others by giving opponent under their effect a protection against another. That would actually allow you to implement Sunder without making it broken as well. But that'd actually require to make the 19 level penalty also last 6 rounds.

In your version, Sunder could be really devastating and cool (and tool Fighters always wanted).

 

CALLED SHOT (SUNDER): With this attack, the fighter chooses to impede defenses. When hit, the target will suffer a -4 Armor Class penalty for 6 rounds. If a save vs. death is made the duration is halved.

At 10th level, any target who fails the save also looses his physical damage resistance for 1 round. [reduced to 0%].

At 19th level, any target who fails the save will also have his constitution reduced by 50% for 1 turn.

And not sure why you are not using Save vs. Wands here. Those were historically THE saves for combat maneuvres.

As I mentioned you via PM there's a bunch of reasons behind me not implementing the Sunder maneuver (despite it being there since the very first versions of KR's Called Shot):

a) I feared it might be too good, while also making following CS uses devastating

b) I don't have bams/icons for it

c) class description limitation

 

a) Your idea have some merit, but at the same time it can be said that within BG1 you have only 2 uses of CS, and thus using Sunder and then follow up with a Disarm/Trip without worrying of missing the target could be considered fine. I'd need more opinions on this matter.

b) this is really a problem now because the other two abilities do have their unique bams

c) this might sounds stupid, but unfortunately True Fighter description is already as long as it can be. Pratically I cannot add anything more because then I would have no space to describe the feature.

 

P.S The 10th lvl upgrade was planned as a -10% penalty, rather than "set it to 0%". I fear the latter could could lead to game-breaking results against certain creatures, and not do a thing against most creatures on a vanilla install. Btw, Sunder has indeed a very nice sinergy with the upcoming IR's Revised Armors (did you thought about it? I actually didn't till now).

 

 

Berserker

Just a quick note: Helpless condition checks for Unconciussness effect as well. Looking good as so far . Demi, T-up if you decide to give him immunites to Fear and Charm while Raged - I assume that has him covered apart Confusion (imo, this shouldn't be cured anyway but that's just me)

Wow, this is turning out really really great! Very nice little twist on your standard "get immunity to x", isn't it?

 

Do you really think there's never a reason to turn OS off despite thac0, AC and saves penalty? Or is it just because of your playstyle?

The thing is - if he isn't in OS, he's suddenly very mellow. Like I'm playing vanilla fighter. There are battles where you want control, but encounters such as those within dungeons etc. I like to fight with OS. I know the game quite well so I can "forsee" where berserk can be a pain to deal with, thus I avoid it (areas with neutrals etc.)

I see your point, it's inevitable that if your not using OS and Rage you have a plain vanilla-like fighter, until later levels where at least you get Diehard as a permanent distinctive feature. That being said, I hoped there were plenty of occasions where you actually have to decide whether or not using OS because of all its penalties.

 

Anyhow, I'd rather if he'd had sort of Defensive Stance where he's safe from berserking. Probably just me, don't tweak this on my account.

I'm really against a Defensive Stance, it does not make sense for this class concept.

 

Otoh, considering we have made Frenzy a much more integral part of Berserker's Rage (it now triggers on each hit while enraged), and that now it also automatically triggers when someone tries to "disable" the Berserker with hold/stun/sleep or similar things - I was wondering - should we remove it from OS? This way the Berserker would still have something unique to offer compared to a True Fighter even while "playing safe". Mmm...

 

...a tought occured to me, and maybe this can fix him for good:

Make the melee hit effect which triggers berserk activate only on hitting enemies - this would:

a) keep him much more controlable

b) prevent you from making him berserk by attacking your own, or when he gets involved with summons

It's a bit more complicated than it seems. Afaik IDS targeting set to 'enemy 255' would not work well for AI controlled Berserkers.

 

I was going to suggest to drop the base THAC0 penalty for berserker's OS (sorta like a bonus for those willing to risk frenzy) but do as you please.

Berserker's has plenty of bonuses to thac0 (up to +4 from Rage, +2 from Frenzy) and can achieve Grandmastery. There's really no reason to drop the penalties when using OS imo, it's already super-effective as it is. Btw, you just said you never want to turn OS off, why are you asking for even more reasons to never turn it off? Not to mention that removing those penalties would make dual wielding OS extremely more powerful.

[kreso]

True Fighter

 

CALLED SHOT (SUNDER)

I love the idea, but I'd leave these feats for thieves.

 

Berserker

Wow, this is turning out really really great! Very nice little twist on your standard "get immunity to x", isn't it?

Yup. I'd still like that Fear/Charm immunity, since these spells have such a short casting time that frenzying before they reach you is impossible.

 

I see your point, it's inevitable that if your not using OS and Rage you have a plain vanilla-like fighter, until later levels where at least you get Diehard as a permanent distinctive feature. That being said, I hoped there were plenty of occasions where you actually have to decide whether or not using OS because of all its penalties.

I'm kind of "forcing it" to test it out, but there are indeed battles (most difficult BG1 encounters will force you to pay attention when exactly do you want to Rage, it's not exactly vanilla "Rage-I'm immune to everything") where frenzy is a very inconvinient state of mind.

As for Diehard, I really, really dislike the <50% trigger since it can trigger when you have 10% left, not 50%. I'd rather tie this up to something else than HP treshold - OS, Frenzy or Rage (I'd vote Frenzy, but that's just me - more risk, more reward for the player). It's not like he doesn't need while frenzied, regardless of his HP.

For that <50% trigger I'd give him damage. Somewhere around 4-6, just to make him "share the pain".

True class can disable like no other, Kensai can dodge Dragon's Breath, Monk can be invulnerable to everything, WS can dodge PW:Kill, I really ain't against Berserker dealing some heavy damage.

EDIT:

Berserker can't die, so he's covered

And I like the vision of bathed-in-blood berserker with a minHP slaughtering Fire Giants.

Since SCS Fire Giants are berserkers as well, that could be an interesting endeavor.

 

I'm really against a Defensive Stance, it does not make sense for this class concept.

As I said, don't tweak this for me.

 

Otoh, considering we have made Frenzy a much more integral part of Berserker's Rage (it now triggers on each hit while enraged), and that now it also automatically triggers when someone tries to "disable" the Berserker with hold/stun/sleep or similar things - I was wondering - should we remove it from OS? This way the Berserker would still have something unique to offer compared to a True Fighter even while "playing safe". Mmm...

I was gonna suggest you raise the probabiltiy to 15 %. LOL. I can easilly tweak this not to ever trigger frenzy, but I don't know if this would be good. Doesn't this make him "more unique" after all?

 

Afaik IDS targeting set to 'enemy 255' would not work well for AI controlled Berserkers.

They don't go in berserk state from berserk opcode used, if that's what worries you. If not, then leave as it is.

 

Btw, you just said you never want to turn OS off, why are you asking for even more reasons to never turn it off?

It does have it's drawbacks as it is - I'm generally fine with frenzy (after all that time one grows to like it) but there are instances where you do not want it to happen - you may consider it a disadvantage of OS. So one suffers AC, saves and frenzy probability + THAC0 penalty, while a true class suffers only THAC0. Damage in OS is not to be underestimated, but berserker does loose on quite a bit of things, all of which hurt more than THAC0 penalty.

[Kalindor]

I don't have a problem with Rage causing Frenzy 100% of the time, but OS leading to a modest increase in Frenzy chance (from base 5% to 10%-15% for instance).

 

I like the HP trigger for the regen. I would not change it personally.

[yarpen]

a) Your idea have some merit, but at the same time it can be said that within BG1 you have only 2 uses of CS, and thus using Sunder and then follow up with a Disarm/Trip without worrying of missing the target could be considered fine. I'd need more opinions on this matter.

And that is why you are blocking other CS. I mean, being under effect of one of the CS makes opponent protected from the other ones for the duration of the longest effect (that's why I'd suggest nerfing the lvl19 penalty to last 4 rounds). So, you can't channel one after another onto single opponent which actually makes it some kind of decision to be made.

 

Actually implementing Sunder would allow you to drop Offensive/Defensive Stance.

Defensive Stance is already covered by CS: Disarm.

Offensive Stance would be a lil' bit covered by CS: Sunder.

 

P.S The 10th lvl upgrade was planned as a -10% penalty, rather than "set it to 0%". I fear the latter could could lead to game-breaking results against certain creatures, and not do a thing against most creatures on a vanilla install. Btw, Sunder has indeed a very nice sinergy with the upcoming IR's Revised Armors (did you thought about it? I actually didn't till now).

Remember that it:

- lasts for 1 round

- requires failed save vs. wands

- we could grant some creatures immunity to this effect (the best example: incorporeal ones).

 

I'm okay with not making it "set 0%", but for examle "-20%". -10% is not enough really. That's ok for long-lasting Know Opponent. Here I am hitting you so hard that for a moment I completely blow your armor/skin away. That'd mean breaking through golem's shell, warrior's plate mail or dragon's scale and make them really vulnerable for a moment.

 

Also, I've did something that could be called a pretty good implementation of Called Shot for Wizard Slayers.

CS: Disrupt

 

At level 1: 20-40% chance to miscast magic for 4 rounds. (depends on your preference on that)

At level 10: Silence for 1 round.

At level 19: Reduces Intelligence by 50% for 4 rounds.

 

I know, Intelligence has little to no impact on spellcasting capabilities (makes some scrolls and wands much harder to use...) but fits for the role-play reasons. Could be improved by either adding Wisdom penalty as well or by tweaking what certain stats do in game.

[Ardanis]

Btw, Sunder has indeed a very nice sinergy with the upcoming IR's Revised Armors (did you thought about it? I actually didn't till now).

We can make it to negate the standard resistance bonus granted by armor, same goes for AC bonus as well.

 

While I understand one would want to use Sunder against natural AC, I don't think it can be done as smoothly and bug-free as with the equipped armor.

[Demivrgvs]

True Fighter

Actually implementing Sunder would allow you to drop Offensive/Defensive Stance.

Defensive Stance is already covered by CS: Disarm.

Offensive Stance would be a lil' bit covered by CS: Sunder.

While I agree that Disarm and Sunder act as a sort of defensive or offensive maneuvers respectively, what the stances are supposed to provide is completely different imo. For example you can try to disarm a powerful warrior, but if you need to tank against multiple opponents you cannot disarm all of them at once.

 

I still don't understand why you dislike Offensive & Defensive Stance so much. They cannot be so bad considering that in PnP getting one of those two feats (Power Attack & Combat Expertise respectively) is a "must have" for like 99% of warrior builds.

 

CALLED SHOT (SUNDER)

I love the idea, but I'd leave these feats for thieves.

Eh? You think the Sunder maneuver fits rogues more than fighters? o.O

 

Btw, Sunder has indeed a very nice sinergy with the upcoming IR's Revised Armors (did you thought about it? I actually didn't till now).

We can make it to negate the standard resistance bonus granted by armor, same goes for AC bonus as well.

 

While I understand one would want to use Sunder against natural AC, I don't think it can be done as smoothly and bug-free as with the equipped armor.

I do thought about trying to use the semi-working opcode 183 to make Sunder work only against armored opponents, but it seemed an unnecessarily complicated solution, was I wrong? Why do you think a simple -x AC (and eventually -x% physical resistance upgrade) would be less smooth and more buggy? Not to mention I actually think Sunder should have some effect against most, if not all, "unarmored" targets too (e.g. dragon's scales are pretty much an armor, and many monsters have similar armor-like carapaces or thick hides), am I wrong?

 

@yarpen, KR's Called Shots are already tweaked to not work on certain targets (e.g. you cannot "disarm" an elemental, nor you can use Trip on a flying creature, etc.), so making Sunder not work against certain targets (e.g. incorporeal creatures) was given for granted.

 

 

Berserker

I don't have a problem with Rage causing Frenzy 100% of the time, but OS leading to a modest increase in Frenzy chance (from base 5% to 10%-15% for instance).

The only reason I suggested to remove Frenzy form OS was just to give Berserker something to make it feel different from a vanilla Fighter even while not enraged and/or frenzied. Reckless Offensive by itself would already display Berserker's unique approach to the fighting, with his disrespect for AC and reflex based saves.

 

Anyway, if the last changes to Frenzy work as we hoped, this class should be able to perform well whether or not OS has a small chance to trigger Frenzy. Thus let's just focus on making Frenzy work as we need first.

 

Afaik IDS targeting set to 'enemy 255' would not work well for AI controlled Berserkers.

They don't go in berserk state from berserk opcode used, if that's what worries you. If not, then leave as it is.

What I meant was that afaik setting Frenzy to trigger only when striking an 'enemy 255' would make it not trigger for AI controlled Berserker against the party.

 

Btw, I actually forgot the current berserk opcode is the one which works only for PCs, what should I do about it? We can switch it to the other berserk opcode and make the AI work the same way, or we may assume players would not notice a difference and that the AI scripts might greatly benefit by having a completely "friendly" Frenzy. What do you think?

 

I like the HP trigger for the regen. I would not change it personally.

Me too, it makes the Berserker harder to kill when bloodied but at the same time it doesn't give him full auto-healing properties. If we remove the <50%hp trigger (mind you, D&D Next seems to have opted for this very same solution) we end up with an ability which allows the Berserker to fully heal himself up to 100% hp (maybe it's unlikely, but still possible).

 

 

Wizard Slayer

I've did something that could be called a pretty good implementation of Called Shot for Wizard Slayers.

CS: Disrupt

 

At level 1: 20-40% chance to miscast magic for 4 rounds. (depends on your preference on that)

At level 10: Silence for 1 round.

At level 19: Reduces Intelligence by 50% for 4 rounds.

 

I know, Intelligence has little to no impact on spellcasting capabilities (makes some scrolls and wands much harder to use...) but fits for the role-play reasons. Could be improved by either adding Wisdom penalty as well or by tweaking what certain stats do in game.

As I said, I do like the idea of WS not getting magical-like abilities (I admit Disruptive/Breaching Strike partially looks like one), but I don't think this solution would be an improvement on this matter compared to the current one. I still don't know which Called Hit it is supposed to represent (throat?), or why a True Fighter, the master of combat maneuvers, would not get it, not to mention that reducing INT and/or WIS with a called shot doesn't make too much sense imo. I'll try to think a bit more about your suggestion though, because it has some merit, but it's not a priority right now considering it would not make a big difference (if any) in terms of actual gameplay, and that the current WS seems to perform quite well, while we have tons of classes which really need of our attention.

[kreso]

True Fighter

You think the Sunder maneuver fits rogues more than fighters? o.O

Yes.

 

Berserker

The only reason I suggested to remove Frenzy form OS was just to give Berserker something to make it feel different from a vanilla Fighter even while not enraged and/or frenzied. Reckless Offensive by itself would already display Berserker's unique approach to the fighting, with his disrespect for AC and reflex based saves.

I've given this some tought. It might actually be a good thing. He doesn't have to be crazy all the time, I fear I let my preferance cloud my objectivity.

Remove berserk chance from here if you like, I think it might be for the better actually.

 

Btw, I actually forgot the current berserk opcode is the one which works only for PCs, what should I do about it? We can switch it to the other berserk opcode and make the AI work the same way, or we may assume players would not notice a difference and that the AI scripts might greatly benefit by having a completely "friendly" Frenzy. What do you think?

I'd say leave it, even if "classic" way of handling berserkers is getting the hell away and letting them kill each other. AI cannot exactly control movements/positioning as player can.

 

it makes the Berserker harder to kill when bloodied but at the same time it doesn't give him full auto-healing properties. If we remove the <50%hp trigger (mind you, D&D Next seems to have opted for this very same solution) we end up with an ability which allows the Berserker to fully heal himself up to 100% hp (maybe it's unlikely, but still possible).

What bothers me is that the trigger is usually late to activate, making it far less efective than it should be. I once tweaked it so he'd have a small chance to trigger a short regeneration when he takes damage, and was quite pleased - it makes weak attacks such as arrows/magic missiles far less effective against berserkers - and is awesome to see an Ogre Berserker in BG1 healing rapidly from a hail of arrows.

[Kalindor]

I still don't understand why you dislike Offensive & Defensive Stance so much. They cannot be so bad considering that in PnP getting one of those two feats (Power Attack & Combat Expertise respectively) is a "must have" for like 99% of warrior builds.

I must say that I use them all of the time. However, a permanent-until-cancelled function would be nice...

 

Eh? You think the Sunder maneuver fits rogues more than fighters? o.O

I am picturing a lumbering warrior with a halberd smashing a huge crack in the opponent's breastplate. It seems more fighter-ish to me. Perhaps a rogue could sneak in and use his dagger to cut the straps holding the breastplate on?

 

We can make it to negate the standard resistance bonus granted by armor, same goes for AC bonus as well.

Could be interesting, but unless there is also an AC penalty, I would never use this over the other Called Shot options. Since Called Shot: Arm and Leg inflict disable and trip respectively, you could have Called Shot: Sunder SET the target's AC to a certain number at higher levels. For example, Sets AC = 8 for three rounds on a failed save.

 

Reckless Offensive by itself would already display Berserker's unique approach to the fighting, with his disrespect for AC and reflex based saves.

Fine with me either way.

 

Btw, I actually forgot the current berserk opcode is the one which works only for PCs, what should I do about it? We can switch it to the other berserk opcode and make the AI work the same way, or we may assume players would not notice a difference and that the AI scripts might greatly benefit by having a completely "friendly" Frenzy. What do you think?

 

I am strongly in favor of having the Frenzy effect used by AI Berserkers as well.

[Ardanis]

I do thought about trying to use the semi-working opcode 183 to make Sunder work only against armored opponents, but it seemed an unnecessarily complicated solution, was I wrong? Why do you think a simple -x AC (and eventually -x% physical resistance upgrade) would be less smooth and more buggy? Not to mention I actually think Sunder should have some effect against most, if not all, "unarmored" targets too (e.g. dragon's scales are pretty much an armor, and many monsters have similar armor-like carapaces or thick hides), am I wrong?

Frankly, I didn't think about 183. I meant to use the 146/206 dual SPL combo. The benefit is that we aren't limited with types of armor available for targeting, and can impose -2 AC/-5% res penalty against leather-wearing opponent, and -7/-15% vs platemail clad one.

 

The idea of sundering one's armor comes from the assumption they had some armor to begin with, no?

The PnP Sunder doesn't even allow to target armor at all, only weapons and shields, so I'm not sure it should affect natural armor.

[yarpen]

I still don't understand why you dislike Offensive & Defensive Stance so much. They cannot be so bad considering that in PnP getting one of those two feats (Power Attack & Combat Expertise respectively) is a "must have" for like 99% of warrior builds.

D&D3 has completely different combat mechanics and stats evaluation. In AD&D I just can't find situations when I'd find sacrificing ThaC0 for Damage or AC, especially in 1 for 1 currency. Except of those cute situations when it's actually not needed.

Okay, AC could be usefull for tanking some dumb AI like golems in De'Arnise... but any mage spell or cleric buff makes you do that 100% better while it turns your offensive capability to useless.

I'd rather have 3 strong abilities than 2 fine abilities and 2 heavily situational.

 

As I said, I do like the idea of WS not getting magical-like abilities (I admit Disruptive/Breaching Strike partially looks like one), but I don't think this solution would be an improvement on this matter compared to the current one. I still don't know which Called Hit it is supposed to represent (throat?), or why a True Fighter, the master of combat maneuvers, would not get it, not to mention that reducing INT and/or WIS with a called shot doesn't make too much sense imo. I'll try to think a bit more about your suggestion though, because it has some merit, but it's not a priority right now considering it would not make a big difference (if any) in terms of actual gameplay, and that the current WS seems to perform quite well, while we have tons of classes which really need of our attention.

Hitting someone at head and maybe throat. Doing whatever you can to disrupt mage's thought processes.

 

Makes you feel shaky during your spellcasting. Let's say, I'll use Flail. And I'll hit you pretty damn hard into your head, aiming at vital for spellcasting spots (mouth/face/head).

For the first round you can't say a word.

Then you casting a spell is still difficult to achieve and also... well, you'll have some severe issues when trying to think clearly.

 

Could be interesting, but unless there is also an AC penalty, I would never use this over the other Called Shot options. Since Called Shot: Arm and Leg inflict disable and trip respectively, you could have Called Shot: Sunder SET the target's AC to a certain number at higher levels. For example, Sets AC = 8 for three rounds on a failed save.

Thought about the same for level 10 effect.

 

The PnP Sunder doesn't even allow to target armor at all, only weapons and shields, so I'm not sure it should affect natural armor.

On the one hand I agree. On the other hand, hey, crushing through dragon's scale or golem's hardened "skin" could be fine. It fits from role playing standpoint.

 

Also, shouldn't Called Shots make you unable to critically strike? They are some kind of "critical" strike on their own already. And that'd prevent some nasty situations while would also provide some kind of better balance for abilities.

[Ardanis]

In AD&D I just can't find situations when I'd find sacrificing ThaC0 for Damage or AC, especially in 1 for 1 currency. Except of those cute situations when it's actually not needed.

If your thaco is too good for a particular encounter - which is often, - there's really no reason not to trade it for extra damage.

 

Okay, AC could be usefull for tanking some dumb AI like golems in De'Arnise... but any mage spell or cleric buff makes you do that 100% better while it turns your offensive capability to useless.

No mage spell can help further a fighter in fullplate.

Defensive Harmony/Barkskin are only good so far, and defense bonus stacks with those.

 

On the one hand I agree. On the other hand, hey, crushing through dragon's scale or golem's hardened "skin" could be fine. It fits from role playing standpoint.

We're talking about natural armor, something that is an inseparable part of the creature. If you could damage it severely enough to make a significant opening, the creature is bound to be mortally wounded, if not outright killed. And golems are monolithic

 

Also, shouldn't Called Shots make you unable to critically strike? They are some kind of "critical" strike on their own already. And that'd prevent some nasty situations while would also provide some kind of better balance for abilities.

I say we wait for custom critical effect opcode to be added in BGIIEE

[yarpen]

Also, shouldn't Called Shots make you unable to critically strike? They are some kind of "critical" strike on their own already. And that'd prevent some nasty situations while would also provide some kind of better balance for abilities.

I'd say you could just give it an effect of granting no chance for critical strike AND making it protect the caster from HLAs like Critical Strike. Then, the only thing that could actually make you crit would be switching into item with crit chance.