Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About SixOfSpades

  • Rank
    Idea Machine

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Bellingham, WA

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • MSN
  • ICQ
  • Yahoo

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. This is too much imo considering that, unlike vanilla, you're allowing WS to use magical equipment. Drinking a Potion of Magic Resistance and/or equipping one of the many magic resistance boosting items will easily get WS to 100% magic resistance. But those very same items that the WS can (finally!) use are also usable by any other character in the game. Yes, let's say a Wizard Slayer uses X and gets 100% MR. If any Warrior-type can use the same X and get a "mere" 85% MR, then what's so special about a Wizard Slayer's MR? Things would be different if the WS was pretty much the only source of cumulative MR, but you're not going that route. Except that with the penalties to THAC0 (and weapon proficiency to some degree), my WS can never be as effective at pure hack-&-slash as other Fighters. By the time you're facing Dragons or noteworthy Demons, the WS is operating at at least a +3 permanent THAC0 penalty. As you mention later in the thread, I'm generally opposed to powerful bonuses & immunities applied at very early levels (unless they're balanced by difficult penalties at those same levels), as it encourages munchkin Dual-classes. But if the MR bonus is a relatively small one, I could be amenable to that. Isn't this a bit redundant considering magic resistance? And having 1% magic damage res per level wouldn't make a difference anyway imo, magic resistance or not. True. It would have some minor effect in-game, but it's mostly there for flavor, a "side effect" of the base MR. It would also make sense in the event of Magic-Damage attacks that ignore MR--not that I can think of any offhand. If you ask me, anything less than 10% per hit is completely pointless, in fact I'd probably prefer to drastically increase it and make it not stackable. With your progression this ability won't matter until WS is at least a 10th lvl imo, is it intentional? I've never played Tutu, so I wasn't really considering truly low levels. But in general, my aim was to make the Spell Failure a useful tool (although not a permanent effect--the WS has to stop for a second and activate his hatred) without turning it into a one-shot that denied the victim a fighting chance. I find a Level 12 WS slowly inflicting 6% Spell Failure per arrow vastly more appealing than, say, putting him under Haste and Invisibility so he can run up and slap the enemy Mage with a one-hit 40% that won't accumulate. I agree that it feels rather magical . . . but certainly no more so than things like War Cry, or various Psionic attacks. I was thinking of it as the WS momentarily taking his personal Magic Resistance using it to force a small local rent in the Weave. Typing this has made me think that perhaps the WS's innate MR should be dropped to 0 (or at least severely penalized) while the Anti-Magic Aura is in effect. Interesting, but it seems a bit complicated; most kits had easily understandable restrictions based on ethos or practical considerations: A cavalier considers ranged combat cowardly; an archer doesn't want their aim to be effected by bulky armor etc. A Wizard Slayer doesn't want to be attainted by contact with any magic items, except for those specific items that help Slay Wizards. I don't consider that to be complicated or difficult to understand. Thanks to the awesome tweak that makes Mirror Image ignore AoE spells, MI is more useful as a defense against very damaging melee opponents, such as Golems, than anything else (and even before the tweak, I'd say the 2 uses were fairly tied). So Ilbratha is out. Similarly, I don't find the Silver Sword that spectacular against Wizards (if you can hit them with a magical item, they're going to be dead in 2 rounds no matter what you're using), it's more useful against enemies that have a lot of hitpoints and whose Saves can be lowered--like Dragons. It goes too. Interesting, especially with your "multiple similar penalties" point . . . but just because Wizards don't have physical attacks doesn't mean that their Summons won't either. Besides, no way am I going to lock out Enkidu's Full Plate. As I've said before, the WS isn't concerned about the item type, his only concern is with the enchantments on it. Dragon's Breath Halberd? Oh hell yeah.
  2. As a caveat, I have to mention that I have a bit of negative baggage concerning other people "watering down" my kits. A few years back, I proposed the Sharpshooter kit, and was so displeased when Andyr removed the only factor that made it worth playing (level-based improvements to ranged THAC0/Damage) that I demanded he remove my name from it, and I released the bona fide kit as the Sniper. So . . . I'm not going to insist you treat this kit design as an all-or-nothing, take-it-or-leave-it idea, although I would prefer it if you did. Considering that the Wizard Slayer has always been a bad joke, I hardly think staying true to vanilla is a concern. I also know that this isn't how the Wizard Slayer is presented in PnP, or it would have been proposed long before now . . . but canon or not, this design seems to work. WIZARD SLAYER Description: Warriors have always frequently regarded spellcasters with both contempt and fear, and naturally this led to certain cadres of fighters trained to strike down practitioners of magic above all other targets. Abject hatred of spellcasters (especially mages) is what drives most of them, and since the Time of Troubles, Wizard Slayers have grown even more dangerous: They have learned to channel the newly-discovered Dead Magic into an aura around themselves, disrupting any nearby magical enchantments. ADVANTAGES: » Gains +3% Magic Resistance per level » Gains +1% Magic Damage Resistance per level » Special Ability of Nullifying Blow, usable 1x/day per level: For 1 turn, all successful attacks by the Wizard Slayer cause a cumulative chance of Spell Failure to their victims--melee hits cause 1% per EXP level of the Wizard Slayer, and ranged hits cause 1% per 2 levels. The Spell Failure effect lasts for 6 rounds. » Special Ability of Anti-Magic Aura, usable 1x/day per 4 levels. For each EXP level of the Wizard Slayer, all creatures within 30 feet take a 2% cumulative Spellcasting Failure penalty (lasts for 6 rounds), and have a 1% chance to have all active enchantments on them instantly dispelled. » Gains access to the HLA of Greater Magic Resistance: Grants +30% Magic Resistance for four rounds. Unlike the regular Magic Resistance HLA, this is cumulative with other sources of Magic Resistance. » Gains access to the ToB HLA of HLA of Greater Anti-Magic Aura: Instead of being centered on the Wizard Slayer, the Greater Aura can be projected toward any point within 30 feet. DISADVANTAGES: » +1 penalty to THAC0 every 4 levels (stops after Level 20) » May put no more than three proficiency points into any weapon » Cannot use ANY magic item whose enchantments make it primarily useful against any foes other than spellcasters. (See below.) » Able to select the ToB HLAs of Greater Whirlwind, Greater Deathblow, and Critical Strike only 3 times each » Able to select the ToB HLA of Hardiness only once Compatibility and other Notes: Wizard Slayers who Dual-class to Thief will be unable to choose the ToB HLA of Use Any Item. The Spell Failure effect (though not the Dispel Magic effect) of both Nullifying Blow and the Anti-Magic Auras acts as a Level 7 spell, so it will affect creatures such as Liches and Rakshasa. All of my spells and abilities have a maximum casting level of 20, so a Level 40 Wizard Slayer's Nullifying Blow will still cause 20% Casting Failure on a melee hit, and 10% on a ranged hit. While the original Wizard Slayer caused Spell Failure only for Wizard spells, mine affects both Wizard and Priest spellcasting. ITEM USABILITY: All magic items are determined on a case-by-case basis, and are flagged as Acceptable or Unacceptable based on their enchantments, not where on the body they are worn. By default, Wizard Slayers are predisposed to reject all magical items, except those that are either A) beneficial in defeating spellcasters, or B) too critical and fundamental to do without. Enchantments that contribute to an item's Acceptance: Base enchantment level of melee weapons or ammunition, Magic Resistance, Elemental resistances, Saving Throw bonuses, Immunities to spells & effects commonly used by spellcasters, Weapons that add elemental damage, Attacks that do extended damage over time, Bonuses to Speed Factor, anything designed to prevent spellcasters from casting, anything likely to make a spellcaster more vulnerable to physical attacks. Enchantments that contribute to an item's Rejection: Base enchantment level of launcher-type weapons, Bonuses to Armor Class, Physical Resistances, Bonuses to THAC0 or Damage, Changes to STR / DEX / CON / INT / WIS / CHA, the casting of any spell that would not be especially useful against spellcasters, any item designed to combat any specific type of enemy other than spellcasters, any spell or effect that would not directly benefit a trueclassed Wizard Slayer. If an item has a fairly even mix of "positive" and "negative" enchantments (e.g., Rings of Protection), I usually allow their use, provided that the items are fairly simple and rather benign. Artifact-level items, however, such as the Ring of Gaxx and Staff of the Magi, are commonly ruled out, as they would be rejected simply due to the large number of powerful enchantments on them. Also, where two spells/effects are very similar, Wizard Slayers will tend to accept one but shun the other: Healing is good, Regeneration is bad. Potions of Explosions are magical, Oils of Fiery Burning are not. Etc. All items added or altered by other mods would have to be individually reviewed and categorized, if true compatibility is to be assured. ADD: While I agree that the Wizard Slayer->Mage Dual-class is an unlikely roleplay, I do not find it implausible, as it allows the character to access all those lovely anti-Protection spells that can forestall even a trueclassed Wizard Slayer.
  3. Since it doesn't look like I'll be releasing the next version of my Kitpack any time this year, would you care to hear how I chose to implement the WS? It performs pretty well (IMO) in playtesting, nice and balanced, although I still need to make the new icons a bit prettier, and accounting for mod items will be have to be done by hand.
  4. Frankly, I'd be more inclined to post a bug report about Skeletons drinking potions.
  5. GAAAAHHHHH!!!! Yes, this has been a well-thought-out, articulate reply.
  6. Is it? If a car slams right into a tree and sits there, radiator wrapped around the trunk, as the driver stumbles from the wreckage clutching his bleeding forehead, and the woman watching this scene from across the street asks, "Oooh, did that car just hit that tree?" then yes, that question is pretty friggin' obvious. If the woman feels insulted by my statement that her question was obvious, then that's her problem, not mine. It's not my fault that she chose not to employ the 6 or 7 brain cells it would have taken to answer her own question. Granted, the Dual-classing question actually at issue here is a less extreme example than Car Hits Tree, but I stand by my statement that the game's class structure is something so fundamental that it's nearly impossible to come up with any new ideas about it--and yes, even total newbies should know this. They should know that the game is over 10 years old, and that it's been heavily modded for well over half that time by people with extensive backgrounds in both PnP D&D and Computer Science, and therefore they should know that the odds of their just waltzing onto a modding forum and dropping off some revolutionary, paradigm-changing idea is, to put it bluntly, not gonna happen. I'm not saying that new users to the forum can't have good ideas, I'm just saying that they can't have good BIG ideas (that can feasibly be implemented). I also stand by my right to classify a question or idea as obvious--or even stupid. "I want to play the game from Irenicus's perspective!" "Let's make a mod where the party goes to Chult to fight dinosaurs!" "Bodhi should be a BDSM dominatrix, and she enslaves the main character and makes him kill his own party members, and then the XXX-rated end movie plays!" . . . ehhhh, how about not. Those suggestions (with the possible exception of Irenicus) are just plain stupid, whether they're brought up by a new user or not. As the saying goes, Lawful Good doesn't mean Lawful Nice. If you felt insulted based on what I actually wrote--the three words "big & obvious," then I'm surprised you were able to wring that much righteous indignation (on behalf of a 3rd party, no less) from those three little words, and of course from the condescending tone that you interpreted them to have. And while my previous post was aimed to soothe any bruised feelings I might have caused, and while the previous section of this post defended my right to have (and express) low opinions of others, the only person in this thread who actually is deliberately and repeatedly insulting other users is . . . you. I don't know whether you're simply easily offended, or are just a slightly more original form of troll, but the fact that you continued your diatribe well after my post of explanation and apology certainly seems to smack of the latter. Whichever is true, I think it would be best to avoid posting here again until after you've calmed down.
  7. I apologize if my post may have seemed condescending--that was never my intention, but on the Internet where you cannot hear tone of voice, and where many trolls lurk waiting to flame the unwary, well, people tend to hear what they expect to hear. The "sorry" at the end of my post was not sarcasm, but an actual expression of regret that class combinations such as Multiclassed Ranger/Bard (the ultimate backup character!) are impossible. (Except, apparently, with GemRB--I didn't know about that.) As for "big & obvious," I'm afraid that yes, expanding class-combination selection fits that description, as one's character class is a huge factor in the game, and modders have been banging their heads against that wall for quite some time. My choice of terminology was not meant to be belittling, but simply comparative, as follows: "Why can't my party members ride horses?" Big & obvious: Because the amount of new animations required would be insane (there isn't even an animation of a horse simply walking, let alone rearing up in combat while its Male Elven Mage rider is casting an Enchantment spell), to say nothing of the new combat dynamics (the Mage failed his Save vs. Hold Person, but the horse is immune due to its size, so can it still fight without making the Elf fall off and break his neck?). "Why can't I make a Halberd that grants the user an additional proficiency point in Halberds?" Small & obscure: Because the opcode that affects proficiency points cannot add or subtract proficiency points, it can only set them. This is something that only a modder (or at least someone familiar with DLTCEP or the IESDP) would know. I am by no means hostile to Baldur's Gate newbies--quite the contrary, in fact. This website should serve as ample proof of that; you may be interested in the Class Combinations section of Chapter 4, and the very end of Chapter 12.
  8. How do you know he's not? Facetiousness aside, any system (no matter how reputable) that says an Invoker can have a little fluffy bunny for a pet while a friggin' Druid can't have any kind of animal companion at all is automatically suspect. Probably even more suspect than the "soul-storage vessel" idea I posted above. Seriously, compared to the NPCs, what are the benefits to being Charname? 1) The mystical, time-warping power of Reload (cannot be seen in-game, as it's the very definition of metagaming) 2) You can roll your own stats (again, not exactly something the NPCs can observe & discuss) 3) You develop some Bhaalspawn abilities in BG1, which are then taken away & replaced with a Slayer Change which is . . . sub-optimal, to say the least. And then, when you get your soul back, you don't even regain your Bhaalspawn powers. Apart from that, Charname is just like any other party member. He just has slightly better stats and never actually dies. I don't want to keep banging this same drum, nor is it my goal to work against canon D&D rules, it just seems to me that making the Familiar a manifestation of Charname's soul is the natural way to reconcile the two 'problems' of "what's so great about being a Bhaalspawn" and "why can only the PC have a Familiar" at the same time.
  9. Okay, so the Speed Factor on this Mod Release+14 isn't the best, but at 4D8 Slashing and a ton of enchantments on hit, it should be enough to make Lilarcor's brother cry. Cool cool cool! YEEAAHH!
  10. I'll bet most of this stuff is already covered above in the thread, but regardless, here's the most important Familiars stuff I'd like to see. 1) Foremost, Find Familiar ceases to be any sort of Wizard (or Beast Master) spell at all, and instead becomes a direct side effect of losing your soul in Spellhold. I know this will be an unpopular idea (particularly those itching to have familiars in Tutu), but there has to be a reason that only Charname can have a familiar, and the Bhaal essence is the only thing that makes sense. We know that Charname instictively throws up protective cocoons when under plot-related threat (the "Transformation & the Dream" sequence, the party's trip to Hell, and of course the Pocket Plane), so it seems logical that Charname would be able to pre-emptively shunt off part of his soul into an external well. 2) The player can choose which specific familiar they get at the time of summoning; any PC of any class or alignment should be able to choose from at least 4 creatures, each of which could benefit the party in different ways (such as the classic archetypes of Fighter, Cleric, Thief, Mage), allowing the player to shore up relative weaknesses in party makeup--which carries the metagaming benefit of increasing flexibility in NPC selection. For instance, a player who loves having an archer-type in the group might "need" Mazzy in every game, but if he could get a Kobold Commando or Hobgoblin Archer for a familiar, he could use Mazzy's slot for somebody else.
  11. The Barbarian is actually a Fighter kit (even though the Character Creation part of the game pretends it's a separate class), and therefore can be modded to be able to Dual-Class to Mage, just as any type of Fighter can. But Monks, Sorcerers, Paladins, and Bards absolutely cannot be combined with any other class, in any way. It's hardcoded into the game engine, and in order to change that, one would have to decompile BALDUR.EXE and tinker with the Assembly code. You can't even do class combinations like Ranger->Mage or Fighter/Cleric/Thief. Long story short, if a class combination is not one of the already-existing, legal options, it simply cannot be done, by any means. Rule of thumb for "big & obvious" wishes like this: If it were possible, somebody would have done it by now. Sorry.
  12. Cleric's Staff Forgot to add that, if no satisfying "generic Cleric" enchantment can be found for this weapon, I for one would prefer to see it renamed to an unadorned Staff+3, rather than cram yet another anti-Undead thing into the game.
  13. About Spears with a range of 3: I haven't tested this yet, but I'm concerned about the ramifications of such long-range melee weapons possibly defeating Fireshields. This might be a good thing (it actually makes sense that if you poke the guy from 15 feet away, his 5-foot-flames can't reach you), or a bad thing (other, possibly modded, backlash effects, which are intended to fire in response to all melee hits, will fail), or a total non-issue (Sanchuudoku obviously proves that backlash effects do not have to be limited by range). Could somebody with more experience experimenting with backlash effects shed some additional light on this? I'm in favor of the first plan, and of course having creatures with no actual blood flow (Vampires, Golems, etc) be immune. I'd like to keep Stunning damage as a "magic bullet," a type of damage that no creature can ever be immune to, to be used only sparingly for things like plot events & being sure that at least a tiny bit of damage can bypass all protections. And possibly for a Sap / Blackjack / Cosh weapon.
  14. I would script the NPC to cast custom spells that would effect the change. Fairly simple.
  15. Flail of Ages I'm undecided about whether or not I like the idea of splitting up the flail heads at all . . . it has its upsides and downsides, most of which have already been posted. One thing that I know I dislike, however, is putting the Cold head in the Ice room of the Planar Sphere. The simple fact is that Lord de'Arnise would have had absolutely no way of putting it there, and the completed +3 Flail specifically says that he had used the whole thing when he was younger. On a minor note, I for one think that the "elemental rooms" theme has been done to death. I don't even like the placement of the Poison and Electric heads. A far better implementation, to my mind, would be Rakshasa-based. Give one Flail (not just the head, but the actual Flail of that head) to the Rukh Transmuter in the Windspear Hills. Or have UB's Jafir drop a head as he leaves. The Rakshasa actually want CHARNAME to have the entire Flail, to make it more sporting when they kill him to get it back. I also thought of giving part of it to Irenicus, because he's a known associate of Rakshasa and would need some pretty tempting bait/payment to get them to work with him . . . but finding a head in the starting dungeon would be waaaay too early (not to mention strongarming the player towards the Keep), and finding it in Spellhold would just be insulting, since you've got to slog through all of Chapters 4 & 5 before you can get back to the Keep or Cromwell. Even if you got the head as loot / reward from Bodhi, that leaves us with the problem of what else Irenicus could pay the Chapter 7 Rakshasa with, as he obviously doesn't have the Flail head any more. Or, we could just live with its current implementation and work on frying our bigger fish, of which we have many. Scimitars are kinda rare (IR adds an early-game flaming scimitar, but even with it we only have 3 specimens before UD), and having two specimens in the same late-game place would seriously hamper their early game appeal imo. Particularly since its current location is already right on top of Rashad's Talon. I would leave Belm on Ihtafeer, but move either Rashad's or Water's to Desharik on Brynnlaw. As for Khan Zahraa's reward, does he even specify that it's a sword, let alone the type of sword?
  • Create New...