IR V3 - List of changes from V2 to V3

[Demivrgvs]

Are you any closer to a beta release?

Ardanis had to go mia for a week right after we decided for a pre-release without waiting for Mike's return. That was 4-5 days ago, thus he should be around anytime soon. He said he should be able to handle almost all of Mike's components (except BGT/Tutu extended compatibility for BG1), and if he does than we're set to go.

 

I've been uber busy myself, and I wasn't in a hurry because of Mike and Ardanis absence, but I'll post all swords asap (almost all of them are exactly as we discussed).

[Shaitan]

Nice!

 

I'll be lloking foreward to playtest IR.

 

Cheers mate

[J Beau]

Have you changed the thrown weapon types that benefit from strength bonuses? If so, which ones benefit from strength and which ones don't?

[Demivrgvs]

Have you changed the thrown weapon types that benefit from strength bonuses? If so, which ones benefit from strength and which ones don't?

It has remained unchanged. "Heavy" weapons get STR bonus (axes, hammers, spears) while light ones don't (daggers, darts), but the latters have 2x or 3x apr.

[yarpen]

Count me in for betatests!

[mikel123]

New to this thread as a whole. Some early thoughts though:

 

I'm not sure why you calculate "total enhancement". You're adding quantities of things in different units; the result is not going to be indicative of anything.

 

I'm not sure I agree with the nerfing of certain weapons because they become available "too early" in the game. For example the Dwarven Thrower. To get this weapon you need to go to the City Gates I believe to get the Trademeet quest. Then you have to go to Trademeet, meet the genies, and travel to the Druid Grove, kill a bunch of trolls (not easy for a brand new party) and then kill some Rakshasa's (not easy for a brand new party). If you want to say the Sentient Sword is available too early, fine. You get dumped in the Slums and I'd bet a ton of people bump into that quest. But the odds of just stumbling into Trademeet right out of Chapter 1 is pretty unlikely.

 

V3 is BRUTAL on boomerang weapons. For one thing, both Fire Tooth and Boomerang Dagger should be base 2d4; thrown weapons do double their base damage. (Actually, Halcyon should thus be 2d6, which is why there's no boomerang spears in the actual game). Yes, this makes them powerful, but given that one can't equip an offhand weapon with them, they're not gamebreaking. They're on the right power level, in my opinion... good, interesting, but not amazing. Rifthome then gets a nerf even though it's only available to a minority of players (those who side with the Vampires) and even then you get it right before you should be setting sail for Chapter 4. Azuredge, OK fine that deserves a nerf :-) Dwarven Thrower... my goodness. As I mention above, it is technically available early to a player who knows about it and goes right for it. Assuming they can handle Trolls and Rakshasa's at low levels. But how many parties have a Dwarf that has proficiencies in the war hammer? Korgan is the only dwarf NPC and he comes ready for axes. And there's more than enough good ones of those to make him never wont for a better weapon. So the dwarven thrower only really matters if you make a PC who intends on using it, or something truly random like a Dwarven Cleric. Probably unlikely enough that it doesn't require a nerf.

 

Anyways, I loved V2 when I tried it for the first time the other day. But just figured I'd pass along my first impressions of the changes to V3. Other than the above complaints, I think it looks really great.

[J Beau]

They have a thing about not having +3 weapons before the Underdark except for a couple of their favorites. There is a very low threshold for what overpowered means in this mod. I never saw the value in total enchantment myself. You can have an item with a bunch of minor powers that could raise its enchantment level to +10, but it could still be a crappy item. Not all powers are equal yet they are treated equal when you assign a total enchantment value. It has limited value in its application imho. But this is Demi's mod and he can do what he wants.

 

Oh, I'm not sure but I think there is a tweak for throwing daggers to be used in off hand.

[Ardanis]

You know, I've been pondering on the possibility of making the Enchantment Nerf a separate component, much like Weapon Changes and Speed Factor.

 

For example the Dwarven Thrower. To get this weapon you need to go to the City Gates I believe to get the Trademeet quest.

It's no longer in Trademeet but in Athkatla. The logic behind this decision is that there's no unique hammer at all available prior completing stronghold quests.

 

For one thing, both Fire Tooth and Boomerang Dagger should be base 2d4; thrown weapons do double their base damage. (Actually, Halcyon should thus be 2d6, which is why there's no boomerang spears in the actual game).

I have to admit that's news to me. But then in vanilla there're still thrown axes and hammers (except Dwarven) that do not have the double damage value.

[Guest Guest_J Beau_*]

I would be all for a separate component. I don't know how much work that would be but it would certainly make the mod appeal to a wider audience.

[Demivrgvs]

Enhancement lvl

I'm not sure why you calculate "total enhancement". You're adding quantities of things in different units; the result is not going to be indicative of anything.

I'm following more or less the same rules used by PnP D&D to determine the enhancement lvl of items, but due to the fact we're using way more unique effects than those presented in PnP books it may be difficult to determine the "enhancement bonus" of a particular effect. For example a Dispelling weapon in PnP can use its effect only 3 times per day, and "costs" as a +1 enhancement bonus, but within BG the effect is triggered on each hit infinite times per day and I consider it a +2 bonus.

 

The whole system is used to quickly get an overall impression of a weapon's power lvl. I know it isn't perfect (PnP too is far from perfect), but it works very fine, and I couldn't imagine myself designing hundreds of items, and keeping track of the overall balance without it.

 

They have a thing about not having +3 weapons before the Underdark except for a couple of their favorites.

Which weapons are supposed to be our favourites? The only 1handed +3 weapons in the early part of the game are Dragonslayer, Root of the Problem and MoD, but all of them are Bane weapons. EDIT: I forgot FoA, which I do still consider slightly over the top despite my nerf.

 

That being said, I use UD as "marker" to determine when I can start to give players +3 weapons because the party is supposed to already be relatively powerful by the time they reach it or quickly get powerful adventuring in such a dangerous place. Furthermore players don't necessarily need +3 weapons until they are forced to fight UD's Baalor. There are a couple of exception like Planar Sphere's Iron Golems for high lvl parties, but we're handling that (you have 2handed weapons and Enchanted Weapon scroll).

 

There is a very low threshold for what overpowered means in this mod. I never saw the value in total enchantment myself. You can have an item with a bunch of minor powers that could raise its enchantment level to +10, but it could still be a crappy item. Not all powers are equal yet they are treated equal when you assign a total enchantment value. It has limited value in its application imho.

I don't understand how you can claim I treat all powers the same way, nor how it is possible to have a crappy weapon with a +10 enhancement lvl. Can you give me some examples?

 

P.S Yes, the threshold is relatively low within IR, especially within V3, but many players (roleplayers in particular) consider it a pro not a con. I prefer a challenging game over an easy run with over the top equipment, and I prefer to have a "believable world" where highly enchanted weapons are very rare, and I get a truly great sense achievement when I finally get a +3/+4 weapon, instead of having a world where +3 weapons grow on trees and my party is fully armed with them as soon as I get out of the first dungeon. You're obviously free to prefer Improved Anvil and its +10 vorpal weapons, but the spirit behind IR is clearly the opposite.

 

You know, I've been pondering on the possibility of making the Enchantment Nerf a separate component, much like Weapon Changes and Speed Factor.

It would be a serious mess imo. For example restoring Frostreaver's +3 enchantment lvl on top of its cold damage and slow effect means getting an incredibly powerful weapon too early in the game. It's not going to break the game, but it is going to seriously mess the overall balance of items.

 

Returning Weapons

V3 is BRUTAL on boomerang weapons. For one thing, both Fire Tooth and Boomerang Dagger should be base 2d4; thrown weapons do double their base damage. (Actually, Halcyon should thus be 2d6, which is why there's no boomerang spears in the actual game). Yes, this makes them powerful, but given that one can't equip an offhand weapon with them, they're not gamebreaking.

Afaik there never was a rule like "thrown weapons deal 2x dmg". As Ardanis says most returning weapons didn't (Throwing Daggers too), not even in vanilla, and within IR you can equip them as offhand weapons.

 

P.S I actually received many complaints about those daggers still looking as throwing bastard swords in older versions of IR.

 

For example the Dwarven Thrower. To get this weapon you need to go to the City Gates I believe to get the Trademeet quest.

It's no longer in Trademeet but in Athkatla. The logic behind this decision is that there's no unique hammer at all available prior completing stronghold quests.

Was it? I thought you can still get both Wrath of Tyr and Rift Hammer early on before completing any stronghold quest.

 

Anyway, this specific hammer is already more enchanted (base +2, returning +1, double dmg +1, and racial enemy "for free") than most SoA 1handed weapons exactly because of its race restriction. I guess we could remove the double dmg feature and restore its +3 enchantment lvl if we don't want to be so strict about having +3 weapons early on, but I'm not sure.

[Ardanis]

Furthermore players don't necessarily need +3 weapons until they are forced to fight UD's Baalor.

And even then they still can kill the gnome and loot the stone. It's nice to have a situation when there's little choice but to commit an evil act

 

It would be a serious mess imo. For example restoring Frostreaver's +3 enchantment lvl on top of its cold damage and slow effect means getting an incredibly powerful weapon too early in the game. It's not going to break the game, but it is going to seriously mess the overall balance of items.

Sure. But since people do complain about too heavy nerfs, offering two options - lite (v2) and recommended (v3) - should satisfy the most. In future versions it may also be expanded to include mod-added items.

 

Was it? I thought you can still get both Wrath of Tyr and Rift Hammer early on before completing any stronghold quest.

Oh, I forgot. Apparently, the best possible course of action is to finish the beta and listen to feedback on a full install

[mikel123]

For information about why thrown daggers should be 2d4 damage:

http://forums.gibberlings3.net/index.php?s...ire+tooth\

 

There is actually a canonical explanation for why the throwing daggers do 2d4 damage. Per the 2e DM's guide......... "A succesful hit when it is thrown will inflict twice normal dagger damage, plus the bonus provided by the blade......." That was probably what bioware was thinking about when they set the weapon's damage at 2d4.

 

And in fact, Boomerang and Firetooth properly do the double damage in vanilla. The thread in the link above explains why I think the Fixpack erroneously adjusts Firetooth to 1d4 base. Thrown axes do not do the double damage in vanilla. The Dwarven Thrower does do double, and barring some info from 2e DM's guide about thrown hammers, my guess is that this is because it's a d4-based weapon instead of d6, and so it was treated like a dagger. Just a guess. (do note that instead of doubling its 1d4+1, it just doubles the d4 and lops off the +1, so it's 2d4 base, +3 for the enchantment on the Dwarven Thrower).

 

For example restoring Frostreaver's +3 enchantment lvl on top of its cold damage and slow effect means getting an incredibly powerful weapon too early in the game.

 

See this is kind of the problem though. Understood, it's not my mod it's yours. But your concept of "incredibly powerful" and "too early" is pretty different from mine, and probably many other players. That's the whole reason someone suggested putting this as a toggle option. Make it an option and trust players to play as they like. Much of the reason I think people aren't viewing things like the Frostreaver +3 as powerfully as you view it is because (a) they use SCS, which creates a bazillion Greater Mummies all over the place, and (b) they are using Item Randomizer, which makes it impossible to know where these +3's are hidden. Early +3's are only "early" because we know where they are and we go straight to them :-)

[Demivrgvs]

There is actually a canonical explanation for why the throwing daggers do 2d4 damage. Per the 2e DM's guide......... "A succesful hit when it is thrown will inflict twice normal dagger damage, plus the bonus provided by the blade......." That was probably what bioware was thinking about when they set the weapon's damage at 2d4.

And in fact, Boomerang and Firetooth properly do the double damage in vanilla. The thread in the link above explains why I think the Fixpack erroneously adjusts Firetooth to 1d4 base. Thrown axes do not do the double damage in vanilla. The Dwarven Thrower does do double, and barring some info from 2e DM's guide about thrown hammers, my guess is that this is because it's a d4-based weapon instead of d6, and so it was treated like a dagger. Just a guess. (do note that instead of doubling its 1d4+1, it just doubles the d4 and lops off the +1, so it's 2d4 base, +3 for the enchantment on the Dwarven Thrower).

Well, that quote actually refers to a unique item listed in that book, specifically the Dagger of Throwing, which even has an incremented range up to 180 feet! The 2x dmg isn't a standard rule for any thrown weapon, neither daggers nor axes/hammers (in fact Dwarven Thrower's description expressly states the double dmg feature because it's not a "normal thing").

 

Anyway, the problem here is that I don't see any explanation to justify throwing daggers having 2x dmg, can you give me one? I don't even see much reasons behind the 2x apr (it was indeed within 2ed rules, 3ed removed it) but I kept it because it's relatively more acceptable than the concept behind "throwing bastard swords" imo, and most of all it helps keep things varied and balanced. Axes/hammers get STR bonus, daggers/darts get higher apr (which is even better than STR bonus for characters like rogues and mages who are not supposed to have high STR), but making a tiny dagger deal more base dmg than a heavier axe or hammer makes little sense imo, and having both 2x apr and 2x dmg would surely ruin the balance between daggers and axes/hammers.

 

For example restoring Frostreaver's +3 enchantment lvl on top of its cold damage and slow effect means getting an incredibly powerful weapon too early in the game.

See this is kind of the problem though. Understood, it's not my mod it's yours. But your concept of "incredibly powerful" and "too early" is pretty different from mine, and probably many other players. That's the whole reason someone suggested putting this as a toggle option. Make it an option and trust players to play as they like. Much of the reason I think people aren't viewing things like the Frostreaver +3 as powerfully as you view it is because (a) they use SCS, which creates a bazillion Greater Mummies all over the place, and (b) they are using Item Randomizer, which makes it impossible to know where these +3's are hidden. Early +3's are only "early" because we know where they are and we go straight to them :-)

I said myself that having Frostreaver get +3 enchantment isn't going to break your game, but it's seriously breaking the balance between weapons.

 

Having SCS installed doesn't imply you need more powerful items imo, that's how Improved Anvil works, and it's a logic I really don't agree with. If you make monsters harder to beat, and then you give yourself more powerful equipment you pratically nullify your previous work on monsters (ending up in an endless loop of increasingly harder monsters and insane weapons).

 

That being said, if playtesting will tell that a particular weapon is too weak/unappealing I don't mind rethinking it, but keep in mind IR isn't intended to make the game easier, and afaik most IR players (at least judging by those posting more often here like Shaitan, Salk, Dakk, Yarpen etc.) seemed to agree with our "nerfs".

 

Regarding Item Randomizer, it's a really nice concept and mod, but it's going to clash with V3's re-allocations, making the two more or less incompatible. Technically they could still be compatible (Ardanis may correct me here) but conceptually they are on opposite sides.

[Dakk]

If you make monsters harder to beat, and then you give yourself more powerful equipment you pratically nullify your previous work on monsters (ending up in an endless loop of increasingly harder monsters and insane weapons).

This. SCS + IR = fighting (more) intelligent opponents with balanced weapons, not fighting cheating opponents with überweapons. As Demi says, if you have monsters with random immunities but then get your hands on a +10 Sword of Megadeath, it kind of cancels out, but that's not the atmosphere we ("we" meaning most of the persistent IR-crowd) are going for.

 

Playtesting will show if "nerfing" - I much prefer "balancing" - has gone too far, or not far enough, IMHO.

 

EDIT: Oh, and having the balancing and redistribution of weapons as a component, what would that accomplish? Some weapons would be no-brainers still, and others would, likewise still, be crap. Possibly not crap in and of itself, but if a weapon is outdone in all aspects by another weapon, it wouldn't be used right? As far as I see it, IR is the sum of it's parts, and removing such central features as have been discussed would render the entire mod moot.

[Thailog]

Frankly, I'm getting the feeling that IR is running in circles with this. First, it nerfs some weapons while powering up others. Next, it moves the weapons around to compensate for this. Then, it readjusts weapon power again to account for the new locations. That just doesn't make much sense to me.

 

IMHO, item randomization should be left to other mods which are better suited for it. Instead, IR should just try to make the items as balanced as possible for their vanilla locations. Just my 2 cents.

 

Also, lowering the base weapon enchantment (the +x which determines whether it can hit a creature or not) just because of some arbitrary rule that +3 weapons are not needed before Underdark is utter nonsense. Many players like to tackle dangerous quests like thr Planar Sphere and Watcher's Keep before going to Spellhold, and not having +3 weapons here presents them with a problem.