Jump to content

Six's random blatherings.


SixOfSpades

Recommended Posts

Class-appropriate Carsomyr

Demi--as I thought I'd pointed out, this wouldn't be another Carsomyr-like weapon: It'd be (essentially) the same weapon, just with a different name and usable only by the kits that deserve it. You're quite correct, some players might not want this change--they like being able to kill one Dragon and have their Cavalier laugh in the face of every spellcaster for the rest of the game. That's why "Class-appropriate Carsomyr" is a separate, optional component in my mod. I just thought that, since it fixes a broken pre-existing item, Item Revisions would be interested, but apparently I was wrong.
What I'm saying is that within IR this weapon shouldn't be broken anymore, and I did it reducing its effectiveness while keeping all its original features. I don't want to please power players, I simply don't want players to ask me why I drastically changed a fan-favourite weapon.

 

 

New item types

As for in-game placement, as I said I think the Blade of Roses and/or Ras might make excellent Rapiers . . . I'd have to look at their icons again, to see if their blades look long & skinny.
Well, actually I did planned to add a rapier, and within older versions it was available too. I changed one of the two Blade of Balduran into the Blade of Sharpness, with a very appropriate bam stolen from IWD. :) Things like that may find place within IR yes...but things like a nunchaku is highly unprobable.

 

* * *

 

Protector of the Second+2

True, the enchantments I suggested (especially Charm Animal) aren't all that snazzy, I just feel that Free Action while equipped is too strong (despite the armor's relatively weak AC). Say, why not just have immunity to Web and Entangle instead? Quite appropriate for Rangers--at least, it's a heck of a lot more appropriate than being immune to Psionic Blast.
Well, Free Action shouldn't grant immunity to Psionic Blast in the first place imo. Anyway, I'm quite open to suggestions on this armor, and I'll think about yours.

 

Since (I assume) IR can change items for Tutu games as well, I'm also considering what effect these changes will have during BG1. As it is, having either Free Action or immunity to Web could remove a lot of the challenge from Cloakwood 2, but then again Sendai is rather difficult to beat at low levels, so I guess it balances out pretty well.
Sendai? Ehm...I was going to write "Mike will kill me for not having played BG1", and he just posted while I was writing this. :grin:

 

Karajah's Armor +3

Armor of Deep Night +4

Armor of the Viper +4

I don't like the idea of changing (or ignoring) an item's original description: In my book, game balance comes first, then realism, developer intent third, and invented coolness fourth. Your changes are cool, yes, but I'd prefer enchantments in the spirit of the original items.
Realism? Anyway, I second what Mike just said. Developers left us tons of unique items not so unique (Karajah's and Deep Night armors had no abilities at all!), and when the original description is two rows long I don't see much developer intent there.

 

Karajah wants quickness and agility, not spellcasting.
I'm sympathetic to this, but as long as the end result would be a lesser Grandmaster's armor I'm against it.

 

Deep Night is about darkness (yeah, despite becoming a common enchantment, Hide in Shadows would be appropriate for this Leather armor) instead of immunity to Backstab. Consider replacing the Backstab immunity with a Fireshield effect: All melee hits force the attacker to Save or be Blinded for a couple of rounds.
You're incredibly fond of fire shield-like effects! :D

 

The Viper is about vulnerability to Poison. IMO, if you want to make an armor with a pro-Poison theme, that's an entirely new item. The Armor of the Viper would be best served by restoring the original Save penalty, and adding roughly 45 points in various Thieving skills.
Just so you know, the original penalty to saves vs poison was actually a -3 penalty vs death, and having this armor work like that would simply have two effects:

* conceptually inconsistency, because it makes you vulnerable to much more than poison (e.g. death effects, diseases,, etc.)

* not a single player would ever use it (and this alone would be more than enough for me to discard the original idea)

 

Mielikki's Gift +4

Yeah--to avoid "Leather Armor with Stealth bonuses" syndrome, it was right to remove that enchantment from the original. The Save vs. Breath bonus just doesn't sit well with me: If you want to reflect quick reflexes or whatever, the DEX bonus is enough. How about also including a small bonus to ranged THAC0, or Animal Summoning 1x/day?
Why saving from breathes doesn't sound like having good reflexes to you? Ranged thac0 bonus on an armor doesn't struck me as very appropriate, while ASI may be fine, but I'm not so sure about adding x/day abilities everywhere (for few things I mentioned many times).

 

And yes, Salk, there is a Tracking ability: It's an HLA, but nobody ever chooses it because it's not a combat skill, and usually only tells the player what they already new. Adding it to this armor is mostly just for flavor.
Actually it should be useful too, as the Tracking Ability I had in mind would let you detect invisible creatures, and bypassing SI:Div too imo.

 

Shadow Armor+3

I think I'd second Mike suggestion. A +3 enchnated armor in BG1 was already quite much, and it didn't make much sense for such an item to be available via store imo.

 

Orc Leather+3

Yeah, I considered Haegan, but thought Borinall was a little better as far as item distribution goes. The Slaver Ship has a Cloak of Protection and 4 CLongbows+1, plus some miscellaneous wands, scrolls & potions, while Borinall's house only has a Warhammer+1. Besides, the Borinall encounter is considerably later in the game. I'm still open to suggestions/arguments, though.
Mee too, and there's an entire topic dedicated to these matters.

 

Shadow Dragonhide+5

The reason I don't like permanent Negative Plane Protection is that the other Dragon armors only provide 50% Resistance to their respective element.
Not only I may second Ardanis, but I consider taking half damage from fire more useful in most situations. You face much more fire-based spells/monsters, and unless you're fighting vampires in SoA level drain is not so common (thought being protected from it is highly valuable).

 

* * *

I need some sleep. I'll reply to everything else when I wake up. ;)

Link to comment
Shadow Armor+3

Unlike having the Protector of the Second to grant immunity to Entangle & Web, having the Shadow Armor allow Wizard spellcasting would be way too overpowered for BG1.

I agree, though I'd favour changing the BG1 version to a different item than altering the BG2 one.

 

Oh no please, that would be a low blow for us BGT players...

 

Nerf it some if you all agree (I don't think it's such an overpowered item) but let's keep it consistent all through the game, thanks.

Link to comment
The Viper is about vulnerability to Poison. IMO, if you want to make an armor with a pro-Poison theme, that's an entirely new item. The Armor of the Viper would be best served by restoring the original Save penalty, and adding roughly 45 points in various Thieving skills.
Just so you know, the original penalty to saves vs poison was actually a -3 penalty vs death, and having this armor work like that would simply have two effects:

* conceptually inconsistency, because it makes you vulnerable to much more than poison (e.g. death effects, diseases,, etc.)

* not a single player would ever use it (and this alone would be more than enough for me to discard the original idea)

 

I am sympathetic with SixOfSpades' attention to consistency between text and item qualities. While I had a plausible justification for Armor of Deep Night's appartent discrepancy between text and protection (the owner was ironically killed by being stabbed to death when not wearing the armor), I agree here about restoring the poison vulnerability.

 

The Claw of Kazgaroth in BG1 has also a similar penalty and it is implemented exactly at the same manner: penalty to Save vs Death.

 

Revise both items, if possible, to just make the wearer weak against poison only (double damage from poison attacks/poison effects, including spells).

Link to comment
Class-appropriate Carsomyr
Well, I think Carsomyr is still fine being restricted to Paladins.
As I said, I'm not against making a powerful weapons for Wizard Slayers, but I really don't feel necessary to make another Carsomyr-like weapon.

Salk--you're fine with which Carsomyr being restricted to Paladins? The one designed to fight evil, or the one designed to kill spellcasters?

 

I am fine with having only one Carsomyr being a bane for evil spellcasters thus restricting it to Paladins only.

Link to comment
Shadow Armor+3

Unlike having the Protector of the Second to grant immunity to Entangle & Web, having the Shadow Armor allow Wizard spellcasting would be way too overpowered for BG1.

I agree, though I'd favour changing the BG1 version to a different item than altering the BG2 one.

 

Oh no please, that would be a low blow for us BGT players...

 

Nerf it some if you all agree (I don't think it's such an overpowered item) but let's keep it consistent all through the game, thanks.

I think in the past we've discussed the difficulty of making an item useful in both BG1 and BG2 without making it overpowered in the former (one of the suggestions was upgrading items in SoA). I've always liked BG1's Shadow Armor, but it was far and away the best armor for thieves before it was revised to allow spellcasting (intended for BG2 use). When I was suggesting to make it a "different" item, I was thinking of reverting it to its vanilla stats, with an altered description to indicate this wouldn't have been worn by Shadowmasters, but thieves of a lesser stature in the organization, and then doing any further revising from there, not changing the item completely.

 

I am sympathetic with SixOfSpades' attention to consistency between text and item qualities. While I had a plausible justification for Armor of Deep Night's appartent discrepancy between text and protection (the owner was ironically killed by being stabbed to death when not wearing the armor), I agree here about restoring the poison vulnerability.

IR's current description makes poison vulnerability the least likely ability the armour would have - it specifically makes note of the suit's immunity to venom. If you're proposing changing the abilities for other reasons, that's fine, but doing so because it doesn't match the vanilla description is quite weird.

Link to comment
Shadow Armor+3

Unlike having the Protector of the Second to grant immunity to Entangle & Web, having the Shadow Armor allow Wizard spellcasting would be way too overpowered for BG1.

I agree, though I'd favour changing the BG1 version to a different item than altering the BG2 one.

 

Oh no please, that would be a low blow for us BGT players...

 

Nerf it some if you all agree (I don't think it's such an overpowered item) but let's keep it consistent all through the game, thanks.

I think in the past we've discussed the difficulty of making an item useful in both BG1 and BG2 without making it overpowered in the former (one of the suggestions was upgrading items in SoA). I've always liked BG1's Shadow Armor, but it was far and away the best armor for thieves before it was revised to allow spellcasting (intended for BG2 use). When I was suggesting to make it a "different" item, I was thinking of reverting it to its vanilla stats, with an altered description to indicate this wouldn't have been worn by Shadowmasters, but thieves of a lesser stature in the organization, and then doing any further revising from there, not changing the item completely.

 

It's very fine to revert the Shadow Armor to its vanilla state (spellcasting not allowed). I would actually prefer that. But the same item can't change to be any different in BG2 so I guess it all depends on what you mean with "further revising".

 

I am sympathetic with SixOfSpades' attention to consistency between text and item qualities. While I had a plausible justification for Armor of Deep Night's appartent discrepancy between text and protection (the owner was ironically killed by being stabbed to death when not wearing the armor), I agree here about restoring the poison vulnerability.

IR's current description makes it poison vulnerability the least likely ability the armour would have - it specifically makes note of the suit's immunity to venom. If you're proposing changing the abilities for other reasons, that's fine, but doing so because it doesn't match the vanilla description is quite weird.

 

I merely seconded SixOfSpades' idea of trying and preserve the vanilla background, when possible and convenient, to facilitate a more seamless integration of such items as part of IR.

 

Since the poison vulnerability was a rather original and welcome characteristic for that armor, I thought that it could have surivived the passage to IR. Indeed, no update to the vanilla description would have been needed in that case. :)

Link to comment

Shadow Armor +3

I've already played several games with BG:T + IR, and I can quite safely say that while the Shadow Armor is powerful for a mage/thief (I always change Imoen to mage/thief multi), it isn't overpowered as Imoen is ANYWAY one of my less resistant characters. She doesn't have to waste a protective spell to lower her AC, but other than that the armor doesn't seem to confer any other really powerful bonuses - while the thieving abilities bonuses are anyway really welcome.

On the other hand, it is true that one could buy the armor quite soon in Beregost, and stick with it for the whole BG1 part of the game.

What I'd do is to leave the armor with both the thieving abilities bonuses and allowed spellcasting, since it makes sense and it doesn't seem overpowered to me, but I'd definitely make it cost a lot more (say ~20.000 or ~30.000 instead of ~10.000), and maybe moving it from Taerum to the thieves guild's shop.

Link to comment
Shadow Armor +3

What I'd do is to leave the armor with both the thieving abilities bonuses and allowed spellcasting, since it makes sense and it doesn't seem overpowered to me, but I'd definitely make it cost a lot more (say ~20.000 or ~30.000 instead of ~10.000), and maybe moving it from Taerum to the thieves guild's shop.

 

This would be a very reasonable solution (well, the price should not really be higher than 20.000 though).

Link to comment

Class-appropriate Carsomyr

Wizard Slayer item restrictions

What I'm saying is that within IR this weapon shouldn't be broken anymore, and I did it reducing its effectiveness while keeping all its original features.

Demi: If the item rightly famed for having the most powerful Magic Resistance and Magic-Dispelling properties in the game is usable by all kinds of Paladins but not by Wizard Slayers, if that item's description states that it's a Holy weapon that stands for Good and Purity--despite the fact that the only Good-related enchantment on it was a small amount of additional damage against (Chaotic) Evil targets, then that item is broken. You nerfed it, well and good, but that wasn't a fix: All you did was make it less broken.

Except then IR would be the mod changing the whole Wizard Slayer kit, which is silly if there's going to be an entire Kit Revisions mod.

If you truly feel that item usability is the sole trait of the Wizard Slayer, that's your prerogative. I was hoping to avoid having to include a "run this if you have Item Revisions installed" component, but it seems I'll have no alternative. Whatever. I wash my hands of it.

 

Karajah's Armor +3

Armor of Deep Night +4

Armor of the Viper +4

I don't like the idea of changing (or ignoring) an item's original description: In my book, game balance comes first, then realism, developer intent third, and invented coolness fourth. Your changes are cool, yes, but I'd prefer enchantments in the spirit of the original items.

Demi and I obviously prefer coolness to developer intent. This mod wouldn't be nearly as fun if it was designed to just improve game balance and realism.

My point was that it's perfectly possible to make cool enchantments that stay true to the original spirit of the item, instead of flying directly in the face of it. If you want to make a Leather armor that stores Wizard spells, or that grants immunity to Backstab, or that casts Cloudkill, that's all well and good--but those armors will NOT be Karajah's, or Deep Night, or the Viper, and have no place using their names or their filenames . . . in fact, they would have little place among Item Revisions at all. The same goes for wanting to turn the Shadow Armor into something practically custom-made for Mae'Var.

 

IR's current description [of the Armor of the Viper]makes it poison vulnerability the least likely ability the armour would have - it specifically makes note of the suit's immunity to venom. If you're proposing changing the abilities for other reasons, that's fine, but doing so because it doesn't match the vanilla description is quite weird.

And rejecting proposals because they don't match the altered description is even weirder. The entire mod is about changing items, but we have to hold a modded item description as gospel?

 

. . . when the original description is two rows long I don't see much developer intent there.

True, but when there IS a decent description I'd much rather work for it than against it. If Karajah thought the light armor aided his quickness and mobility, that suggests Movement Rate, Speed Factor, DEX and ApR, not spellcasting. (Can you really picture a mob of gladiators beating Karajah to death over an enchantment he couldn't possibly have used?) If you want to create a new item basically from scratch, do it with one whose description truly sucks--my favorite being the Harp of Pandemonium. ("Uhhh . . . this item used to belong to somebody . . . who doesn't have it anymore.")

 

Armor of the Viper

. . . not a single player would ever use it (and this alone would be more than enough for me to discard the original idea)

Naturally, anyone with any familiarity with the game at all would know that a Save vs. Death penalty is asking for a big fat Finger of Death down the throat. The vanilla Armor of the Viper could only be made more unappealing by turning it an actual Cursed item and making the player pay a pile of gold for it--after slipping Ribald some extra coin just to have a look. :) But the (best) answer there is not to throw away the original idea, the point is to find a way to balance out the curse with enchantments that make the item actually worth the tradeoff.

 

 

Looking back over this post so far, it seems that I'm a vicious advocate of drastically changing the spirit of a sword, but when it comes to redesigning a suit of armor, I become a staunch traditionalist. I guess for me, everything hinges on the fact that Carsomyr destroys the Wizard Slayer kit (game balance = top priority), while the armors can easily be just as cool while maintaining developer intent. Yes, I supported turning The Night's Gift into Mielekki's Gift, but that's largely because

a) a suit of enchanted leather armor that grants a stealth bonus, oooh how unusual, and

b) the item was flawed in the first place: Minister Lloyd says it belonged to the town's first Ranger protector, yet the description states it's only been owned by Thieves. Etc.

 

Shadow Dragonhide Armor

Some spells are supposed to deal negative energy damage (Vampiric Touch, Harm, Finger of Death, etc.), though they deal magic damage in IE instead. Armor providing immunity to level drain while offering nothing against those spells seems exactly around 50%.

Hm. Well, okay. I'm still not entirely happy, but once somebody rebalances Vampires so that NPP isn't so essential and powerful against them, balance will finally be achieved. Help, I'm turning into a Druid.

 

Protector of the Second+2

Well, Free Action shouldn't grant immunity to Psionic Blast in the first place imo.

Depending on whether or not an optional component of the Fixpack is installed, Free Action grants immunity to Stun.

 

Mielikki's Gift+4

Ranged thac0 bonus on an armor doesn't struck me as very appropriate, while ASI may be fine, but I'm not so sure about adding x/day abilities everywhere

Yeah, I'm just trying to have the armor have more of a "huntsman" flavor, but putting that enchantment on an armor isn't the same as a pair of bracers. And didn't you just say I was slapping Fireshield-based spells on everything? :grin:

 

the Tracking Ability I had in mind would let you detect invisible creatures, and bypassing SI:Div too imo.

What? The Tracking ability becomes useful? Say it ain't so!

THE WORLD COLLAPSES

 

Shadow Armor+3

A +3 enchnated armor in BG1 was already quite much, and it didn't make much sense for such an item to be available via store imo.

Didn't make much sense? This is the Thunderhammer Smithy we're talking about (run by the guy who made the Sentinel Shield, for those unfamiliar with BG1), not some street hawker wandering through Gullykin. Besides, both games are rather short on quality equipment that you have to buy . . . most essentials are available for free, dropped by enemies you were going to be killing anyway, so the Shadow Armor gained additional novelty simply by how you obtained it.

 

* * *

 

Okay, more new stuff.

 

Helm of Resilience

Good, but too powerful to be picked up for free in Jon's Dungeon. Are you planning to move it somewhere? Druids can wear Helmets, and there's not a one to be found in the Grove--wait a minute, that one armored Fighter/Druid that (briefly) helps you fight the Trolls. He'd be a good candidate.

 

Helm of Balduran

It's very arguably the best helm in the entire saga, and it's just sitting on a shelf getting dusty? Slap that thing onto Ilyich's head, pronto! (And include a note in the README that IR should be installed after Improved Ilyich.) Also, in keeping with the "artifact" status of the Helm, I disagree with its enchantments conflicting with a piddling little spell like Aid.

 

Helm of Glory

Wait--did you restore the original animation, or just the Inventory icon? It makes a big difference, to those of us with a sense of style. ;) Anyway, the Blessing is too strong, especially considering how often one can be hit. I would rename it to "Valiant's Retribution" and shorten the duration to 1 round, but also confer immunity to Fear during that round.

 

Helmet of Defense

I actually preferred the +1 to Saves--protecting your weaker party members from physical blows is manageable enough, but Save-or-else AoE spells are a different matter entirely. It's also consistent with the Helm providing elemental resistances instead of physical ones.

 

Dragon Helm

You might make the Fear immunity be a 1x/day casting, but non-dispellable for uniqueness, and add a hefty Save vs. Breath Weapon bonus, to help ensure they keep the thing on (if it's just the +2 THAC0/Damage against Dragons, I'd still prefer to wear Balduran, even against a Dragon). Also, change its location to ANYWHERE in the game rather than right before you fight a Dragon. Perhaps to Firkraag's hoard, to show that he's not a complete moron?

 

Skull of Death

The description says it was used to slay the enemy "commanders," plural, so perhaps it would be better to allow the Death Gaze 3x/day, and remove the death-magic immunity.

 

Helm of Brilliance

I think Sol's Searing Orb, usable 1x or 2x/day, would be more appropriate than Prismatic Spray . . . and the +40% Fire Resistance is a little much.

 

Helm of Darkness

Give it to the Shade Lord, and move the Cloak of the Stars to . . . Anishai? Hmm. Actually, the Helm of Opposite Alignment, is implemented in BG1, it's just nearly impossible to obtain.

 

Vhailor's Helm

Just to make sure you know, the Helm of Balduran's icon in BG1 wasn't the one used by vanilla BG2 Helm of Glory: It was . . . oh wait, go here: http://mikesrpgcenter.com/bgate/armor.html

 

Roranach's Horn

YES, thank you, I might even wear it now. Although to make it more fun, you might add a 1x/day Headbutt ability, with the same effects as a full hit from the completed Staff of the Ram.

 

Thieves' Hood

Considering it's competing with every Helmet and Ioun Stone in the game, even the upgraded vanilla version is laughably pathetic. I would put the Backstab immunity on the first version, along with some decent boosts to Find Traps and Detect Illusions, for those parties stuck with Imoen or Nalia as their Thief. Add the AC, Poison immunity, & True Sight in the upgrade, and you've got a good Thief hat.

 

Helm of the Rock

Considering when you get it, it seems that most enemies who are able to get through your AC are almost guaranteed to make a simple Save vs. Spell, and that's on top of the fact that landing a successful hit usually has the effect of increasing your courage. Instead, I'd have the basic Helm grant immunities to Sleep, Fear, Charm, and Confusion, and with the upgrade it casts both Resist Fear and Horror every round, both with a 15' radius (Save on the Horror to be determined).

 

Adventurer's/Knave's/Traveler's Robe of Cold/Electrical/Fire Resistance

Considering that these robes will almost certainly be worn for just the first 4 or 5 days of the game, are you sure it's worth the effort of tweaking them? This is almost a BG1-only change, as that's pretty much the only setting in which they'll be used. Regardless, the upgraded enchantments are decent, but even in BG1 they're blown away by the Archmagi Robes . . . but then, they're supposed to be. I have to say, though, that I don't like the Movement Rate bonus on the Traveler's Robe: It means my Mage wanders out in front and gets his ass shot off.

But the real change I want to talk about is that I've always considered that the lesser Mage Robes should be wearable by everyone, including Monks, Kensai, and Shapeshifters. If they are no more restrictive than regular clothing, and ALL characters wear clothing, why would these classes/kits shun them? Even Wizard Slayers would tolerate the enchantments on all but the Traveler's and Adventurer's Robes. As for non-Mages not "knowing how" to wear the Robes or being "rejected" by them, I can easily see that happening for potent items like the Archmagi Robes . . . but not for this low-level stuff.

 

Robe of the [Alignment] Archmagi

What do you mean, "unchanged?" Where did this Spell Penetrate come from--I assume it's a 1x/day ability with no Save? If so, that seems okay . . . makes handling Drow a bit easier, at least. But I want to mess with the locations: If any Robe deserves to be held back until Ribald's secret stash, it's Larloch's (which looks good, by the way). I would return the Good Robe to the Trademeet smithy, place the Neutral one in Bernard's special stock, and move the Evil one to Fael's store, thus placing all on the other side of a semi-dangerous quest, some Travel Time (except for the Neutral), and the purchase price, but they're all available in Chapter 2/3. Yes, I'll be adding these item re-allocation suggestions to the proper thread once I've finished my list of all the items. Speaking of which, that's enough for this lot.

 

Oh yes, Vhailor's Helm and Robe of Larloch: "As per SCS, but I have to wait for DavidW." I seem to recall that SCS moves the Robe to Watcher's Keep Level 5 or thereabouts, and I have no idea about the Helm. Is that correct?

Link to comment
Shadow Armor+3

...Besides, both games are rather short on quality equipment that you have to buy . . . most essentials are available for free, dropped by enemies you were going to be killing anyway, so the Shadow Armor gained additional novelty simply by how you obtained it.

 

There is much more to comment about but this seems one interesting point.

 

As general guideline I tend to favour finding special items dropped by enemies. Despite the quality of the artwork of specific smiths (Taerom in this case), I still think that it should be possible to buy enchanted items though limited to a generic bonus (from +2 to +4, say) while items with special qualities (most of all if especially powerful) should be worn most of the time or be part of a treasure for the few others. Having such precious items on sale doesn't strike me as very proper. Especially when considering that the people selling those items, once attacked and defeated, manage to take all those items with them in the underworld.

Link to comment
Except then IR would be the mod changing the whole Wizard Slayer kit, which is silly if there's going to be an entire Kit Revisions mod.

If you truly feel that item usability is the sole trait of the Wizard Slayer, that's your prerogative. I was hoping to avoid having to include a "run this if you have Item Revisions installed" component, but it seems I'll have no alternative. Whatever. I wash my hands of it.

Okay, usability doesn't define the whole of the kit, but it's a quite important part of it. I still don't understand why you think this should be part of IR and not KR. :)

 

Edit: Actually, scratch that last line and what I was saying earlier about KR. I revisited the first post and it seems that you're looking for a version of your Wizard Slayer's item restrictions as appropriate to IR items. I don't know what Demi is planning for the kit, but it's possible KR will take it in a different direction entirely. I think this whole thing would best be handled in the appropriate mods (your kitpack and potentially KR) using a list of information about IR items and an IF statement to determine if IR is installed.

 

IR's current description [of the Armor of the Viper]makes it poison vulnerability the least likely ability the armour would have - it specifically makes note of the suit's immunity to venom. If you're proposing changing the abilities for other reasons, that's fine, but doing so because it doesn't match the vanilla description is quite weird.

And rejecting proposals because they don't match the altered description is even weirder. The entire mod is about changing items, but we have to hold a modded item description as gospel?

That's not what I said. If he has any reasons for changing it other than "because vanilla did it", they should be treated as valid concerns. Even "vanilla's concept was better" is okay. When you're playing with IR installed, you see only IR's description, and in your game, that is the item as far as you and your characters know.

 

I think we just disagree on how closely "revising" needs to stay true to developer intent. Maybe pick a different word if that makes you more comfortable with what IR does. Part of the point of the mod is to create new experiences for the player, so that you aren't always encountering the same old stuff in abilities, or lore - and to make that stuff fun.

Link to comment
If he has any reasons for changing it other than "because vanilla did it", they should be treated as valid concerns. Even "vanilla's concept was better" is okay. When you're playing with IR installed, you see only IR's description, and in your game, that is the item as far as you and your characters know.

 

If you refer to me, I believe I wrote above the reasons why I believe that the armor should keep its original vanilla background/weakness.

 

Notably, it was not even my own feedback in the first place but Six's, which I happen to agree with (while the same argument doesn't - in my opinion - apply to Deep Night because of my personal interpreation of the vanilla text description).

Link to comment
If he has any reasons for changing it other than "because vanilla did it", they should be treated as valid concerns. Even "vanilla's concept was better" is okay. When you're playing with IR installed, you see only IR's description, and in your game, that is the item as far as you and your characters know.

 

If you refer to me, I believe I wrote above the reasons why I believe that the armor should keep its original vanilla background/weakness.

 

Notably, it was not even my own feedback in the first place but Six's, which I happen to agree with.

In that case, all I see is that IR's item doesn't match the vanilla description, which I don't view as a problem.

Link to comment
My point was that it's perfectly possible to make cool enchantments that stay true to the original spirit of the item, instead of flying directly in the face of it. If you want to make a Leather armor that stores Wizard spells, or that grants immunity to Backstab, or that casts Cloudkill, that's all well and good--but those armors will NOT be Karajah's, or Deep Night, or the Viper, and have no place using their names or their filenames . . . in fact, they would have little place among Item Revisions at all.
Well, don't you think that if it was possible to have a great variety of effects I would have preferred to keep the original "spirit" of the item? Writing new descriptions or extending original ones took me a lot of time, and I gladly keep the original ones whenever possible! Anyway, staying true to "developer intent" on each item is certainly not the top priority of IR, because allowing the widest variety of abilities and unique features, while keeping everything as balanced as possible comes first.

 

If to stay true to developer intents I have to make 2-3 light armors work almost the same way (e.g. Shadow Armor, Night's Gift, and Armor of Deep Night) I have no intention to work in that direction.

 

True, but when there IS a decent description I'd much rather work for it than against it.
Indeed this is exactly within IR's philosophy. The problem is that you may consider "decent" a description which for IR's standards is only a draft. When I find cool descriptions within vanilla's items I'm the first one happy about it, and I do strive to remain true to such backgrounds.

 

 

Shadow Armor +3

The same goes for wanting to turn the Shadow Armor into something practically custom-made for Mae'Var.
Actually I turned it into something custom made for any Shadowmaster (it would be great on Aran too), and I remained quite true to the original spirit of this armor. Shadow Armor's background tells us these suits are created exclusively for Shadowmasters, and if 2 of the 3 Shadowmasters you face in BG are M/T I think my changes are very appropriate.

 

Regarding my statement that having it sold by a smith doesn't make much sense: I didn't mean to say that I can't see a powerful item sold by the same smith who crafted it, but this armor belongs to a Shadowmaster, and I think the Shadow Thieves would retreive such armor as soon as possible. If it has to remain in a store, it should be a heavily guarded one.

 

That being said, raising its value a little, and making it available a little later in BG1 is fine with me. If I'm not wrong many of you would find this a good solution even for an unmodded Shadow Armor, as it was by far the best BG1 light armor, and it was available too soon. I don't know much about BG1 thus I can't say if kthxbye's suggestion about Taerum is the best solution, but I do vote to follow the concept of his suggestion about making it more hard to obtain.

 

 

Darkmail+3

Since the original description implies its use against Red Dragons, beefing up its original Fire Resistance to, say, 30 or 35%, and carrying over your Fear immunity, would seem fitting. I don't really see a reason for a Disease immunity.
IR's descriptions is the following: "Whether by design or through exposure to extensive military campaigns and battles, the chain links of this armor are coal black throughout. While legends usually speak of knights in shining armor facing vile beasts, the enchantments on this suit suggest equally great, if unheralded, battles with evil creatures of darkness."

 

Don't you think fire resistance is really too common as magical enhancement?

 

 

Jester's Chain+4

I like the Prismatic Spray ability, but not the elemental resistances. A better plan would be making this an Elven Chain with no spellcasting penalty, adding immunity to Intoxication, and letting it cast Protection from Missiles at least 2x/day (in case there's a matinee performance as well).
The elemental resistances are tied to the Prismatic effect. Anyway I thought too about making it allow spellcasting, but then I would have to restrict it for bards, and I actually discarded the idea only because we already have tons of elven chains. :grin:

 

 

Crimson Chain+5

The Rages are quite interesting. I don't know if I like the Tireless Rage, as I think becoming winded after a rage is quite balanced, but I don't know how many others agree.
I'm not sure either, but it's indeed a very unique feature for the most heavily enchanted chain mail in the game.

 

The Blood Rage is going to make the armor unusable in ToB: A 5% chance per hit of not being able to control things like drinking Potions & Critical Strike? What's this going to be like under Insect Plague? Better to make this be an X-times-per-day ability.
As an x/day ability it would lose half of its uniqueness. I'd prefer to remove the "uncontrollable" part if necessary", but it's actually what balanced eveything up imo. With this armor you could have your berskerker enrage without worrying of having him tired in the midlle of a fight, and the blood rage would potentially make him even more powerful, but this at the cost of entering into an uncontrollable frenzy.

 

Furthermore, Chaotic Commands should grant immunity to berserk state and I planned to add an item which granted "calm emotions" or something like that (the whole idea come up when we were discussing about set items a la Diablo).

 

 

Ashen Scales+3

If it's usable by Druids & Beastmasters, I take it you removed the reference to chain mail? The Poison immunity sounds good . . . I would add a THAC0/Damage boost against Wyverns, but of course there are only 2 of them in the game.
At the cost of sounding repetitive adding thac0/damage via armor doesn't seem much appropriate to me. A "protection from wyvern" effect would be more appropriate, but hardly important considering by the time you have this armor you'll probably never fight a wyvern for the rest of the game.

 

 

Armor of Faith+3

The near-unobtainability of this armor really dims my enthusiasm about tweaking it. Personally, I think it should stack with its namesake spell, this would be overpowered on late-Dual Barbarian->Clerics, but how many of those do you see? Either that, or the armor simply casts AoF and confers a WIS bonus (and/or Chant) while equipped.
You don't need a dualed barbarian/cleric to make this armor "overpowered", and I may prefer a permanent non-stackable AoF (20% res) over a 10% stackable, because ironically it may end up being more balanced.

 

 

White Dragon Scale+5

The Cone of Freezing Cold is good, but I forget if the spell has the Slow ability as well, or just the damage.
The "slow" effect is a custom feature. This is called Cone of Freezing Cold and not Cone of Cold. :love:

 

About Dragon armors mimicking various types of armors: If I had my way, all Dragons would drop four sets of Scales...
It's not going to happen, even if it conceptually makes sense.

 

 

Sylvan Chain+2

Pretty good. You might as well throw in a bonus to Save vs. Polymorph, just to keep things in their "natural" state.

 

Also, can we please do something about the way so many of the best items in the game (especially Elven Chains) are green? I'm getting sick of it. Larloch's Robe was a good start.
Gorgon Plate is not green anymore. :hm: elven chains have to remian green imo, except Asylferund one, which I've slightly edited to allow more "gold".

 

 

Dark Elven Chain

Casts Spider Spawn 2x/day, possibly immune to Web.
Seems appropriate though I'd like to point out one thing: you seem to be extremely fond of x/day abilities, but I'm not particulalry into them unless "necessary" or very interesting. I don't like the idea of a fighter with an entire spellbook at his disposal because each magical item he store in the backpack can be used to cast any sort of spell.

 

 

Melodic Chain+3

Yeah, immunity to Silence is perfect. Since the armor plays its own tune, though, maybe it should have a weak Bard Song all of its own, playing even while the wearer is actually fighting or casting spells.
Interesting. I actually thought about making it replace the bard's song with a custom one, but a x/day ability in this case may be more "user-friendly".

 

 

Bladesinger Chain+4

I'd like to have a little more "Blade" and "Singer" in the enchantments. How about THAC0 and CHA bonuses?
Again thac0??!!! :):) Anyway, the concept here is that Bladesingers are elven fighter/mages, and having the armor let you cast spells while armored and do it quicker than usual seem quite appropriate.

 

 

Asylferund Elven Chain+5

I would add +1 Saving Throw bonuses as well.
I don't know, an armor with base AC 0 which lets you cast spells with a bonus to casting speed seems quite powerful to me, but I'm nothing against a small additional feature.

 

 

Radiant Plate+3

I think this is restored in the Tactics Improved North Forest. Personally, I'd shun anti-Evil effects, as there are plenty in the game already. Hmm . . . how about +2 to spellcasting level and -20% chance of Spell Failure while equipped? These would seem interesting enough for BG2, yet subtle enough for BG1. Personally, I think this armor is big & shiny enough to justify blocking all Stealth while worn. Since the armor is now "Neutral" in alignment, perhaps it should be in the Helm temple instead of Lathander's.
Spellcasting level cannot be modified, and reducing spellcasting failure doesn't seem a great effect, is it? ;)

 

 

Delver's Plate+3

The original only provided a bonus to Save vs. Spells . . . I don't think I like it being better than Full Plate plus an RoP+2 in the same slot. I would make it just a +3 bonus to Save vs. Spells, and immunities to Feeblemind and Ray of Enfeeblement.
:D What can I say, I'll think about it.

 

 

Doomplate+3

I was going to suggest Fire Resistance and Fireshield:Red, but your idea is definitely better.
:love:

 

 

Gorgon Plate+4/Deep Guardian Plate +4

I have no idea what a Gorgon's natural immunities are, so I can't speak for the difference between Fire/Acid resistance and low-level spell immunity. But surely immunity to Petrification would fit the name?
Gorgons don't have any natural immunity.

 

This is vanilla's description: "Hunting Gorgons is a highly dangerous drow sport. Often, after a successful hunt, the blood of the Gorgon is taken and used in the creation of a new suit of plate. This special type of drow plate is actually able to withstand the light of the surface world."

 

And this is IR's one: "In an effort to better protect their soldiers, the artificers of ancient Imaskar set about creating a kind of living symbiote, something that would bond with their user and protect them from harm. Using specimens pulled from the deepest pits of the ocean, the Imaskari spellcasters slowly began to graft these magically-enhanced creatures onto suits of plate mail, weaning them off of salt water and forcing them to rely on magic for nourishment. This technique worked well, allowing the user a far greater resistance to spells than normal... but other magewrights looked upon this creation with a growing fear, worried that a creature that fed on magic might soon grow too hungry and feed upon its masters instead. Because of this, only a few suits of this armor were ever made, and the creatures created by the Imaskari sealed away and forgotten.

 

The living symbiote feeds itself with low level spells and consumes them in the process, thus making the wearer completely immune to 1st and 2nd level spells. Unfortunately it doesn't distinguish between harmful and friendly magic, but at least it doesn't seem to interfere with spells casted by the wearer."

 

 

Red Dragonplate Armor+5

Since the White casts Cone of Cold, why not Fireball? Hardly unique, of course, but then neither are Red Dragons.

 

 

Shuruppak's Plate +5

Well, as the description says "butchery," "bloodthirsty," and "slaughter," apparently BioWare didn't picture this item as being worn by a Mage. However, the text doesn't specify that Shuruppak himself wore the armor, the right hand of Gilgeam may have entrusted the Plate to his own right hand. So it would be a unique twist to give this armor a 1x/day ability to generate a powerful summon, inside the armor: The armor drops off you & onto the ground, where it grows a Mindless Killer who fights for you for 2 turns, dropping the armor again when it is slain. It should probably be possible to have this ability usable from the Inventory as well, so you don't have to be able to wear the armor yourself.

As for more mundane matters, in keeping with its description it shouldn't have and DEX or Movement Rate penalties at all. But yeah, losing the Fire Resistance was good.

Shakti Figurine already do what you suggest, and I don't think players (an me) would like to have an armor which is used only to summon a custom creature, without even equipping it...

 

 

Pride of the Order+2

This is renamed from Pride of the Legion, yes? Either way, I forget how you get it, I believe it's a reward for the Paladin stronghold, in which case the enchantments would be nicely fitting. You might add Bless while equipped, though.
You get it after you complete the Paladin stronghold quests yes (but before completing the last mission against Firkraag). Bless would be appropriate yes, but isn't this armor already quite heavily enchanted?

 

 

Death Knight Armor +3

The Necromancy immunity is only going to affect hostile spells--not only is it possible to remove the item to allow friendly Necromancy to pass, it's quite plausible as well, "Duh, I should take my armor off so the Cleric can heal me." Doffing the Grandmaster's Armor to accept an Improved Haste would be cheesy, but this would not be, as most restorative spells are cast well out of combat anyway. So I'm of two minds about the Spell Immunity--yeah, the armor deserves a powerful effect, but THAT powerful?
Player's feedback on this is essential, but I'm talking about real playtesting.

 

I would make the Death Armor backlash do Magic Damage instead of Cold, and have the armor Set Melee Effect while equipped, making all hits cause an extra 1D4 Cold damage.
Having the armor grant the wearer a permanent 1d4 additional cold damge on hit is not particularly appropriate imo, and quite too much.

 

 

I'll reply to your other post asap.

 

P.S From now on I may not reply to each and every suggestion for each item because between this, actually working on IR, checking and working on SR beta testing reports, I really have very few spare time. This doesn't mean that I don't appreciate unreplied suggestions, I do, but just that I'll comment those which I consider more important, or those which may need more discussion. I may actually end up implementing a suggestion of yours even if we don't discuss it. :D

Link to comment
Shadow Armor +3

What I'd do is to leave the armor with both the thieving abilities bonuses and allowed spellcasting, since it makes sense and it doesn't seem overpowered to me, but I'd definitely make it cost a lot more (say ~20.000 or ~30.000 instead of ~10.000), and maybe moving it from Taerum to the thieves guild's shop.

 

This would be a very reasonable solution (well, the price should not really be higher than 20.000 though).

why is that? there is np way you can have 20k gp in the first half of the game (considerng you also spend your money on other things like spells and ammo) playing with 4-6 characters IMO.

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...