Let's talk about modding bards

[subtledoctor]

So strict! So what makes a bard only comes down to whether you can cast wizard spells? If you can use bard song, and you can pick pockets, and you have high lore, and you can use wands and potions and cast spells from scrolls... but you can't cast arcane spells from memory, and in place of that you can open locks and hide in shadows... THAT is the difference that makes you no longer a bard?

 

What about "demi-bard" kits like the Halfling whistler or Dwarven Chanter? They cannot cast spells (cannot even cast from scrolls!), but they are still in the Complete Bard's Handbook.

 

What about other classes? If a priest of Chauntea or Silvanus can cast druid spells, are they a cleric or a druid?Seems to me the technical matter of which menu a kit happens to be in in the straitjacketed Infinity Engine, is less important than what the kit can do and how the kit is played. For instance in Faiths & Powers we have a druid/thief multiclass kit... to get there, you have to go through the cleric/thief menu. But once you choose it and start playing, you will very much be playing a druid/thief.

 

So, sorry to burst your rigid ideas about classes, but my mod has and will introduce hybrids. The Blade is going to become a hybrid bard/thief. The Skald and Gallant will be hybrid fighter/bards. The Loremaster may become a hybrid bard/mage... I'm still pondering that one. I may do a cleric of Milil who can sing bard songs, and cast wizard spells from scrolls, but cast priest spells from memory. Why not? Could be fun. Actually if I squint I could see moving Skalds to the cleric class instead of fighter..

 

All of those are "bards" in a broad sense. But the actual kits in your "Bard" menu might only be:

- Bard

- Jester

- Meistersinger

- Acrobat/Jongleur

- Dirgesinger

- Gypsy

- ...Herald??? (Maybe I'll take a stab at this)

[Jarno Mikkola]

So strict! So what makes a bard only comes down to whether you can cast wizard spells? If you can use bard song, and you can pick pockets, and you have high lore, and you can use wands and potions and cast spells from scrolls... but you can't cast arcane spells from memory, and in place of that you can open locks and hide in shadows... THAT is the difference that makes you no longer a bard?

It's no longer a bard if you won't use the Bard as the class in the code(ADD_KIT's item usability flag etc). Aka as the games own restrictions limit you from allowing the use of wide variety of Thieving abilities, and you can't make it allow the lock picking etc, as then you aren't using a bard.

Song, casting ability or even thaco usage is not really relevant, but the fact that you aren't using the base type as the base any longer. I can see a bard that can't sing, pick pocket, cast spells or use bard accept-able items as a bard so long as the class frame is used... you can remove one/all of those for example to power up something magnificent to give back the "lost power". As well as you can make a thief kit that only gets 10 thieving skill points to a thief kit to give them supplemented magic casting abilities, or what ever you wish...but that's a thief kit, as they can assign the thieving skill points how ever they want.

 

... will introduce hybrids. The Blade is going to become a hybrid bard/thief. The Skald and Gallant will be hybrid fighter/bards. The Loremaster may become a hybrid bard/mage...

The game doesn't allow you to make a Bard/Mage character. So you can't have a hybrid of them. And none of the others either... But you can use the bards baseclass and then make a kit out of it... even with 1d12 HP's(in EE games) or however whatever. Skalds you should leave alone, cause the game already has one... same with Jesters, and Blades. But feel free to add in the Jongler, Disgesinger, Gipsy, Herald, Clown, Joker, Batman and Robin etc, as bards kits, as long as you use the bard class at the base, even if it's modified to be a monster of unrecognizable proportions.. A few exceptions need to exist of course... for example a Cleric kits called "Druid", not for fun, but usability, of course that needs a lots of fine tuning to do that, so a Dwarf can be come a druid for example this way. And there can be Druid/Rangers.. or whatever.

[subtledoctor]

Jarno have you forgotten what the word "mod" means?

 

My divine classes mod changes the vanilla cleric kits.

My arcane classes mod changes the vanilla wizard kits.

Mt thief class mod changes the vanilla thief kits.

My proficiency system mod changes the vanilla proficiency system.

My NPC mod changes the vanilla NPCs.

 

My bard class mod will change the vanilla bard kits.

[Grammarsalad]

I have a mod in the back of my head that is going to blow your mind if i ever get around to it Jarno. I'm going to use the bard slot for a "witch" class. It's going to be crazy because it's going to be a witch which isn't a bard and so it's not going to be a bard, but it's going to use the bard usability (etc.) so it's going to be a bard. It's going to be wild.

 

Edit: but it's not going to use wild magic

[Jarno Mikkola]

I have a mod in the back of my head that is going to blow your mind if i ever get around to it Jarno.

Let's see it then !

There isn't anything unique about the Bard usability flag... unless you make it unique and thus also hamper it's usage in every other mod out there... and there's a lot of them. Then when you say you are going to use... yeah you can bolster what ever you wish so long as you know it's actually possible. But I have a great doubt that you actually do know what you are talking about.

The thing I mean with this is, the game is very restrict on what a mod can do with the elements provided by it. And not knowing the restrictions set to them is one of the biggest mistakes you can make.

 

Jarno have you forgotten what the word "mod" means?

But you aren't going to make them bards ? Then.. WHY THE CHEESE ARE YOU CALLING THEM BARDS ? You can't come up with a new kit name ? Are you THAT STUPID ?

You know, there's enough mods that already modify the "vanilla" kits, why not create new ones and forget about the old ones ? Is the stupidity that alluring ?

 

Now, yes the Halfling Whistler could be an excellent bard kit, you could even make it select-able from the Halflings Fighter class in the kit selection table... that you then use the Change class script action to become a Bard... and then it would be a legit Bard. That's a modified Bard. But a Fighter based Blade is not a Bard. It's what ever you want to call it as long as you don't try to make it a Blade...

[InKal]

Is modded bard still bard?? or is he a modbard?? just call them modbards and get on with it.

 

but(t)...

 

if a modbard is also kitted....WHO THE FUCK IS HE??

 

and

 

can you really mod bards? I mean really change them? how? for what and what for? have you forgotten "hardcoded"?

 

in BG2 there is a BARD(lets call it base) and kits (lets call it underbase), Fighter+kits, etc.

 

IMO adding new kits is safe and easy peasy, lol, but mucking with the base is tricky and questionable in the sense "for what?", "whats the point?" and "how you gonna change them?"

 

by giving them more APR? give more APR to swashbuckler and you have a 100% fighter with extra bonuses and UAI - whats the point?

 

also I'm not a modder but common sense tells me this: base is also for multi and dual-classing. Multi and duals are already stupidly op, so, for example if you buff the base fighter he can dual or multi into a total weirdo so overpowered that being totally out of whack even for BG2 "powergaming" retarded "standards".

 

you can install "tweaks" (more liek fcuking CHEATS, amirite?) and cast spells with heavy armor and shit. allright! AWESOME!! /pukes/

 

and you want to mod a fecking kit (because you oh, so much love your paraolimpics 4.5 edition of brainfarts) like spellswinger or something so your elven genderfluid sorcerOr can thwcak bad white orcs and abudalzim them at the same time in full metal fate/night Saber armor?? I understand. I'm totally with you! I love Saber - best waifu!! but answer me - why do you even want to be wasting time for modding this when a simple "tweak" mentioned above can do this crap for you, eh?

 

 

 

 

 

ps.

dongs

[subtledoctor]

 

But you aren't going to make them bards ? Then.. WHY THE F___ ARE YOU CALLING THEM BARDS ?

Easy on the language buddy, there are kids around here.

 

Because they sing? That's pretty much my entire definition of what makes a bard. Many mods have used the technical Bard class to make an Elven Bladesinger kit... but that it's not a Bard, it's and elven gish that happens to rest in the Bard menu due solely to technical limitations. Likewise I made a psionicist kit in the thief class... it's not a thief - it doesn't go into people's house and steal stuff - it only happens to be in the thief menu. Why so protective of a couple arbitrary menus?

 

Now, yes the Halfling Whistler could be an excellent bard kit, you could even make it select-able from the Halflings Fighter class in the kit selection table... that you then use the Change class script action to become a Bard... and then it would be a legit Bard. That's a modified Bard.

This, I don't understand at all. The whole point of this kit is that it can use bard song, but not cast wizard spells. I can mod the fighter kit to use bard song, so that goal is accomplished... and then you want to use a script to shift it into a base class that can cast wizard spells?? That ruins the whole concept. No - leave it in the fighter class (or better, in the thief class)!

[Jarno Mikkola]

Because they sing? That's pretty much my entire definition of what makes a bard.

Hah... are they actually singing, or did you just choose an arbitrary bonus to give to the party and choose to justify it by the mechanism it's employed.

If you want it to be a thief class, then just make it a thief class(or fighter, cleric.. ) and nothing to do with Bards. Yes, thieves too can have aura effects, be it passive, activated or what ever. But DO NOT CONFUSE IT with the class actually being a BARD, if you don't make it actually one.

[Grammarsalad]

 

I have a mod in the back of my head that is going to blow your mind if i ever get around to it Jarno.

Let's see it then !

There isn't anything unique about the Bard usability flag... unless you make it unique and thus also hamper it's usage in every other mod out there... and there's a lot of them. Then when you say you are going to use... yeah you can bolster what ever you wish so long as you know it's actually possible. But I have a great doubt that you actually do know what you are talking about.

The thing I mean with this is, the game is very restrict on what a mod can do with the elements provided by it. And not knowing the restrictions set to them is one of the biggest mistakes you can make.

 

...

The bard is going to disappear, see. *Poof*. All it takes is a change to a few strings, and some fluffy descriptions.

 

Heh, maybe I'll create a thief kit *called* bard, using some of the ideas here. But you and I will know that it isn't a bard (and that it is)

[subtledoctor]

 

Because they sing? That's pretty much my entire definition of what makes a bard.

Hah... are they actually singing, or did you just choose an arbitrary bonus to give to the party and choose to justify it by the mechanism it's employed.

Have you looked at the game files? That's all bard song is.

[agb1]

Jarno, what aspect of calling some kit a "Bard" when it is technically implemented as a different class concerns you?

 

Item usability is already such a mess when it comes to classes and kits that making it a bit worse is hardly going to be noticeable. These new kits could even improve it by using 181 effects on the kits themselves to block excluded item categories instead of relying on the usability bitmasks in kitlist.2da and itm files.

[Jarno Mikkola]

Have you looked at the game files? That's all bard song is.

The fact that a thief has a "bard song" doesn't make it a bard*... in the eyes of the game. Or the eyes of the player if they play a modified game you have no control over. Say like added stronghold only available for bards... so it's a thief kit. Just be honest and talk about adding mechanisms that allow pseudo kits. It might be bard-like kit, but it's not a legit one.

And their consequences.

 

*especially if it doesn't work like the vanilla games ones.

 

Jarno, what aspect of calling some kit a "Bard" when it is technically implemented as a different class concerns you?

Well, the fact that they are lying about what they are actually doing to their players.

It can't be good for tweak mod makers that they need to take every implementation into account, say like Bards kits that actually are thief kits that sing, when they try to allow Bards to use ... Great Axes. Bad example, but it's the first rabbit I had in my hat.

[subtledoctor]

The fact that a thief has a "bard song" doesn't make it a bard*... in the eyes of the game.

The game doesn't have eyes.*

 

* (Well I guess it has Wizard Eyes... and Seven Eyes... but, ah, forget it.)

 

especially if it doesn't work like the vanilla games [songs].

The vanilla game songs are just effects that use INAREAPA.PRO or similar methods to affect multiple targets, applied every six seconds.

 

I am modding those songs to allow you to fight and/or cast spells while singing... but it's still just an effect repeating every six seconds over an AoE. Conveniently, making that change to songs also opens up the possibility that kit's from other technical base classes will be able to use the ability.

 

Now, go read the Complete Book of Bards... the Blade kit is described as a performer and entertainer (bard-ish!), who tends to dress in dark colors, and does stuff like sneaking around, breaking into people's locked rooms, and poisoning them. (Hmm, what does that sound like?) At no point does it talk about how they are awesome spellcasters. So, if a modder wants to mod the Blade kit to be more like PnP, and the PnP description describes a blend of characteristics of the Bard class and the Thief class... hmm, what's a modder to do?

 

Just be honest and talk about adding mechanisms that allow pseudo kits.

Ah! Great idea! That's it: I'll call it a "hybrid bard/thief."

 

Oh wait. I already did that.

[Jarno Mikkola]

Now, go read the Complete Book of Bards...

That's what ? A book. Ah, why would I need to do something like that... it's irrelevant in my Real Time Strategy game, that has barely anything to do with ancient turn based Role Playing Gate where the Dungeon Keeper was the rule setter, with player that had the allowance to bring supplements the DM allowed. As that's how the game was/is played even todays.

Now, here's where the fun thing is, the player installs the supplements... still they need to know that the facts behind them. Is the kit actually a Bard kit, or Thief kit that is named as if it were a vanilla games Bard kit... that is seen by the game as a Thief, while you lie to them and tell "it's a bard". While the rules book it's from is "Complete Book of Thieves in Baldur's Gate Games."

 

The game doesn't have eyes.*

Well then, tell me what this will give you:

IF
		See([PC.0.0.BARD])
THEN
	RESPONSE #100
	stuff
END

Of course if you fail to understand what those things do... I can't help you.

 

And also the games own description says:

The Blade is an expert fighter and adventurer whose bardic acting abilities make him appear more intimidating and fearsome. His fighting style is flashy and entertaining, but is also quite deadly.

And that's what not in the Complete Book of Bards, but that doesn't matter... if you want to make a "Blade" kit from CBoB, then just name it differently and do not modify the original in game one. Why... cause you can have another one that's doesn't break the original one... there's like a thousand other mods that already edit it without breaking everything else the game has.. such as Rogue Rebalance that has other things than just the Bard Kit revisions.

[subtledoctor]

The CBoB was there way before Bioware butchered the kit... I'm just undoing their mistake. Bioware should have named it something else.

 

Heck, the absurd vanilla "Blade" kit could be left in the game, and simply renamed. It functions more or less like the Jongleur: excellent at knife-throwing/tricks with bladed weapons/dodging.

 

Are you so offended by a simple string change in clastext.2da, but not by (say) the major technical revisions done by Rogue Rebalancing?