To "unlame" Rangers in IWD2....

[Rikka]

I know that I'm coming to this thread late, but I thought that I'd add my 2 cents.

 

Domi, I'm working on an IWD2 mod these days. And while it's mostly an "item and merchants" mod, there are other things in it as well. One of those things is an attempt to upgrade the Ranger class to a 3.5e-ish standard.

 

Things I'm doing to upgrade the ranger class (in no particular order):

 

1. Increase the base number number of skill points from 2 to 3.

2. Set the ranger save progression to the 3.5 standard (i.e. "good" Fort and Reflex saves, "weak" Will saves).

3. Reduce the hit dice from 1d10 to 1d8. (I actually accomplished this by adjusting the warrior's HP 2DA file to give all d10 warrior classes only 1d8, but then upgrade the fighter and paladin CLAB 2DA file to add 2 HP at every level up.)

4. Add appropriate (and already existing) spells to the ranger's spell list (L1: Charm Animal or Person; L2: Barkskin, Cat's Grace, Bull's Strength, Spike Growth).

5. Give the Forester feat at creation.

6. Set starting armor proficiency to Light Armor.

7. Give Evasion at level 9.

 

There's some more, but I want to move on to The Bigg's points.

 

 

Anyway, if you're looking for something on level with the warrior's feats or the barbarian's HP (not to mention paladins and monks), you'd have to force your hand a little.

 

A possible idea would be to give real skill bonuses (a +1 here and there isn't going to cut it anyway). I'd do give a +1 with the following pattern:

levels 3n+1 (1,4,7...): Hide, Wilderness Lore

levels 3n+2 (2,5,8...): Move Silently, Animal Empathy

levels 3n (3,6,9...): Search, Concentration

(and an additional +1 to each of these skills at level 1), for a total of 2 bonus skill points per level.

 

This one would make Rangers a skill points whore - basically giving them something to say over Feat whores, HP whores, ST whores and MR whores (respectively, Fighters, Barbarians, Paladins and Monks). Also, in 2nd ed. (or at least so in BG1/2 & IWD1) they'd get `free' points in these skills

While this wouldn't be a turning point for powergamers (skill points are only really important for spellcasters), they'd be at least useful for non-powergamers (as opposed to the total losers they were before).

 

You have some some interesting points here, Bigg. My work has largely been aimed at converting the Ranger to a 3.5ed standard, which would mean 3 SP/level (since all SP/level in IWD2 are set to 1/2 the PnP standard). But perhaps setting it to 4 SP/level would be a good way to make Rangers the SP whores you allude to. (BTW, I like how you differentiate the warrior classes, but I'm missing what an "ST" whore is for pallies. ST?)

 

I'd rather simply increase the number of SP/level, rather than trying to force specific skill bonuses, particularly since some skills do not have effect opcodes.

 

 

Something else to think about (combining my initial points with this mini-reply to Bigg) is that 3.5 Rangers are supposed to choose between two combat styles at creation, two-weapon fighting or archery. And then throughout their level progression, rangers get forced bonus feats in those combat styles.

 

For better or worse, I see no way to force that combat style selection. Also, most of those "forced" combat style feats seem weak and unimplementable within IWD2/IE.

 

Before I continue, I want to add another of Bigg's comments so that I can work off it…

 

Other possible things are:

*real* Ambidestry & Dual Fighting at 7' level. With practice, you should be even better at dual-wield even with chain mail IMHO.

 

A few points in reply…

 

A) While it's possible to force add Feats thru BCS-file scripting, I don't know how one could do it 2DA files.

 

A) If I were to stick with a 3.5ed-ish upgrade, adding "real" Ambidex and 2WF seems to be a waste, since 3.5e rangers seem to be built around a light armor, high DEX, high Reflex save "light fighter" paradigm. OTOH, if a different ranger paradigm were to be envisioned, then I can easily see adding the "real" versions.

 

 

3rd pip in Armor Proficiency and Shield Proficiency at 10'. After all, in 2nd ed they had those from level 1.

 

A) Along the same lines as "B", giving rangers a Heavy armor prof, seems counter to the "light fighter" paradigm. And it should also be noted that "Rangers-as-skill-whores" would be hurt by wearing heavy armor, so that also seems counterproductive for the class.

 

 

" Bow focus at 3' level, specialization at 6', +1 bow thac0 at 9,12,15.... They're supposed to be very good archers after all."

 

Since 3.5 rangers get the combat style bonus feats at level 2, 6, and 11, I'd probably just give them extra Feat points at those levels and let the player choose what feat they want. If they choose a feat that's appropriate, great! If they choose something else, oh well.

 

I would be very tempted to give rangers Rapid Shot at creation, except that I really dislike powergamers sniping single levels of various classes to get a bunch of creation bonuses. (Perhaps give Precise Shot at creation, since it is an archery feat, but not nearly as much of a "gotta have" feat.)

 

I'd love to automatically award rangers the Bow focus at L2, and specialization at L6. Auto-awarding feats is something I don't know how to do within a normal level up process. And I don't know how to get around the fact that only fighters can get specialization. Also, does the ADD_FEAT scripting command add a 2nd (or 3rd) pip to feats that accept multiple pips, such as the various weapon feats? I've never researched this.

 

Regarding missile AB bonuses, I'm not sure that I'd bother for only bonuses to the BAB. Archers are hardly going to miss all that much at higher levels anyways. What archers really need to be more deadly is damage bonuses.

 

 

 

 

IMHO, the better way to unlame a class is giving them something that no other class can replicate - in my example, lots of skill points and a pseudo-Archer kit (with the last item).

 

I'm leaning towards this latter thought as well, since there really seems no way to upgrade two weapon fighting.

 

I've actually created my own version of "called shot" that would give this ability that "no other class can replicate".

 

My version of Called Shot is as follows:

 

Benefit: The Ranger gets +1 AB and +2 damage per "level" of Called Shot for the duration (i.e. 2 rounds).

 

Disadvantages: -4 penalty to AC and Reflex saves and severely reduced movement (down to 2 points of movement) for the duration of Called Shot.

 

"Levels" of Called Shot: The Ranger gets the first level of CS at creation and an additional level of CS every 5th level thereafter (i.e. levels 1, 6, 11, 16, 21, 26).

 

Number of uses per day: Uncertain about this. Perhaps 1 use every 5th level in parallel with the number of CS levels. Or perhaps at half that rate, i.e. every 10th level (i.e. at level 1 1/day; at L11, 2/day; and at L21, 3/day).

 

While I've created the SPL file to support CS, I haven't gotten around to testing it yet. And don't know how to force additional uses per day. Simply add more instances of the CS SPIN in the ranger CLAB file?

 

It might also be better to have CS start at level 2 to prevent the ability being sniped at creation by powergaming. Or heck, hold off until perhaps level 6 before getting it. That would really force a commitment to the ranger class.

 

 

I suppose that a simpler alternative to a Called Shot ability would be to mirror the BG2 Archer kit and give a +1 missile AB, +1 missile damage bonus every 3rd level. (Or go whole hog and give the bonuses and Called Shot.)

 

EDIT:BTW, it occurs to me that if rangers were to be given regular missile AB and damage bonuses every few levels, trying to find some way to give them Bow specialization would seem somewhat superfluous, since Specialization adds +2 to damage.

 

 

I think that the best ways to unnerf the Ranger class are a few tweaks around the edges, along the 3.5ed lines, and the concept of giving the class the ability that no other class can duplicate. And since modifying Two Weapon Fighting seems rather unlikely, improved archery seems the way to go.

 

 

 

 

Animal Companions: Domi, I'm all for animal companions, but don't know how to implement it. BTW, druids should also get animal companions, according to the 3.5 PHB (don't own the 3.0 PHB).

 

 

 

 

Oh, oh, oh… another thing that can be done on a far simpler level is to include some items that are specifically for rangers (or perhaps ranger or druid). I've been making some of these items already. I've created a few items with the assumption of the ranger as a lightly armored warrior.

 

 

Here's a quick list:

 

Frostguard: +2 Studded leather with 5/- Cold Res and Prot from Evil while equipped (non-evil rangers and druids only)

 

OakShield: +2 Small Shield that can cast Barkskin 1/day (rangers and druids only)

 

Scarab of the Great Archer: +2 missile BAB, can cast Holy Power (adjusted to only enhance missile damage) 1/day (Elven and Half-Elven Rangers and Fighters)

 

The Greenbow: +2 Mielikki blessed Composite Longbow that adds STR bonus to damage (Good Rangers or Druids who are human, elven, or half-elven) (HOF version adds a Holy damage effect)

 

The Falcon Arrow: +1 Holy Sure-Striking Returning Arrow (This is a toughy for me. Currently, the Normal Mode version Holy effect does +1d6 damage, and the HOF version (named The Gyrfalcon Arrow) does +2d6. But I worry that this is too strong an effect, at least for it being a weapon to give/buy at the Wandering Village. I've considered replacing Holy with Keen, or moving the item to later in the game where the power level could be justified better. Maybe Chult. And as a "holy" arrow, I'd feel that the item should be good only. I suppose that replacing the Holy effect with a Keen effect, I could remove the alignment restriction.)

 

 

I envision The Greenbow as being the masterpiece creation of a Mielikki worshipping human bowyer in the Wandering Village. I'm not completely certain about why I want the racial limitations on The Greenbow. Perhaps because Mielikki is largely worshipped by humans, half-elves, and elves and I see The Greenbow as a "blessed" weapon of sorts (which also accounds for the "good" alignment limitation.)

 

I'm a bit worried that I'm discriminating against evil rangers (and druids) in my item creations above. Perhaps I'll make a Malar "blessed" item or 2 and put it in the Malarite infested area in Chapter one.

 

 

 

Anyways, these are my thoughts on enhancing rangers in IWD2. Any comments?

[Domi]

Heh, I never did anything on that ever since, and I am more than happy to leave it to people who'd work on it exclusively than trying to introduce a quick fix. I think your stuff looks pretty good, and will gladly download the mod after you are done.

 

Re: animal companions: the BG2 way used in Azure does not work in IWD2, ie the companion cannot travel between areas. I experimented with summoning the animal whenever there is none in sight, but it was unreliable and what's worse I couldn't make the darn beast useful by selecting different character status for the bloody thing. So making companions would involve pretty heavy duty scripting, I am affraid, far beyond my small ability.

 

So I am kind of cowardly retreating to my dialogue, dialogue and more dialogue thing.

[Rikka]

Thanks for the reply, Domi. My talents are more in the ITM making realm. Writing dialogs for my merchants tends to be like pulling teeth, as I don't seem to have a muse at my beck and call. I usually don't have as much trouble writing item descriptions, although I have to admit that there's always the fallback of wimping out with a generic description (which I try to avoid at all costs).

[Domi]

Well, I think it's a match made in heaven then IWD2 needs decent merchants and items. I mean the holy sword that was used to slay the Six of Xvim's best that *cannot* damage Xvim's avatar is one of the most annoying things I have ever seen. You'd think a paladin with such a weapon would be the best person to face the abomination, and all he is is a cannon fodder. I guess it's ironic on some levels, but it does not have any sense in the context of the item's history.

[Rikka]

Well, I think it's a match made in heaven then IWD2 needs decent merchants and items. I mean the holy sword that was used to slay the Six of Xvim's best that *cannot* damage Xvim's avatar is one of the most annoying things I have ever seen. You'd think a paladin with such a weapon would be the best person to face the abomination, and all he is is a cannon fodder. I guess it's ironic on some levels, but it does not have any sense in the context of the item's history.

 

I must be numb, I don't recall Cera Sumat not being able to damage Xvim's avatar. (Just looked at Xvim's resistances...) Oooooooh. I seeeeeee. It's the 15/- Slashing resistance and the 20/- Magic Damage resistance. Cera Sumat's 1d8+5 slashing and 2d6 magic vs evil damaging effects are simply not up to overcoming either of those two resistances. (The unmodded HOF version of Cera Sumat does 1d8+10 which is enough, barely, to overcome the 15/- Slashing Resistance, not accounting for any STR bonus.)

 

Well, I didn't have this in mind at the time, but part of my mod is to modify a number of existing weapons. Sometimes, merely to change things up to add a bit less predictability. Sometimes to make a weapon seem more appropriate to its wielder (such as making the Slayer Knights' greatswords, evil only weapons).

 

In the case of Cera Sumat, I am converting it to be a greatsword, although I hadn't really intended upgrading anything else about it for fear of making it too powerful. Short of making Cera Sumat so much more powerful that it would become nearly a godweapon against lesser foes, about the only way that I can see of making it more useful (in a more balanced way) against Xvim would be to weaken Xvim's Slashing and Magic Damage resistances ... which would, of course, weaken it for everyone attacking Xvim and making him a less tough enemy. A 2d6+5 (+ 150% STR bonus) greatsword has a decent chance of overcoming 15/- slashing res, although it would only just be mild wounds, nothing major. Let's assume 24 STR from Champ's STR (+11 STR bonus (2H weapon)). With max roll, that's 28 hp, which is a decent wound.

 

As for the magic effect, even making it "double Holy", i.e. 4d6 of Holy magic damage would hardly guarantee overcoming 20/-. In fact, on average 4d6 only does 14 hp of damage. And adding a Lawful (+2d6 magic damage vs chaotic) would be useless against Xvim, since he's Lawful Evil.

 

One thought that does come to mind, although I don't know if it would work as I envision it is 1 or 2 times a day effect that doubles the HA's slashing damage, using the "Damage Mod" (eff #73) to add 2d6+5 to slashing damage. But the thing is that I don't know if that effect directly adds to the weapon's base damage for one single large number or if the Damage Mod effect adds damage in a seperate "attack" that would be resisted seperately.

 

 

Domi, I'm mostly just tempted to leave my Cera Sumat upgrade to a greatsword as is, let the player just deal with the challenge. OTOH, if you have that big file that lists all of the items in IWD2, Cera Sumat doesn't stack up very well against WAY too many of the uber-high powered semi-generic weapons. I mean, some of these weapons are getting like +3 to +5 or 6 extra dice of effects damage. Geeeeez. By comparison, Pale Justice never looked weak against the best that IWD1 had to offer.

 

Maybe Cera Sumat could use a serious upgrade in power to make it a weapon that your paladin just HAS to have. I must admit that I am tempted to give it some high stat requirements to make it more difficult to wield for powergamers who've merely sniped a level or 2 of pally. Maybe make it have a STR 18 required. No more wussy Sorc X/pal 2's picking up Cera Sumat for the Spell Resistance!

 

Your comments have inspired me to action!

[Domi]

I think it's a great idea to make Cera Suma a powerful weapon that can only be handled by high level paladins. Or, in keeping with the sword's history, make it self-upgrade as your paladin gains paladin's levels.

 

As for being Xvim's bane, he is suspetible to electrical and cold (though I did not managed to damage him with cold), but electrical was the only one that worked. How about add the 25% or so chance to summon a lightening bolt if the oponent is Evil? I think something like that was described in the original 'Complex Items Creation Manual" for the Moonblade that was done ages ago for the long forgotten "After the End " mod.

 

I dunno, it just makes no sense to me that the only character who can touch Xvim's avatar is not a holy warrior, not a good-aligned priest, but wow! A sorcerer loaded with what its name spell. Huh?

[Blaellyn]

Well I see ya'll are havin' a bit of trouble with this animal companion business and being a bit of a jack-o-trades myself I could offer a little but assitance but being a jack-o-trades my skills are rather limited... Plus most of my work is in BG2

[Domi]

BG2 work-around to make permanent companions does not work in IWD2. The creatures summoned does not follow the player between areas, because IWD2 does not recognize a particular command that BG2 had.

[Blaellyn]

Right, but I've been working on figuring out how to transplant scripts and commands from the different IE games and I think I'm getting closer... Hey, how much do you know about IDS files?

[Rikka]

Domi, here's what I'm thnking about regarding Cera Sumat at the moment. Please note that I've been using the new DnD Magic Items Compendium as a new source of effects ideas.

 

 

Normal Mode version of Cera Sumat

 

STATISTICS:

 

Damage: 2d8 + 5

Attack Bonus: +5

Enchantment: +5

Damage Type: Slashing

Special:

Holy: +2d6 magic damage vs evil creatures.

Sacred: +1d6 magic damage vs undead, +2d6 magic damage vs outsiders

Resistance: +15 Spell Resistance

Spell Power: Can cast the spell Dispel Magic, No Limit per Day

Weight: 16 lb.

Feat Requirement: Martial Weapon, Greatsword

Type: Two-handed

Minimum Strength of 16, Minimum Wisdom of 13 required

 

and for HOF ...

 

HOF Mode version of Cera Sumat:

 

STATISTICS:

 

Damage: 2d8 + 10

Attack Bonus: +10

Enchantment: +5

Damage Type: Slashing

Special:

Holy: +2d6 magic damage vs evil creatures

Sacred Burst: vs Undead: +1d6 magic damage and 10% chance of +1d10 magic damage

Sacred Burst: vs Outsiders: +2d6 magic damage and 10% chance of +1d10 magic damage

Resistance: +30 Spell Resistance

Spell Power: Can cast the spell Dispel Magic, No Limit per Day

Weight: 12 lb.

Feat Requirement: Martial Weapon, Greatsword

Type: Two-handed

Minimum Strength of 16, Minimum Wisdom of 13 required

 

The 2d8 represents a vision of Cera Sumat being a somewhat larger than normal Greatsword. Not a "massive" greatsword, which would be 3d6. Just a bit larger and heavier than normal, hence the Min STR of 16, rather than 18. Regarding the WIS, I'm even tempted to make it 14. Still, even with these requirements, it's not out of the question that a decent Cleric of Ilmater (cleric X/pal 1, for example) could easily meet these prerequisites. Heck, I suppose that even some sorcs might be able to do so, but with mins of 16 STR and 13 (or 14) WIS, that's a lot of stat points in the somewhat non-standard abilities for a sorcerer.

 

 

 

 

 

Domi, regarding your idea about a chance of summoning a lightning bolt vs evil targets, maybe a simpler solution would be to convert Cera Sumat's secondary damage from being "magic" damage to being electrical damage. That would certainly be a "shock" to Xvim.

 

I do agree with you that it is rather unseemly for the most holy of warriors, a paladin, armed with the most holy of mortal weapons, a holy avenger, seems to be singularly incapable of putting a dent in Xvim's avatar.

[Domi]

Replacing magic with electrical should do the trick. Would be neat to get some cool animation on that like that of the LB though or electrical hits. Magic one is sort of a purple splotch.

 

Right, but I've been working on figuring out how to transplant scripts and commands from the different IE games and I think I'm getting closer... Hey, how much do you know about IDS files?

 

Not much. Have you seen Cirerrek's work on IE triggers/actions comparison? It's compiled here. Basically the resref can only be added/replaced, if there is no conflict. It's described here:

 

http://www.gibberlings3.net/tools/action_ids_comparo.xls

http://www.gibberlings3.net/tools/trigger_ids_comparo.xls

http://www.gibberlings3.net/tools/

[Blaellyn]

Well since we can't seem to make this familiar style companion work could we not make the companion local? That would allow the creature to "advance" depending on the area's difficulty. Sure it would take alot of creature making, not to mention possibly some scripting (maby by using a 2da file, like combining the summoning spells 2da files and the tracking one) if it is made into a summoning spell, but it does seem possible. More possible then making a familiar style one anyway...

 

[Edit] Right, I think that 2da thing will work. I'll get to work on a sample spell...

 

[update] Got it patially down, I've got it summoning from the list, having trouble gettting to to reconize the areas though...

 

[update] Realised I was working with BG2, and when I went over to IWD2 I found out, I can't summon creatures from a table so that ain't gonna work.

[Domi]

The problem I ran into with summoning animal for every area was that it was impossible to destroy the animal after the party left area.

[Blaellyn]

Hmm well perhaps we could create an animal unique to each area and then have it seek out the ranger, assuming there is a MoveTo and Follow command for IWD2...

[Domi]

You can already charm an animal into helping you, so this won't be anything dramatically different and worth exploring imo.