Revised Races

[Ardanis]

Revised table makes sense, however what would be the benefit? Lowering values seems more like artificial restriction to me, because if you agree with them then you don't play a DEX 18 dwarf in the first place, and if you don't then why install the component.

 

Also a number of characters, joinable and not, may end up with illegal stats with this revision, unless patched manually.

[Demivrgvs]

Revised table makes sense, however what would be the benefit? Lowering values seems more like artificial restriction to me, because if you agree with them then you don't play a DEX 18 dwarf in the first place, and if you don't then why install the component.

Well, they are not set in stone yet, and they do not need to be just "nerfs" (the half-elf gets better DEX and CHA for example).

 

Btw, your position is sort of saying "while blocking exploits when you can just not use them"? Well, you know me, I like to do it anyway. I like to then play a single class Human Berserker without thinking that with my game rules all other races would have been a hugely better pick.

 

Also a number of characters, joinable and not, may end up with illegal stats with this revision, unless patched manually.

I just checked all joinable NPCs and I see only two cases, Khalid's CON 17 and Kivan's STR 18/12. We already had 2 BG1 NPCs with illegal stats for years, we could take this opportunity to revise them all.

[subtledoctor]

That proposed table is sort of shockingly similar to mine.

 

Elves: 19 DEX, 19 INT, 17 STR, 16 CON

1/2-elf: 19 CHA, 17 WIS

Dwarf: 19 CON, 17 DEX, 16 CHA

Gnome: 19 CON, 19 INT, 17 STR, 16 WIS

Halfling: 19 DEX, 19 CHA, 17 INT, 16 STR

1/2-orc: 19 STR, 17 INT, 16 CHA

 

Humans' advantage is an overall +1 bonus, their disadvantage is no extremely high stats. Dwarves and half-orcs have a further -1, because their good stats are very good (STR/CON) and not off-set by any particularly important weaknesses.

 

The difference is, my component is "revised stat bonuses," not "revised races." It also makes INT give bonuses/penalties to crit chance, and CHA give bonuses to saves/luck. And removes shorty CON saves (because CON is already important enough just for HP/regen).

[Ardanis]

Btw, your position is sort of saying "while blocking exploits when you can just not use them"? Well, you know me, I like to do it anyway. I like to then play a single class Human Berserker without thinking that with my game rules all other races would have been a hugely better pick.

 

Since when was my position anything but that?

 

As for why I play exclusively humans, that's because I like to be as pretty and good-looking in a game as I am irl Certainly not because they got better scores. FWIW I deliberately don't even take 18 in any stat when generating new character, and play with 16-17 instead.

 

I just checked all joinable NPCs and I see only two cases, Khalid's CON 17 and Kivan's STR 18/12. We already had 2 BG1 NPCs with illegal stats for years, we could take this opportunity to revise them all.

 

I dunno about the so-called illegal... PC, fresh out of Candlekeep, can bump their WIS up to damn +3 over the racial max during the course of BG1 campaign, but a seasoned adventurer like Coran or Kagain couldn't have managed to raise theirs by +1?

[Mike1072]

I think in order to rebalance the races, the effects of the attributes might need to be tweaked as well (as subtledoctor mentioned, they sort of go hand-in-hand).

I wanted to make a point regarding strength and BGEE.

19 strength makes a noticeable difference. In original BG1, 19 strength was rare because you could only permanently get to 19 strength with 1 character starting from 18 strength and using the Manual of Gainful Exercise fairly late in the game. For a temporary boost, Draw Upon Holy Might could be used by clerics and as a Bhaalspawn power.

In BGEE, Dorn comes with 19 strength and you can also equip a character with the Big-Fisted Belt (from Rasaad's quest) to give them 19 strength as long they don't mind reduced intelligence. Plus, you can make CHARNAME a half-orc, too. I've never liked the artificial jump over the exceptional strength values and BGEE makes this a lot more common.

I've thought about either reducing the opportunities to gain 19 strength in BGEE or reducing the boost from getting to 19 strength and I'm leaning towards the latter. The Stat Bonus Overhaul component in Scales of Balance does something like this.

[Jarno Mikkola]

I dunno about the so-called illegal... PC, fresh out of Candlekeep, can bump their WIS up to damn +3 over the racial max during the course of BG1 campaign, but a seasoned adventurer like ... Kagain(assuming here but Kivan) couldn't have managed to raise theirs by +1?

Well, considering the "seasoned adventurers" have less than 5000xp, I really doubt that they are all that seasoned. Considering the enemies that you'll face to get to the + books are fairly more decent, I don't see the PC getting to them before that amount of XP. Unless they risk their lives unduly. Coran... the hippy ranger, got nothing on an actual ranger.

 

I've thought about either reducing the opportunities to gain 19 strength in BGEE ...

Right. It's not like the game can handle it's balance by itself. Or is it that you can't just add things if there's things already in balance ? So your only way to improve is to reduce and then add ? That's ok, but doing so with the expense of others, is kinda out of date. Cause the player can't be expected to do everything you do in the same order, there needs to be various bonuses on different locations and thus also multiple ways to get more powerful, not just 1. And people usually forget all about that.

Ever started the game with a char that has 10 in every stat and try to win the game ? I am betting you would welcome the bonuses the game throws at you, at some point.

[Demivrgvs]

@Subtle it doesn't surprise me our tables are similar. While it would be cool to make mental stats more meaningful I'm not sure I like what you did because:

- if you don't have enough benefits spread around all the stat cores then you create a system where you're sort of compelled to min-max to reach that particular score (e.g. INT x to reach that +1 bonus or CHA y to reach that super powerful luck bonus). That's pretty much what vanilla's tables encourage, you're sort of forced to get STR 18/xx or 19 because STR 11-16 means nothing and the difference from 17 and 18/xx or 19 is ridiculously huge.

- your tweak only apply at character creation, and unfortunately for you the game offers tons of ways to modify your ability scores during the game.

That being said, making INT affect crits is a nice idea on paper (much like it would be cool tomake it affect Called Hits imo) while I'm not sure why CHA would affect luck. Considering your mods sort of embraced SR save system, I might suggest you making CHA affect will saves (aka vs. spells).

 

@Mike with the revised ability scores, getting that STR 19 will still be very nice but not hugely better than having STR 16-17.

 

EDIT: it's not the final table but it gives you an idea...

STR  hit     dmg           pointless               Vanilla's weight e requirement (to be revised a bit)
10   0        0               10                      70  -> Scimitar, Axe, Mace
11   0        0               11                      70  -> Bastard Sword & Morning Star
12   0        0               12                      90  -> Plate Mail & Medium Shield, Heavy Xbow
13   0        1               13                      90  -> Halberd, Flail
14   1        1               14                      120 -> Greatsword
15   1        2               15                      120 -> Full Plate & Large Shields
16   2        2               16                      150
17   2        3               40                      170
18   3        3               45                      200 -> +1 dmg below STR 18/50, +2 up to 18/00? mmm
19   3        5               50                      500
20   4        5               55                      600
21   4        7               60                      700
22   5        7               65                      800
23   5        8               70                      1000
24   6        8               75                      1200
25   6        10              80                      1600

Edited September 20, 2016 by Demivrgvs

[subtledoctor]

Remember that warriors cannot roll a natural "unexceptional" 18. So for them, 18/01-18/50 is the equivalent. So, I have no difference between 18 and 18/01 and 18/50. Rolling 18/51 and above is the fighter's chance to get a bonus - literally to get 'halfway' to a 19 score.

 

As for min-maxing stuff: I don't mind having high requirements for CHA & INT because they are traditional dump stats. If someone playing the mod want to play with these new benefits, they have to put a lot of points there which forces them to move points away from STR/DEX/CON. If the player can't stop themselves from maxing S/D/C then they'll already get enough bonuses and they shouldn't get these new ones.

 

Plus, there are only so many meaningful bonuses you can attach to stats and some (crit, luck) just don't scale well above a +2 or so.

 

Also: I stopped worrying about trying to move bonuses down to 13 when I realized that this game so often results in very high stat rolls. I mean the minimum roll gets you 13 in all stats! 80-85 is more or less the minimum that most players accept, which is an average of 14; so for me, that justifies having bonuses kick in at 15. Literally "above average."

 

My CHA bonus only applies at CharGen because of all the stupid CHA-boosting items in the game. The INT crit bonuses are dynamic on the new EE engine, using a repeating .eff.

 

Using CHA for saves vs. spells only is a fine idea, but then IMHO they should be removed from CON shorty save bonuses. CON should be for death/poison and petrification/polymorph only. (Which makes sense anyway.)

Edited September 20, 2016 by subtledoctor

[Demivrgvs]

Remember that warriors cannot roll a natural "unexceptional" 18. So for them, 18/01-18/50 is the equivalent.

Yeah, I wrote that comment near STR 18 and only later realized the implication. I guess STR 18 cannot have +1 to hit if we want to preserve that 18/xx, but +2 dmg split in two. The "problem" is that if I opt for that, either the bonuses start from STR 14 instead of 13 or we end up with giving STR 18-19 even better thac0 than before.

 

If the player can't stop themselves from maxing S/D/C then they'll already get enough bonuses and they should get these new ones.

You mean "shouldn't"? Anyway, they can still max out S/D/C and easily get high INT 15-18 for your bonus. Say hello to vanilla's Ring of Human Influence.

 

Also: I stopped worrying about trying to move bonuses down to 13 when I realized that this game so often results in very high stat rolls. I mean the minimum roll gets you 13 in all stats! 80-85 is more or less the minimum that most players accept, which is an average of 14; so for me, that justifies having bonuses kick in at 15. Literally "above average."

Point taken, but I would still have bonuses kick in at least at 14 if 13 really isn't possible.

 

Using CHA for saves vs. spells only is a fine idea, but then IMHO they should be removed from CON shorty save bonuses. CON should be for death/poison and petrification/polymorph only. (Which makes sense anyway.)

But CHA bonuses would not be an exclusive of shorties.

[Jarno Mikkola]

What does the strmodex.2da look like ? Hoping it looks boring:

2DA V1.0
 0
    TO_HIT   DAMAGE    BEND_BARS_LIFT_GATES      WEIGHT_ALLOWANCE
0    0         0                0                      0
1    0         0                0                      2
..
50   0         0                0                      100
51   0         1                0                      102
...
100  0         1                0                      200

[subtledoctor]

either the bonuses start from STR 14 instead of 13 or we end up with giving STR 18-19 even better thac0 than before.

14 seems fine to me. My broader point is, not every stat needs bonuses to begin at the same levels. Starting bonuses at 14 for S/D/CON means combat bonuses are pretty well distributed. Meanwhile, the more outlandish bonuses starting higher forces you to actually sacrifice some of those oh-so-important physical stats, which encourages character builds that might actually have 14-16 in those stats, so the new bonus distributions are actually meaningful.

But CHA bonuses would not be an exclusive of shorties.

Nope. 1/2-elves and halflings can have 19 CHA so they work well for dashing-but-not-muscular swashbuckler types, with great Luck. Dwarves and gnomes get high CON so they are hardier (needless to say I improved CON bonuses to be beneficial above 16). Elves and gnomes get high INT, so a bonus to crit chance (which is interesting because it actually increases your chance to *hit,* not just to crit - in certain circumstances and in a way that doesn't stack with thac0). And 1/2-orcs, of course, are stupid cheating cheesy brutes with hill giant strength.

You mean "shouldn't"? Anyway, they can still max out S/D/C and easily get high INT 15-18 for your bonus. Say hello to vanilla's Ring of Human Influence.

Yes, fixed, thx. And that stupid ring is why I will never use a repeating .eff for my CHA bonuses.

 

EDIT - I'll stop taking this off-topic and talking about my mod, just want to say this discussion convinced my to give shorties back their save bonuses - but only for Poison/Death and Petrify/Polymorph, and only up to +3. And I'm now limiting the CHA save bonuses to Spells and Wands.

Edited September 21, 2016 by subtledoctor

[Demivrgvs]

Something like this? Ignore bend bars and weight stuff, I'm still messing with that...

10   0        0               10                      70  -> Scimitar, Axe, Mace
11   0        0               11                      70  -> Bastard Sword & Morning Star
12   0        0               12                      90  -> Plate Mail & Medium Shield, Heavy Xbow
13   0        0               13                      90  -> Halberd, Flail
14   0        1               14                      120 -> Two-handed Sword
15   1        1               15                      120 -> Full Plate & Large Shields
16   1        2               20                      150
17   2        2               40                      200
18   2        3               45                      300 -> 3 dmg below STR 18/50, 4 up to 18/00
19   3        4               50                      400
20   3        6               55                      500
21   4        6               60                      600
22   4        8               65                      800
23   5        8               70                      1000
24   5        10              75                      1200
25   6        10              80                      1400

Overall:

- STR 14 is meh, but at least it starts getting something

- characters with STR 15-17 gets the most noticeable buff

- STR 18/xx is somehow preserved and functional (18/00 is a bit nerfed while Anomen and Korgan are almost unchanged)

- STR 19 has same thac0 as vanilla but -3 dmg

- STR 20+ is very slighty nerfed (thac0 is either unchanged or 1 point worse, dmg is generally 2 points lower)

[subtledoctor]

Looks nice. Basically it just unpacks a lot of the bonuses from 18 to 18/90 and shifts them to lower scores, so having (say) a 15 STR is actually useful and meaningful.

 

Only thing I would change is to make 19 be +3/+5 - it's a step up from18/00 (if you roll 18/00 and read a Tome, you get 19) so there should be a difference.

Edited September 21, 2016 by subtledoctor

[Demivrgvs]

- Looks nice. Basically it just unpacks a lot of the noises from 18 to 18/90 and shifts them to lower scores, so having (say) a 15 STR is actually useful and meaningful.

 

- Only thing I would change is to make 19 be +3/+5 - it's a step up from18/00 (if you roll 18/00 and read a Tome, you get 19) so there should be a difference.

- exactly

 

- going from 18/00 to 19 gives a +1 to hit bonus. I think that's fine, and it gives half-orcs a noticeable advantage for BG1 (better than vanilla's +1 dmg over 18/00). Otoh, 18/00 isn't so special anymore, because I have the same +2 dmg from 18/51 up to 18/00, but I think it's better like that than having 18/01-18/99 with +1 and then only the 18/00 with +2. Am I wrong?

 

Overall I'm quite satisfied. I'm improving characters with "believable" stats (14-17) without hurting characters with maxed stats (18-19). The only goal we once set that I haven't completely fullfilled is nerfing the 'to hit' bonuses with god-like stats (only 24-25 has 1 point worse thac0).

We could split those +2 dmg at 20, 22 & 24 like this:

STR  Hit     Dmg
19   3        4
20   3        5
21   3        6
22   4        6
23   4        7
24   4        8
25   5        8

But that would create a non-linear progression while also restoring vanilla's issue with 18->19 step being somehow better than anyother step.

Edited September 21, 2016 by Demivrgvs

[subtledoctor]

- going from 18/00 to 19 gives a +1 to hit bonus.

Oops, missed that.