3rd edition bonuses for ability points

[Jarno Mikkola]

That said, I likely want it this way:

wizard, sorc - 1

thief, bard, druid - 2

cleric, monk, ranger - 3

paladin, fighter - 4

barbarian - 5

Can't be done without ugly hacks... As the HPxxx.2da's only cover ...monk..., ...wiz...(-ards/mage+Sorcerer), ...rog...(-ues; Thief+Bard), ...pri...(-est; Clerics+Druid) and ...war...(-riors; Paladin, Ranger, Fighter) and their kits which one is Barbarian (as Fighter kit).... and when we talk about ugly, they need to be done in every kit for the class, and up to the 50th level, that ugly.

 

Edit:

...max: 42...

We just talked about this, mages get 10 *1d4, so the max is 45, but anyway, but the 59 is way too much yes.

And let's not forget the Kangaxx the Lich is 27th level mage with Con 11 (--> max 57), but he just has 126 Hit points, it seems like the rotting of the corpse makes you more healthy.

[Salk]

Most hostile NPCs have in fact their hit dice maxed out.

They do not

 

They don't?

 

Let's just take a look at few of the hostile NPC humans from unmodded Shadow of Amn, browsing the Near Infinity creature list (with enemy allegiance) in alphabetical order:

 

Sir Beverus - Paladin lvl 16 No Cos Bonus: Hit Points 102 (possible minimum: 30, max: 108 )

Alhelor - Mage lvl 18 Cos Bonus +2: Hit Points 38 (possible minimum: 36, max: 63)

Mercenary - Berserker lvl 5 Cos Bonus +2: Hit Points 50 (possible minimum: 15, max: 60)

Monk - Monk lvl 6 Cos Bonus +2: Hit Points 45 (possible minimum: 18, max: 60)

Amnish Centurion - Fighter lvl 16 Cos Bonus +4: Hit Point 101 (possible minimum: 66, max: 147)

Cleric of Lathander - Priest lvl 10 No Cos Bonus: Hit Points 60 (possible minimum: 11, max: 80)

Archer - Figher lvl 12 Cos Bonus +2: Hit Points 99 (possible minimum: 36, max: 117)

Mage - Mage lvl 15 No Cos Bonus: Hit Points 59 (possible minimum: 15, max: 42)

Priest of Cyric - Priest lvl 14 No Cos Bonus: Hit Points 94 (possible minimum: 19, max: 46)

 

(jump randomly in the middle of the list)

 

Assassin - Thief lvl 15 Cos Bonus +2: Hit Points 72 (possible minimum: 39, max: 84)

 

And now after looking at these first entries I don't think I need to go further down to see a clear pattern (only Alhelor, a mage, has low hit points). Not only the trend is rather clear, but two entries are even largely illegal, exceeding the possible max hit points for that level!

[Ardanis]

Can't be done without ugly hacks... As the HPxxx.2da's only cover ...monk..., ...wiz...(-ards/mage+Sorcerer), ...rog...(-ues; Thief+Bard), ...pri...(-est; Clerics+Druid) and ...war...(-riors; Paladin, Ranger, Fighter) and their kits which one is Barbarian (as Fighter kit).... and when we talk about ugly, they need to be done in every kit for the class, and up to the 50th level, that ugly.

I don't see it a problem to read a list of tree hugger CLABs and append each with a row of AP_ONEHPs.

 

And now after looking at these first entries I don't think I need to go further down to see a clear pattern (only Alhelor, a mage, has low hit points). Not only the trend is rather clear, but two entries are even largely illegal, exceeding the possible max hit points for that level!

Most of your entries have ~80% of the maximum value. I'm fairly sure this can't be called 'they have hit dice maxed out'. Yes, few have near the minimum, but how many (N)PCs do?

[the bigg]

Yes, few have near the minimum, but how many (N)PCs do?

Jaheira (and Minsc to a lesser extent)

[Constantine]

I am talking about removal of the Con bonus cap, but it needs to be done so that it's balanced in my eyes, and that's not the 3ed way of (Con -10)/2... which grants the mages the +4 at Con 18, alike the warriors gain. The games using the third ed also had the stats cost more to increase with +1 for a reason...

Oh, my. And why a mage with CON 18 should receive less HP than a fighter with CON 18? Stats should remain irrespective to character classes.

[Jarno Mikkola]

Can't be done without ugly hacks... As the HPxxx.2da's only cover ...monk..., ...wiz...(-ards/mage+Sorcerer), ...rog...(-ues; Thief+Bard), ...pri...(-est; Clerics+Druid) and ...war...(-riors; Paladin, Ranger, Fighter) and their kits which one is Barbarian (as Fighter kit).... and when we talk about ugly, they need to be done in every kit for the class, and up to the 50th level, that ugly.

I don't see it a problem to read a list of tree hugger CLABs and append each with a row of AP_ONEHPs.

Hmm, if you put it that way then yes, it can be done... _{one just has to read the K_D_x's, then append the CLABxxx.2da's those indicate, easy, you'll now just have to code it.}

 

I am talking about removal of the Con bonus cap, but it needs to be done so that it's balanced in my eyes, and that's not the 3ed way of (Con -10)/2... which grants the mages the +4 at Con 18, alike the warriors gain. The games using the third ed also had the stats cost more to increase with +1 for a reason...

Oh, my. And why a mage with CON 18 should receive less HP than a fighter with CON 18? Stats should remain irrespective to character classes.

Hmm, balance perhaps? Let's see, I'll cast a magic missile onto your fighter that has 1 hit point... I'll always win, well, expect against the rare occasion you have a Wizard Slayer and then you have a 2% chance of winning(because your magic resistance). My mage has also 1 hit point, but that doesn't matter so much as the fighter never gets that close.

 

Dermit also has a good point.

[Dermit]

Oh, my. And why a mage with CON 18 should receive less HP than a fighter with CON 18? Stats should remain irrespective to character classes.

 

Hitpoints represent more than just physical health, in a way it is an abstraction of a character's survivability. I think this is the reason for the different HD between classes. An axe to the face is doing the same kind of damage to any character it hits, but a fighter with 10 Hp taking the hit and living represents his ability to take the hit well, a partial parry or dodge for instance. He still takes damage, nut not the same kind as the wizard with 4HP, who just takes the axe to the face and dies. I'd think of HP as sort of like combat or endurance saving throws. After all it isn't like a high level character has grown a couple extra layers of skin to shrug off damage with.

 

So extending that logic to CON bonuses it could be said that after a certain point a fighter knows how to translate his toughness into combat endurance. Another class, while still receiving the other bonuses, does not get extra hit points. Like someone mentioned it is an extra benefit to a class that gets very little compared to casters and thieves.

 

Really let us just stay away from 3rd Edition stats in a 2nd Edition game.

[Constantine]

Really let us just stay away from 3rd Edition stats in a 2nd Edition game.

Indeed. Really, debates on the "balance" ot "fairness" of the good old 2nd ed. rules are quite pointless imo. Like Salk said, this mod is not a total conversion project. We shouldn't reinvent the wheel over and over again. I think we must strive to keep ourselves as close to the original rule set as possible.

[Ardanis]

So extending that logic to CON bonuses it could be said that after a certain point a fighter knows how to translate his toughness into combat endurance. Another class, while still receiving the other bonuses, does not get extra hit points. Like someone mentioned it is an extra benefit to a class that gets very little compared to casters and thieves.

I said I was neutral about changes towards 3E and my attitude hasn't changed since. However why should HP stand out so much? Fighter already receives three times more health than a wizard to demonstrate his higher combat experience. If CON offers different bonus for different classes then why should other stats not do the same? For example, Lore bonus from INT/WIS should then be much higher for wizards than for warriors. DEX bonus to thieving skills should be different too for rangers and monks.

[Jarno Mikkola]

I think we must strive to keep ourselves as close to the original rule set as possible.

You realize that we are actually talking of a possibly of making an optional component to a "x Revisions" mod, not a non optional change to the Item Revisions mod? Yes, this started here and wasn't moved because there's really no place to move the thread... yet.

 

If CON offers different bonus for different classes then why should other stats not do the same? For example, Lore bonus from INT/WIS should then be much higher for wizards than for warriors. DEX bonus to thieving skills should be different too for rangers and monks.

Well, yes. The simple answer is that there's just no way of making them to be like that... but I still haven't found micelf in making a fighter that has extreme lore value from his Int and Wis bonuses... And rangers don't gain thieving skills at all, and the stealth value is preset, so the Dex value doesn't even count that much... unless you are a Stalker, or a Hobo.

[Dermit]

I said I was neutral about changes towards 3E and my attitude hasn't changed since. However why should HP stand out so much? Fighter already receives three times more health than a wizard to demonstrate his higher combat experience. If CON offers different bonus for different classes then why should other stats not do the same? For example, Lore bonus from INT/WIS should then be much higher for wizards than for warriors. DEX bonus to thieving skills should be different too for rangers and monks.

 

I don't know, AD&D stats can be pretty strange, they tended to be rather abstract unlike the number heavy spelled out in ink rules of 3rd Edition. And this is just my own rationalization of course.

 

I guess because the other classes get skills that their ability points can buff up, like thieving skills and DEX, and spell memorization and INT or WIS for priests' bonus spells. The warrior group gets no such special skills, just good thaco and higher hitpoints (features native to all classes), so STR and CON can do more for him. At least I think that is the idea.

[Ardanis]

In all times fighters were the lowerest ranking in class hierarchy. Primarily because they exactly have no special abilities like other classes.

I suppose the concept of a war machine with tons of health could work for a fighter, but then how to handle other warrior classes, namely rangers and paladins? Unlike the former they do possess special abilities and spellcasting, yet within this engine they are forced to share the CON with fighters.

 

And once again I would mention that Sarevok or Korgan, despite being mere fighters, usually lead the kill rate anyway.

[Salk]

And now after looking at these first entries I don't think I need to go further down to see a clear pattern (only Alhelor, a mage, has low hit points). Not only the trend is rather clear, but two entries are even largely illegal, exceeding the possible max hit points for that level!

Most of your entries have ~80% of the maximum value. I'm fairly sure this can't be called 'they have hit dice maxed out'. Yes, few have near the minimum, but how many (N)PCs do?

 

For me, it's more than enough to have my party get max HP at level up with no guilty conscience. Especially, I repeat, considering that of the 11 entries I posted, 1 had 130% and another over 200% of the maximum allowed!

 

Also, you know more than me that their class defining abilities are often extremely high (fighters have often Str 18/xx, mages have often Int 18, etc. etc.)

[Salk]

If CON offers different bonus for different classes then why should other stats not do the same? For example, Lore bonus from INT/WIS should then be much higher for wizards than for warriors. DEX bonus to thieving skills should be different too for rangers and monks.

 

Int/Wis doesn't provide different Lore bonus to different classes simply because noone cares about Lore bonus. But to arcane and divine spellcasters, high Int and high Wis bring additional bonus only to their specific classes (a warrior with Int and Wis at 18 can't read a mage scroll nor could he pray for spells).

 

As well, Dex does provide thieves of additional abilities. A thief with high Dexterity gets a bonus to thieving skills on top of AC improvement, which is common to all classes. Rangers and Monks do follow the same table simply because their ability is of a thieving type.

 

Fighters having a special gain from high Constitution makes sense because fighters should be the most resiliant against damage. With the higher bonus to very high Constitution, chances that a mage or a thief having more hit points than a fighter at early levels are lowered and situations where a level 2 Thief has more hit points than a level 2 fighter are less likely (but still very possible!).

 

Ultimately the Constitution table being different for fighters is simply a gameplay choice. And in the AD&D 2nd. Edition rules, it makes perfect sense.

[Constantine]

Fighters having a special gain from high Constitution makes sense because fighters should be the most resiliant against damage. With the higher bonus to very high Constitution, chances that a mage or a thief having more hit points than a fighter at early levels are lowered and situations where a level 2 Thief has more hit points than a level 2 fighter are less likely (but still very possible!).

I see no problem with that. There can be weak fighter and tough, muscular thief. It's just natural.