Schatten's Content

#158379 Is Chloe a well balanced NPC?

Posted by Schatten on 30 September 2004 - 03:32 PM in Chloe

Every time someone posts in this thread, I'm reminded of how much I prefer the 3rd edition rules to the 2nd edition. If this game were under the 3E rules, this squabbling about Chloe's dexterity would not be occuring as it's far less than a mature air elemental's in 3E rules.

lets say i, schatten god of strength, have a strength of 40 and you made a npc with strength 45. do you think in 3ed no one would question you about that? or am i confused and did not understand that? :wacko:

#150946 The Revision of the Five

Posted by Schatten on 09 September 2004 - 04:49 AM in Refinements

You mean it would be nicer if she wouldn't knocking back opponents? True, it can be more deadly. How about reducing the save penalties on that effect to -2 then?

also get the healing ability on the bow
Wouldn't it become too powerful? I don't really like this one anyway.

i mean she can use the buffet bow on melee chars when she get attacked by them. because this way with only one bow the wing buffet is too nasty. or you could use one bow and reduce the buffet to -4 (??).
as for healing.... okay, its powerfull.... perhaps reduce it to 5hp? or just ignore it.

#150929 The Revision of the Five

Posted by Schatten on 09 September 2004 - 03:45 AM in Refinements

imo make two bows. one as you suggested without winbuffet and one with wingbuffet. the wingbuffet one can be used on melee critters and the other one on others. also get the healing ability on the bow, too.

#151633 The Revision of the Five

Posted by Schatten on 12 September 2004 - 03:42 AM in Refinements

"Before someone might get me wrong, I suggested that she should use one 1 bow, the more powerful one in my description. The other one (with the nerfed abilities) should be droppable and useable by the party."

yes, and i said i dont like that idea. i find it better to have two bows. one with a good chance to push enemies back because, we all know, long range units are weak in melee or at least should be. so she can push fighters back. and one bow to do heavy damage.
and not one and only one bow to do it all in a soso manner.

#152230 The Revision of the Five

Posted by Schatten on 14 September 2004 - 03:58 AM in Refinements

And to tell the truth, I think having 2 different bows on her and switching them in combat sounds rather silly. Of course, it is the way things go in BG2, but still...

its the 4 arms technique. a bhaalpower. with it she can use two bows at the same time.

I tell you a secret Feanor:
I already dispatched Schatten a while back, it is only me posting under his identity...

..... i am.... just one of tgms many voices in his head?

#156952 The Revision of the Five

Posted by Schatten on 27 September 2004 - 05:54 AM in Refinements

It's always best to give players the option. They love the options and don't care what extra coding it requires.

i vote for an option to install all or none and an option to install some of the components.

#131582 The Revision of the Five

Posted by Schatten on 12 July 2004 - 04:43 PM in Refinements

I'm not sure if there is an urgent need to add new goodies.
gold. i need only gold. give them more gold. :turnip2: (i love this smilie)
I wonder why do you need additional gold. In TOB, you can gather more gold than you can ever spend.

gold is equivalent to charisma. the more gold you have the more ladies you get. :edwin:

#151982 The Revision of the Five

Posted by Schatten on 13 September 2004 - 06:03 AM in Refinements

its more strategical. because the chance for knocking back is higher and melee chars have a lesser chance to melee.

and more importantly i demand it as your boss. :nana:

#151368 The Revision of the Five

Posted by Schatten on 10 September 2004 - 02:39 PM in Refinements

In my opinion, a bow would have a knock effect only id it shots with hammers.

magical enhance the string and the power of the bow and have a plate in the middle of the arrow so it can pierce and damage you and knock you back. simple.

#128617 The Revision of the Five

Posted by Schatten on 02 July 2004 - 06:34 AM in Refinements

I'm not sure if there is an urgent need to add new goodies.

gold. i need only gold. give them more gold. :turnip2: (i love this smilie)

#121610 The Revision of the Five

Posted by Schatten on 06 June 2004 - 07:17 AM in Refinements

"1. Scripting. Any changes you make will likely require scripting support. The new abilities suggested do make sense in some cases but I fear that it will take quite a bit of scripting to make them work properly."

to add a few lines so the enemy uses a new spell or ability with a check if the target will be affected (fire res check for fireball...) is not hard to do. everyone can do that.

2. true

3. i am not fond of this, too. they are at a good diff for me as it is now. but to each their own. i would rather like the second part of this revision done. improvements of the other monsters. as it is now, all are just experience potions that needs to be tapped, except bosses like dragons, liches, named bosses.

yaga: i, too, am against an improved spawning rate. but tgm is right about the leutenants. if they appear than with leutenants and soldiers. and they should flee after the death of yaga.

"My suggestion here is to not spawn extra mercs. Sure he would have them but Balthazar always struck me as the Honorable type. IMO the best solution would be for him to have a group that matches yours. In solo games he would fight the PC one-on-one. Against parties he would have 1 companion for each party member. Perhaps the Merc leaders."

sorry, now. this would involve in a)heavy scripting and thus heavy amount of time like it was already done with the rogue rebal or b)cheats and we all know tgm dont like cheats. so i am with tgm here except maybe increase the spawn to two rounds.

#122732 The Revision of the Five

Posted by Schatten on 10 June 2004 - 07:26 AM in Refinements

BG2 is BASED on pnp, but clearly uses a different system.

because of engine limitations and not because the devs want a different setting.

We should use those sources where we see fit, and where the game can benefit them.

agreed. so, tell me, what pnp rules kill bg2 that is based on most of those rules and why?

#122737 The Revision of the Five

Posted by Schatten on 10 June 2004 - 07:46 AM in Refinements

sorry, some poisons are able kill you if not treated properly like those of the pit fiend and such tough enemies should have them. nothing wrong with that. :huh:

#122747 The Revision of the Five

Posted by Schatten on 10 June 2004 - 08:03 AM in Refinements

Cyanide kills you within a few seconds but from a gameplay standpoin i realy cant support any form of insta death

i didnt say anybody has such mighty poison. even in rl not everybody has them. they are rare and some mighty foes can have them. and its not always instant kill. the cleric can heal you in a specific time frame.

#163896 True Dweomers

Posted by Schatten on 19 October 2004 - 04:50 AM in Refinements

i have very blurry memory of a rpg game with age effects. might and magic? dont know.
the older you get the more age side effects you get. more fragile (lower const=less hp, senile= less int= less magic ect...). perhaps as an idea, let the caster get older and older per global variabel for all magician who can cast this. lets say 3 casts results in one age category, 5 for the next and so on to a total in which the next casts means death or something. just an idea. i dont know if the concept of age is in ad&d. those effects seem more logical. i mean strength of 10 or 9 is for a wizard in bg2 not much a difference. when its start to reduce your int i would really think if i must cast that exploding chicken slinger.
i dont know how often you plan to use tds. somewhere in the end of like 8 casts you can start to reduce int as well.
as i said the consequences seem more logical somehow but somehow....ach forget it. :wacko:

is too much work, isnt it?
just an idea... :drunk: :help:

"that trap was *really* hard to disarm, might as well make the Thief pay XP to do it."

#163879 True Dweomers

Posted by Schatten on 19 October 2004 - 03:47 AM in Refinements

we haven't decided on this issue, but one thing is sure: I'd never grant such power to playing characters without proper downsides to balance it. And I really don't have to introduce anything new to the game here: XP cost appears for almost every single TD in 3rdE. And for a good reason I say.

since when do i play bg2 in 3rd ed? xp loss is such a stinking way to balance god powers. seriously, why do you loose things you just learned anyway? does a bolder drop on your head?
when crafting items and you must invest your own magical energy its more logical to sacrifice slots for n items then xp, imo. because, well, you use magical energy to make items.
as an example.
xp sacrifice sucks. i for one would never use anything with that as side effect.

#163920 True Dweomers

Posted by Schatten on 19 October 2004 - 07:43 AM in Refinements

i said spell slots, not exp.

i said if you craft lets say 10 items you must sacrifice 2 spell slots.
i cant see any fantasy-reality reason why you should loose experience by managing to create difficult items.

i also like the ravenloft vampire drains more then the exp drains. in ravenloft vamps can also drain abilities. seems better then exp to me. perhaps i cant comprehend the exp system entirely and see exp in ad&d the way it is in reality. there you can only loose exp due to amnesia ect...

#163548 True Dweomers

Posted by Schatten on 18 October 2004 - 03:59 AM in Refinements

like wail of banshee somewhat.

edit: has two saves instead of one.

edit2: first save for death then save for damage.

#163942 True Dweomers

Posted by Schatten on 19 October 2004 - 09:56 AM in Refinements

i hope understanding what you meaning equals not with being on your side.

i understand it, too. i am only strongly against it.

"I think you guys overreacted a bit against the idea of XP loss. Personally I think that 1000-10000 XP is a so piss poor ammount that you are not going to notice it. Honestly."

if i follow by the letter of that, please explain to me the downside then...

"However I also see XP as the character's real power, and this is what feeds a True Dweomer imho, the caster's power, his energy (therefore energy drain spell btw)."

hmm.... *scratches head*.... if you look at it this way....

#106813 True Dweomers

Posted by Schatten on 31 March 2004 - 01:17 PM in Refinements

"Devas no longer get Globe of Blades in Refinemets."

why? i hope you write all changes in the readme.

"In PnP, a pit fiend used to be able to gate in more pit fiends."

this is not true. he can gate demons who are less powerful then himself.

#106369 True Dweomers

Posted by Schatten on 29 March 2004 - 06:06 AM in Refinements

good idea.

are you able to cast all dweomers in pnp, too? isnt it better to be able to choose along the lvl ups what powers you are able to cast?

#106999 True Dweomers

Posted by Schatten on 01 April 2004 - 11:37 AM in Refinements

Actually a pit fiend can gate in two lesser baatezu or one greater baatezu (a pit fiend is a greater baatezu) per round with 100% chance of success.
This statement is almost word for word out of the Monstrous Compendium, if I remember correctly. My point was that fighting a pit fiend is an exercise in futility, and a guarantee of certain death due solely to this ability. Allowing one to get loose from hell is a very, very bad thing, and opens a flood gate sized conduit for him to gate in his buddies to wreak havoc and mayhem. In fact, the way Demigorgon (what a tough battle) was imprisoned should represent the way all demons must be imprisoned. Summoning one should be a hair raising experience indeed. And one undertaken taken with the utmost protection, care, and caution. But once it is summoned, stand by for carnage will ensue.

Do I think a greater demon should be able to take on the toughest of enemies in the game? Absolutely. But should it be a hair raising experience? Absolutely. I think there are very few SoA or ToB enemies that should be able to stand up to one of these guys. Maybe Firkraag, , the silver dragon, Jon (of course), Kangaxx, all of the Baalspawn (except the first one in the grove of ancients), any demi-lich, etc...

okay, okay, i have read it in the book as well. a pit fiend can gate others. but you cannot implement that. you know a demilich is able to summon hundreds of liches and/or has other insanely powerfull abilities. he can kill any npc (pc would be lame

) with one thought. and every lich has a dozen of powerfull guards. but to put it in would be lame and boring.
and your second paragraph can as well describe a lich and demilich. (okay, a lich perhaps, demilich definetly)

@tgm: if you improve demons dont forget us necrophil players. any demilich can beat a demon (dont scream now not true yadda yadda, pals, you knwo what i mean).

#106766 True Dweomers

Posted by Schatten on 31 March 2004 - 09:16 AM in Refinements

"First of all, Planetars are NOT that powerful in ToB. A single Planetar falls very quickly against a ToB Dragon or any of the bosses. "

well, have never used it against dragons, only mordis.

nevertheless, imo planetars are very tough summons. they are hasted, vorpal hits and globe of blades. its just my opinion. perhaps because i have never used them against really tough opponets.

dont ask me why.

"But Schatten, do you believe that it will come without heavy drawbacks? You still don't know me well enough!"

no no. i knew you would have something up your sleeve.

hey, i am your biggest fan. i have posters all over my walls of you.

i just fear, you gate that beast, it kills a dragon/bhaalspawn/... without you to interfere and you just wait till its done. so even if you get now exp. i mean. if i am only lvl 40 or 36 after the end doesnt matter too much.
so to clarify a bit. i fear it can beat (or help too much) the only real challenge which are the boss fights.

but after i read what you intend to do its seems not to be that way. not to be able to move without being attacked is a bit of a handicap.

#162681 True Dweomers

Posted by Schatten on 14 October 2004 - 05:01 AM in Refinements

hmm.... a single class mage is a better mage then a multiclass... isnt it natural that a multiclass is not as good in its classes than a single class? :wacko:

#162684 True Dweomers

Posted by Schatten on 14 October 2004 - 05:09 AM in Refinements

yep, it euqals to experience.
if i am a busy businessman and wrestler, i am not as good as the undertaker who wrestles his whole lifetime.
a 10/10 elf monk/wizard cant cast the same powerfull spells as a 20 wizard. the wizard spends his life for magical research and the monk/wizard not.
i see it that way. :blink:

By content type

See this member's