Kit Revisions (Paladins)

[Ardanis]

I see another problem with Challenge - even if you succeed in disrupting AI, it will still (quickly?) recover from the effect and resume its routine.

 

BG combat can in fact be built around the threat system - iirc there're functions that allow to adapt it well enough - but it's radically different from what SCS and aTweaks have been doing for years.

 

The only way would be to integrate the native support for Challenge into SCS. And I'm not sure it would work even then... even for melee grunts only.

[veyn]

+1 for expanding Undead Hunter to anti-demon/whatever. I agree that the "anti-undead" is too small a niche to be appealing for BG, considering that undead are rarely particularly challenging - except for liches, but that is more of Inquisitor's domain (I think this was already discussed in this forum?).

 

Maybe make a poll to see whether this idea is widely supported?

[kreso]

I see another problem with Challenge - even if you succeed in disrupting AI, it will still (quickly?) recover from the effect and resume its routine.

I think this would actually be the whole point of this ability. Your mage gets held, grunt closing in to kill him, then it's Cavalier to the rescue by drawing fire away, even a round would be enough.

 

The only way would be to integrate the native support for Challenge into SCS. And I'm not sure it would work even then... even for melee grunts only.

Can you elaborate? I'm not sure I understand what the problem would be. Afaik, enemies would be affected by Berserk opcode which would force them to attack the nearest target (presumably Cavalier) for a limited time. After that time ends, they resume their script, similar to what happens if they get confused, no?

[Demivrgvs]

Challenge

I see another problem with Challenge - even if you succeed in disrupting AI, it will still (quickly?) recover from the effect and resume its routine.

Well, we are using berserk opcode (I think aVENGER did the same for mephit's taunt), thus it all depends on the effect's duration. Even without prolonged berserk opcode (which may not be a problem for warrior only targets imo), the ability might already achieve its main goal imo, which is to draw the attention of the warrior and give Cavalier's ally the time to reposition or escape. After that, if the AI doesn't decide to change target again it's great, but even if the creature (aka the script) for some reason really don't want to target the Cavalier who just smashed his face (DavidW might now the behaviour better - but why wouldn't it react to the attacker who's already at melee range?) at least the Challenge would have bought some time for his allies.

 

Also note that even in PnP Knight's Challenge still slightly boost the cavalier's attack and damage rolls, thus the "distraction" part (even 1 round) is just icing on the cake.

 

EDITED: kreso once again anticipated me. Arda you have a rival in terms of reading my mind.

[Ardanis]

After that, if the AI doesn't decide to change target again it's great, but even if the creature (aka the script) for some reason really don't want to target the Cavalier who just smashed his face (DavidW might now the behaviour better - but why wouldn't it react to the attacker who's already at melee range?) at least the Challenge would have bought some time for his allies.

If that's no issue, then we're fine.

[kreso]

LOL.

 

After that, if the AI doesn't decide to change target again it's great, but even if the creature (aka the script) for some reason really don't want to target the Cavalier who just smashed his face (DavidW might now the behaviour better - but why wouldn't it react to the attacker who's already at melee range?)

It would stick to attacking the Cavalier, he won't change target (unless the Cavalier runs away, the the effected creature "calculates" targeting again).

EDIT:

If the creature is a warrior it would work as intended. If he was able to cast spells, or similar, he'd do that instead afaik. I really don't think this would mess AI.

[DrAzTiK]

I play an inquisitor (Bg1) and I must admit that I find this kit quite powerfulll... surely too much..

 

Fighting all enemy mages is really a walk in the park but inquisitor is also a nice tank. (heavy armor and shied)

 

I think TRUE SEEING is the main problem Imo. It makes many fights really easy (against mages and thiefs). This spell is supposed to be a level 5 clerc spell and inquisitor get it at level 4. Nobody complain about it?

 

I don't know but obviously, the wizard slayer looks pathetic in comparaison.

 

He get all his advantages very early.

 

At 2nd level, becomes immune to charm effects. : very convenient and powerfull immunity, (SCS AI love to cast charm). Why do you let inquisitor having this ability at level2. Surely Controll the mind need time and experience...

 

Paladins already have good saving throws, do they really need so much convenient immunity ? getting good saving trows and immunity is contradictory Imo. I would keep only immunity to fear for role play reasons.

 

What are the inquisitor disadvantages ?

 

But maybe Paladins are supposed to be powerfull. ( at least, human race is appealing with this class)

 

Edit : checking with near infinity, it looks like my inquisitor is also immune to fear at level 2 and get immunity to charm at level 1 . ??

[kreso]

I think TRUE SEEING is the main problem Imo. It makes many fights really easy (against mages and thiefs). This spell is supposed to be a level 5 clerc spell and inquisitor get it at level 4. Nobody complain about it?

It's not the same spell as vanilla - it doesn't allow anyone but him to target II characters. You only get 2 uses in BG1. It's convinient, but a thief can do the same, even better, with Detect Illusion.

 

I don't know but obviously, the wizard slayer looks pathetic in comparaison.

I'd rate WS above an Inquisitor for killing mages, especially after level 10. His Dispel is much tweaked - he can't use it on II targets under SI:Div, has lost AoE. It also only affects evil targets.

 

 

At 2nd level, becomes immune to charm effects.

: very convenient and powerfull immunity, (SCS AI love to cast charm).

I think that's exactly what balances it. SCS casters won't bother charming him, they'll Charm others instead.

 

What are the inquisitor disadvantages ?

He can't get more than 2 apr even hasted in BG1 unless dual-wielding, no GM, no spells.

 

But maybe Paladins are supposed to be powerfull. ( at least, human race is appealing with this class)

I guess so.

 

Edit : checking with near infinity, it looks like my inquisitor is also immune to fear at level 2 and get immunity to charm at level 1 . ??

There may be something wrong with your game setup.

[Demivrgvs]

Inquisitor

I play an inquisitor (Bg1) and I must admit that I find this kit quite powerfulll... surely too much.

Well, vanilla's kit was insanely OP, thus I do expected it to still be great.

 

Leaving aside smaller changes, I heavily nerfed both his custom Dispel (from 99/100% chance down to 50-75%, from large AoE to single target, evil only) and True Seeing (does not dispel illusionary protections or clones), and in exchange I gave it back a slightly tweaked Lay on Hands.

 

Fighting all enemy mages is really a walk in the park but inquisitor is also a nice tank. (heavy armor and shied)

Great anti-spellcaster tools and good tanking potential is what you would expect from this kit, don't you? Btw, he can indeed tank, but not nearly as well as a True Paladin (who can use spells to buff himself) not to mention the upcoming Cavalier, and in terms of physical tanking both True Fighter and Barbarian are superior imo.

 

I think TRUE SEEING is the main problem Imo. It makes many fights really easy (against mages and thiefs). This spell is supposed to be a level 5 clerc spell and inquisitor get it at level 4. Nobody complain about it?

Is True Seeing still so OP even in its current version?

 

On a side note, if I had to put Rage into a spell level I would surely say it's worth a 5th level spell slot (if not 6th) despite it being an ability available at level 1 for the kit. I'm not saying TS isn't great, and I can actually be persuaded to move it slightly later, but I would not focus on which spell level it is supposed to fill. We need to consider the kit as a whole, and the role each of his abilities play.

 

The main roles of TS are:

- allow the kit to target Improved Invisible targets with Dispel Evil, which does not have an AoE anymore

- provide immunity to hostile illusions as per PnP Inquisitor

Thus, considering mages get II at level 7, I can imagine moving TS slightly later might not make such a big difference, except when facing opponents of much higher level than yourself. Overall, moving it or not doesn't make such a big difference imo.

 

I don't know but obviously, the wizard slayer looks pathetic in comparison.

Does he? Ideally the WS should perform much better as an anti-mage "tank" thanks to his great saves (on par with Inquisitor's ones when facing arcane casters) combined with innate magic resistance and Inner Focus. The WS has to play more defensively, and wait for the right time to strike, but if a mage ever lets his guard down for a moment the WS has the right tools to screw him up instantly with Disruptive Strike and weapon mastery. Am I missing something?

 

At 2nd level, becomes immune to charm effects. : very convenient and powerfull immunity, (SCS AI love to cast charm). Why do you let inquisitor having this ability at level2. Surely Controll the mind need time and experience...

I could move it to level 5 (a 3E Church Inquisitor gets it at level 2, but he needs to at least be a level 3 cleric to get the PrC in the first place), but within AD&D it's there till the very first level.

 

Paladins already have good saving throws, do they really need so much convenient immunity ? getting good saving trows and immunity is contradictory Imo. I would keep only immunity to fear for role play reasons.

I kept immunity to charm because that's something the Inquisitor always had, both within AD&D and 3E. The main reason I put it at level 2 (where the other paladins get immunity to fear) was because I wanted the kit to not share the very same immunities of the Cavalier. :/

 

What are the inquisitor disadvantages ?

Compared to whom?

 

All other paladins get Divine Spellcasting, and their own unique abilities.

 

Comparing it to the WS or other warriors instead is a bit complicated, especially within KR where all of them have received quite a lot of new features, but the first thing to notice is that with KR's nerfed specialization (no +1/2 apr) the Inquisitor simply cannot match fighters when it comes to martial combat.

 

But maybe Paladins are supposed to be powerfull. (at least, human race is appealing with this class)

They are indeed supposed to be very powerful. To slightly counter it we could also try to implement PnP-esque restrictions such as not using poisons, evil-aligned items, and so on, though for the most part what we would truly need is for players to actually roleplay paladins, and that is not doable (though eventually Quest Revisions could do something about it imo).

 

Edit : checking with near infinity, it looks like my inquisitor is also immune to fear at level 2 and get immunity to charm at level 1 . ??

Mmm...Level 1 NPC mod again maybe?

 

Speaking of which, I don't know if Arda likes the idea but I do wanted to add something similar to that mod within KR, though with a slightly different scope. I don't have in mind a "customize every NPC with every munchkin crazy power combo you like" but rather offering a bunch of "sensible options", such as:

- turning Minsc into either a semi-custom ranger (loses spells in exchange for Rage) or giving it the Barbarian kit

- making Cernd either an Avenger or Totemic Druid (really, the kit he has now makes no sense imo)

- and so on.

Other random ideas for such a component:

- NPCs are always met with their own appropriate levels (e.g. Aerie and Nalia should be low level, Keldorn should be relatively high, etc.)

- give NPC spellcasters semi-unique spellbooks (e.g. Aerie might focus on Enchantments and buffs, Nalia on Transmutations and Illusions, Edwin should have tons of summons, etc.)

- etc.

[DrAzTiK]

Humm yes, I guess inquisitor will be less powerfull in BG2, but in BG1 he performs very well..

 

Edit : checking with near infinity, it looks like my inquisitor is also immune to fear at level 2 and get immunity to charm at level 1 . ??

There may be something wrong with your game setup.

I have tested on basic installation. (only bg2fixpack)

[DrAzTiK]

 

At 2nd level, becomes immune to charm effects. : very convenient and powerfull immunity, (SCS AI love to cast charm). Why do you let inquisitor having this ability at level2. Surely Controll the mind need time and experience...

I could move it to level 5 (a 3E Church Inquisitor gets it at level 2, but he needs to at least be a level 3 cleric to get the PrC in the first place), but within AD&D it's there till the very first level

Humm no need because SCS check inquisitor kit and don't cast charm on him. ^^

 

 

At low level, I think inquisitor outshine wizard slayer but maybe it's not bad and add some variety

 

 

Your idea about customise NPC looks very nice !

[Demivrgvs]

Inquisitor

checking with near infinity, it looks like my inquisitor is also immune to fear at level 2 and get immunity to charm at level 1 . ??

I really don't know why the clab file got both immunities. Sorry for the issue. Use the one attached in this post (just copy/past into inquisitor's folder) while waiting for the new beta (out either during this week or not later than this week-end).

 

At low level, I think inquisitor outshine wizard slayer but maybe it's not bad and add some variety

Well, I'm glad I and kreso seemed to at least convince you that both classes have their pros, but I actually think the WS rocks even at low levels considering mages don't have PfMW to protect themselves from Disruptive Strike.

clabpa03.rar

[kreso]

Inquisitor's TS is indeed powerful ability for BG1. But at level 5 every kit gets something, so I don't see why not here. It's still much less than vanilla (he got it at level 1 there). In addition, with SCS, you do need this somewhere around this level (5 or 6).

When I played Inq he was more a support character than a real fighter, either dispeling protections/buffs from fighters, or using LoH ability to keep things flowing. I really like him.

SCS won't bother with them, Cavaliers or elves when it comes to charms, so no changes needed.

 

EDIT:

Yeah, Inquisitor indeed has CLAB errors. Nice catch.

[Darkersun]

Speaking of which, I don't know if Arda likes the idea but I do wanted to add something similar to that mod within KR, though with a slightly different scope. I don't have in mind a "customize every NPC with every munchkin crazy power combo you like" but rather offering a bunch of "sensible options", such as:

- turning Minsc into either a semi-custom ranger (loses spells in exchange for Rage) or giving it the Barbarian kit

- making Cernd either an Avenger or Totemic Druid (really, the kit he has now makes no sense imo)

- and so on.

Other random ideas for such a component:

- NPCs are always met with their own appropriate levels (e.g. Aerie and Nalia should be low level, Keldorn should be relatively high, etc.)

- give NPC spellcasters semi-unique spellbooks (e.g. Aerie might focus on Enchantments and buffs, Nalia on Transmutations and Illusions, Edwin should have tons of summons, etc.)

- etc.

 

I'm a big fan of making the NPC more special and unique. Here are some good ideas for BG1 (but aslo overpowered and I think hard to do. But maybe a good inspire:

 

http://forum.baldursgate.com/discussion/comment/368410/#Comment_368410

[DrAzTiK]

Well, I'm glad I and kreso seemed to at least convince you that both classes have their pros, but I actually think the WS rocks even at low levels considering mages don't have PfMW to protect themselves from Disruptive Strike.

I am not sure to understand how I can easily perform a disruptive strike. Stoneskin and mirror image should protect from it, isn't it ?

I guess I should also use some ranged weapons , maybe darts considering the high APR ? Well, I don't like to build a warrior and put 5 stars in darts, it looks pathetic ha ha.

 

Also, ti would be nice to have a clue when we do perform a disruptive strike. (display animation on enemy). It's quite boring to always need to check the dialog box to be sure enemy fail the saving throw or not. (Same about called shot)