Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
jastey

NTotSC for EET (and BGT and BG:EE) - Download

Recommended Posts

56 minutes ago, Guest -me- said:

If you meet an encounter in game where all the enemies have extremely high stats, with specific overpowered weapons assigned to them, it clearly shows the author's intent - that he deliberately wanted this particular encounter to be this way.

Whereas things like dialogue holes, lack of journal entries, etc can be easily explained due to the author's negligence.

Are you seriously telling me you don't see the difference between the two?

I see what you mean, but here is my view: plot holes and missing journal entries are one kind of author's negligence. Putting in enemies with extreme resitances, xp, and magic weapons and armor +x in a BG1 mod is another author's negligence in designing a mod which is supposed to work in BG1. In the one case, the author did not create the mod in a way it can be played seamingless in BG1. In the other, he did not create a mod that fits itself into BG1. Is NTotSC supposed to be a partial conversion with challenging fighting encounters, somewhere in its own BG1 related world, or is it meant to be a quest mod - yes, quest mod - inside of BG1?

Call it arrogance and ignorance towards the mod's author's original intentions. Or call it bringing the mod to current modding standards. In my view - where I am not alone as I did not start with this - nerfing completely overpowered enemies and weapons is part of bringing the mod to current modding standards.

As you already pointed out, I am not a tactical modder so I will not spent time making the fights harder, the result would satisfy noone. What I can offer is to reverse nerfes I did with the last update if this is general opinion on how this should be dealt with.

Anyone feel free to step up and take over maintenance of the mod, with focus on preserving/restoring the hard fights of it, btw - I'm not nailed to this position.

On the contrary: I took on the job and I spent quite an amount of my free time working on a mod that is not mine and was completely buggy before, and I surely did not do so to create "Jastey's Reimagined DisneyWorld Edition of NTotSC". The time I spent on this mod was meant as a contribution to an old mod as well as the community. I'm not whining about my lost life time, as I said it was meant as a gift. What I mean is that I did not do this so people would complain about it afterwards, so if the result is not accepted, it's easy to reverse the overhaul, all we need to do is take down the current version and reverse to v1.x+patch.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Arthas

If one is for preserving the experience, he would not choose a refined version. It s a matter of coherence. Either you get pleased by the old version or by the new. 

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Arthas

Personally I am pleased with jastey version.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Arthad

And please, keep nerfing stuff. 

Share this post


Link to post

I have not played NTOTSC since... so long... so I won't say about this particular mod.

But, generally speaking, I am REALLY happy when "new" modders do maintain "old" mods and port them to EE(T).

For this, I say "Thank you", even if I think it doesn't perfectly stick to "original author point of view".

BTW, there is a big difference between "original author point of view"  and "what I think original author point of view was" so... pointless debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Ludwig

I agree %100 with what Fouinto wrote above.

About this mod, I played it a few years back, and decided not to play it again due to how overpowered some items were that it felt like cheating. Some dialogs were buggy and some encounters felt out of place for BG world. If you guys like playing like that, luckily for you, you can still play the old version. And now thanks to Jastey, the people who would like a balanced and more coherent version like me can play it too. No need to complain if Jastey's changes do not suit your taste, just play the old version. But don't try to take other people's right of playing a balanced and maintained version. This might come as a surprise for you, but not everyone has the same opinion as you guys. 

Thank you so much for your efforts and for maintaining this mod Jastey. I really appreciate it.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest -me-

To the ones that keep repeating 'just dig up and use the old, buggy version'... I heard you the first time.

Obviously you are not capable of understanding the direction the mod is heading into since you seem to prefer a handheld, emasculated, Care Bears version of the mod.  Which is fine.  I get it.  However, it doesn't have to be *just* this way.  It can (and should) also remain faithful to the original vision of the mod, simply for the sake of integrity.  This is where the skill and experience of the maintainer comes into play (which Jastey has plenty of, no doubt).

Imagine 20 years from now, some other maintainer comes along and starts applying a bunch of more nerfs to encounters because some future player complained this or that enemy character is too difficult.  The maintainer's justification (even though he does it with good intentions) would probably be something similar -- that it is to address 'balance' and bring the mod up to "current modding standards".  At what point would people wake up and realize we're way off course here?

Share this post


Link to post

As I said, I hear the valid points in the discussion. And also Guest -me-: you stated your opinion, I heard you.

What is needed now is constructive suggestions. "Revert back all nerfes since version 1.x" would be not constructive with regard to the current version. I said I spent the time on the mod freely but that doesn't mean I'll spend weeks again to undo all those changes (most not even by me). In that case I'd prefer to revert to v1.x and be done with it.

My take on it: first we need to agree what we are talking about. Are we talking about all nerfes since v1.x? Then, as I said, we will not come to an agreement with regard to the current version but need to revert t v1.x.

Or are we talking about the nerfes I introduced since v2.0? If yes, what do you expect - take them all out? - then we will not come to an agreement with regard to the current version but need to revert t v1.x. As I said, for me the mod is unplayable this way.

In case there is consensus that giving an easier version for easy game settings is acceptible but I nerfed too much in terms of "having to switch to INSANE before entering a dungeon is insane indeed" than I see a way to find a compromise for the current version.

Please note: I'd appreciate it very much if people participating in the "you nerfed too much" discussion would actually play the current version on the game dificulty they usually do and draw their conclusions from there. Just bashing out of principle is low.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest -me-

No, that's okay, you don't have to undo or reverse any change. You obviously spent enough time and effort on it to the point your contributions as just as much integral to the mod as the original author's.  I was just cautioning for future modifications, because there will always be someone complaining about something out of balance.


Please note: I'd appreciate it very much if people participating in the "you nerfed too much" discussion would actually play the current version on the game dificulty they usually do and draw their conclusions from there. Just bashing out of principle is low.


That's a fair point.

Share this post


Link to post

Just adding my $0.02 as one who suggested (and personally made) some of the nerfs.

First of all, if you're not the original author, please consider carefully about what you promote as "the author's intent".  That is merely your interpretation/opinion, and nothing more than that.  Also, let's try to be civil about this, yes?

Secondly, why would a broken dialog be a valid bug, but a broken encounter not?  Some of the things I encountered were monsters with stats completely beyond what would be valid under even the most liberal interpretation of 2e rules.  Was that monster with more than ten times the HP even maximized rolls would give it the author's intent, or merely a typo of an extra zero?  The fighter/mage with only druid spells memorized, but not scripted to use either wizard or druid spells, intentional or just a poorly edited creature file?  The completely ordinary human fighter who could literally not miss a single attack due to a thac0 far beyond his level (and I do mean *far* beyond, what he had would make some ToB enemies green with envy), intentional or an oversight?  Your opinion is as valid as my own.

Please know that I did not suggest/do these nerfs lightly.  But when I was testing and noting down these, I was playing a party that was already overleveled by BG1 standards and well beyond the XP cap of both TotSC and SoD, and they were still nearly impossible.  Intentional, or just poorly thought out?  As Jastey already pointed out, mod standards have changed over the years, and some old mods like this one just are completely broken in more than one way.  Without the original author available, it's not always so clear what their intent was, and sometimes choices have to be made. 

And yes, I fully agree there can be such a thing as too much nerfing, but there can also very well be too little.  Personally I think Jastey's way of keeping most of the original difficulty on insane, but toning things down at lower levels is perfectly reasonable.  That's what those difficulty levels are for after all, so that everyone can play the game at a level they feel comfortable at.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest -me-


Secondly, why would a broken dialog be a valid bug, but a broken encounter not?

Simply because the mod is largely defined by its encounters rather than its dialogs. If you were around back in the day (old gamebanshee/teambg forums), you would probably remember the lively discussions players had when facing such monsters with outrageous stats.  Believe it or not, people actually liked the absurdity of it in a twisted, perverse way.  But now that these same enemies are made more down-to-earth and generic, they are simply indistinguishable from any other enemy as they lost their individuality.



The completely ordinary human fighter who could literally not miss a single attack due to a thac0 far beyond his level (and I do mean *far* beyond, what he had would make some ToB enemies green with envy), intentional or an oversight?

If you use the internet archive and check out the official site for DSotSC (https://web.archive.org/web/20001017123600/http://www.dsotsc.com/index1.html), you would realize almost all of the things you mentioned are much more likely to be intentional than an oversight.  The mod even installs a Level 40 rules pack to prep you for the encounters and warns you not to start the mod until after you finished all of TotSC first.



Your opinion is as valid as my own.

*sigh* Okay. I give up.

Share this post


Link to post
35 minutes ago, Guest -me- said:

Simply because the mod is largely defined by its encounters rather than its dialogs. If you were around back in the day (old gamebanshee/teambg forums), you would probably remember the lively discussions players had when facing such monsters with outrageous stats.  Believe it or not, people actually liked the absurdity of it in a twisted, perverse way.  But now that these same enemies are made more down-to-earth and generic, they are simply indistinguishable from any other enemy as they lost their individuality.

SCS and many other mods have already proven it's quite possible to make challenging and memorable encounters without giving enemies insane stats or absurd immunities.  Nowadays this is (correctly) seen as cheap, bad design.  And FYI, I *was* around in those days, and I also remember several people protesting against such insanity.

38 minutes ago, Guest -me- said:

If you use the internet archive and check out the official site for DSotSC (https://web.archive.org/web/20001017123600/http://www.dsotsc.com/index1.html), you would realize almost all of the things you mentioned are much more likely to be intentional than an oversight.  The mod even installs a Level 40 rules pack to prep you for the encounters and warns you not to start the mod until after you finished all of TotSC first.

Okay, 1) this version of NTotSC is designed to be playable *without* DSotSC, and 2) there is literally no use for level 40 rules when all of BG1 + TotSC barely contains enough XP to get you level 9, maybe 10 for some classes.  And I know, I have played through old BG1 + TotSC many times since its release in 1998.

43 minutes ago, Guest -me- said:

*sigh* Okay. I give up.

There is literally nothing stopping you from playing with intentionally broken mods if that's what you want to do.  NTotSC is on github, what's stopping you from forking it and making your own "correct" version if you think this one is so bad?  Just don't assume that your way of playing is the one true way.  And no, neither do I.  As I pointed out before, that's what difficulty settings are for.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest -me-
Quote


SCS and many other mods have already proven it's quite possible to make challenging and memorable encounters without giving enemies insane stats or absurd immunities.

Whether it's possible or not to make challenging and memorable encounters without giving enemies insane stats is irrelevant. The issue is preserving the original vision in some way along with keeping up with the so-called mod standards, whatever they may be.

Quote


Okay, 1) this version of NTotSC is designed to be playable *without* DSotSC, and 2) there is literally no use for level 40 rules when all of BG1 + TotSC barely contains enough XP to get you level 9, maybe 10 for some classes.


I mentioned DSotSC because the two mods go hand in hand.  NTotSC was inspired by DSotSC and known for being just as difficult, if not more.  The original NTotSC site is in polish, so I didn't bother to link to it. But the same context applies to both mods.  Even the original readme for DSotSC states:

 

Obviously, that should tell you what the intent of these mods were.

 

 

Quote


NTotSC is on github, what's stopping you from forking it and making your own "correct" version if you think this one is so bad?

LOL. This type of ridiculous reasoning can also be used the other way around.  What's stopping you from forking it and making your own Bambi version of NTotSC? Do you really want every player to start forking the mod and have a million different versions of NTotSC floating around the internet?

Share this post


Link to post
Guest -me-

eh... the quotes were messed up.  Should be:

Even the original readme for DSotSC states:  "The recommended level of your party is 9/10. If you are below this level chances are you will not survive."

Obviously, that should tell you what the intent of these mods were.

Share this post


Link to post

I for one would never think of installing DSotSC or NTotSC without these balance improvements (and from what I recall from my last playthrough, there are still some encounters / items I would like to see nerfed further). This is not because I do not enjoy tactical challenges (we have the vastly superior SCS for that nowadays), but because gameplay and story integration into the original game are completely messed up otherwise. In my opinion, these pre-WeiDU mods actually trivialise the game when a random orc horde provides for more of a challenge than Sarevok and his goons, and moreover the uber loot of that orc horde would make Firkraag envious. That is why not only encounters, but also items are nerfed. I appreciate the concern for author's intent, but at some point you have to take into consideration that a) modding was, well, non-modular back in the day so you had to combine quest and tactics mods, while today we can easily chose to focus on either and b) strictly speaking, the author's intent was neither for the mod to be ported to BGT, EE, etc., and there is nothing stopping people from installing Classic BG1 and original DSotSC if that's what they prefer. As Jastey pointed out, you could also just raise difficulty to insane (but please leave nerfs enabled on D&D rules!).

So please, Jastey, keep to your current design philosophy which creates a more smooth experience between all the elements of a megamod, and thank you for all the hard work put into NTotSC!

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...