247 replies to this topic

[Feanor]

Well, Firk and Thax have only 15 Dex in Bg2. But I didn't check all the dragons. IMO, Thax should have the highest DEX, something around 16-17 and Firk the lower Dex, around 11-12.

[Feanor]

TG, I think that Adalon's claws should do 3D6 or 4D6 damage instead of 2D10 +6...

[T.G.Maestro]

Firk and Thax have only 15 Dex in Bg2. But I didn't check all the dragons. IMO, Thax should have the highest DEX, something around 16-17

Take a look at Nizi, he has around 20. Interesting, eh? I guess we should be a bit more careful with those low numbers.

I think that Adalon's claws should do 3D6 or 4D6 damage instead of 2D10 +6

Nope, sorry. While I could set it so to do 4D6 damage, I found it a bit odd that different types of dragons roll exactly the same damage score. I find nothing wrong with a 2D10+6 instead of a 4D6 for example.

[Feanor]

Firk and Thax have only 15 Dex in Bg2. But I didn't check all the dragons. IMO, Thax should have the highest DEX, something around 16-17

Take a look at Nizi, he has around 20. Interesting, eh? I guess we should be a bit more careful with those low numbers.

I think that Adalon's claws should do 3D6 or 4D6 damage instead of 2D10 +6

Nope, sorry. While I could set it so to do 4D6 damage, I found it a bit odd that different types of dragons roll exactly the same damage score. I find nothing wrong with a 2D10+6 instead of a 4D6 for example.

Of all the dragons, only Niz and Adalon have more than 15 Dex. Niz has 21 and Adalon has 19, and here I think BG2 is totally illogical. BTW, TG, I think you have made a mistake here : you gave Firk the highest Dex of all the dragons, though he shoud have the lowest Dex, because he is a red one and he is the larger one.

About your second point, TG : why do you think dragons do multiple damage, like 3D6 or 4D6 ?

[T.G.Maestro]

Of all the dragons, only Niz and Adalon have more than 15 Dex. Niz has 21 and Adalon has 19, and here I think BG2 is totally illogical.

Partially. While I would agree that Adalon has high DEX scores, I find it funny that a Black Dragon has 21.

BTW, TG, I think you have made a mistake here : you gave Firk the highest Dex of all the dragons, though he shoud have the lowest Dex, because he is a red one and he is the larger one.

Thats not so easy in my eyes, but I agree, those stats should be revised. Still, I don't think any of these Dragons will have ANY of their stats below 15, that will be the lower limit. Yet don't forget that 18 DEX can be different - it works different for a quick elf, who is able to dodge arrows or blows, and works different on a gigantic creature. I have a good example how a giant lizard with 18-20 dex would behave: Godzilla. Yes, that was a great example on an amazingly dextrous and evasive beast.

why do you think dragons do multiple damage, like 3D6 or 4D6 ?

I don't really understand this question Feanor. Why not??? Simply because they are more powerful. And to show this, we have to increase the damage rolls somehow. There are different ways for this, one is to simply increase the fixed damage, e.g. increase the normal 1D6+3 to 1D6+15. The problem with this method is that it leaves little room for the "luck" and for the different "damage types". I mean, we cannot expect that every blow of the dragon will inflict almost identical amount of damage, right? Thats why I increase the BASE damage from 1D6+5 to 3D6+5 for example. This way the max damage is increased by 12, but there is a chance for weaker blows as well. I think this way it is more "realistic".

[Schatten]

isnt it more important to look upon those numbers that make a difference gameplay wise? if it has 15 dex or 21 dex is not so much of a difference for an npc, its more aestethics. instead you should change the res of the demons according to the mm. *hint*

Edited by Schatten, 06 August 2004 - 07:28 AM.

[Feanor]

I don't really understand this question Feanor. Why not??? Simply because they are more powerful. And to show this, we have to increase the damage rolls somehow. There are different ways for this, one is to simply increase the fixed damage, e.g. increase the normal 1D6+3 to 1D6+15. The problem with this method is that it leaves little room for the "luck" and for the different "damage types". I mean, we cannot expect that every blow of the dragon will inflict almost identical amount of damage, right? Thats why I increase the BASE damage from 1D6+5 to 3D6+5 for example. This way the max damage is increased by 12, but there is a chance for weaker blows as well. I think this way it is more "realistic".

First, I would use the term "logical" instead of "realistic", because BG2 is not realistic. I did so once and Notmrt started mocking me.
Now, let's talk seriously. Those damage is not because they are more powerful. The damage due to their strength is a total different bonus. But I wanted to point you in a different direction. I shall explain to you my point of view (and this will clarify why I said that Adalon should have 3D6 or 4D6 damage for her claws). IMO, this huge damage, I emphasize this again, IS NOT DUE TO THEIR STRENGTH. It's because a dragon's claw HAVE MORE TALONS. When Firk, for instance, hits his opponent, it's like he hits with 4 short sword simultaneously. That's why he does 4D6 damage and not 1D24, for instance. Because, hiting with 4 talons simultaneously, his talons would score minimum 1 damage and maximum 6 damage each. That's why I said Adalon should not have 2D10 damage : first, I doubt he has talons sharper or bigger than Firk (to do 1D10 damage each, comparing with the 1D6 of Firk), but the main reason is that reptiles have at least 3 talons for every claw. I just can't imagine Adalon with only 2 talons...

[T.G.Maestro]

IMO, this huge damage, I emphasize this again, IS NOT DUE TO THEIR STRENGTH. It's because a dragon's claw HAVE MORE TALONS

I guess you'll be surprised, but these were my thoughts as well. Exactly.

When Firk, for instance, hits his opponent, it's like he hits with 4 short sword simultaneously. That's why he does 4D6 damage and not 1D24, for instance

But here comes the problematic part. While those paws have talons, the damage is not clearly inflicted by them. Imagine a Dragon attacking a knight with the paw. Right, there is a chance that only the talons will reach him (4D6 damage), but it is more likely that the knight will be smashed with the paw itself, knocking him away (1D20 damage). I guess we should be cautious in with these multiplyers this time. While this suggestion would be very nice (and I would support it entirely, its not overly fitting in the BG2 system).

I doubt he has talons sharper or bigger than Firk

There are no useable descriptions about these, we don't know the specific details of the claws for any of the subraces. This means we can easily state that Black Dragons have the larger claws, or the Silver subrace has the longest tail compared to body length.

I think you understand my reasoning here.
Still, I promise I will take another look at these suggestions and decide weather they can be integrated into the mod nicely.

you should change the res of the demons according to the mm. *hint*

Of course. I'll try to make them as "official" as possible, though these are only plans for the future. Right now we are working on the Five.

[Feanor]

But here comes the problematic part. While those paws have talons, the damage is not clearly inflicted by them. Imagine a Dragon attacking a knight with the paw. Right, there is a chance that only the talons will reach him (4D6 damage), but it is more likely that the knight will be smashed with the paw itself, knocking him away (1D20 damage). I guess we should be cautious in with these multiplyers this time. While this suggestion would be very nice (and I would support it entirely, its not overly fitting in the BG2 system).

I'm not defeated, TG (I'm stubborn, isn' it ? ). I admit I didn't thought at the fact that the paw itself could do damage. BUT (because there is a but, hehe) : the description of the (that 3D6 or 4D6 thing) damage indicates it's damage caused by the talons. As I remember, the claw do slashing damage (but I'm not sure 100%, I'll check this evening, if it is so, you're hit). Better would be this way : 3D6 +3 slashing damage and an additional 1D6 crushing damage (if you want to show that the paw itself could do damage).

[T.G.Maestro]

Good points, really, but they get simply too complicated. As always, this is a game, and so it is not always logical or realistic. While I'd gladly create a completely smooth and logical damage system, it something too much .
And if we would do it for Dragons, we should start and do it for everything else, right? Nope, I guess we will use the classical methods, and forget logic and reality - once again .

[Feanor]

And if we would do it for Dragons, we should start and do it for everything else, right?

Well, we refine only the dragons now, isn't it ?


OK then TG. Another point : dragons should receive only 2 attacks per round each. Until now, they had 3 or 4. Reasons ? Two :
1. What I have already said, giant creatures are slow.
2. Since we give them increased HP and new abilities, I think we should also give them some weaknesses. B)

[Schatten]

feanor, please, this is getting somewhat silly now. dragons arent clumsy zombies.



"first, I doubt he has talons sharper or bigger than Firk (to do 1D10 damage each, comparing with the 1D6 of Firk), "

red dragon claw 1-10
silver 1-8

[T.G.Maestro]

dragons should receive only 2 attacks per round each

No. They attack AT LEAST once with both of their paws, attack AT LEAST once with their bits, which means at least 3 attacks.

Since we give them increased HP and new abilities, I think we should also give them some weaknesses

Why? If they have weaknesses, it will show up after all. But if they don't have many, we shouldn't make them weaker manually. For example they tend to be "soloing", whic makes them vulnerable versus a "dragon-slayer" party of attackers.

[Feanor]

All right, boys, have it in your way.

No. They attack AT LEAST once with both of their paws, attack AT LEAST once with their bits, which means at least 3 attacks.

You're right, TG. And what I suggested is not even official. They do have at least 3 attacks per round.
But I still have a question : why did you give to some of them a separated bite attack ?

2. Something which I want to tell you : according to AD&D manual second edition, black and green dragon have 4 AC less (for Base AC) than red and silver dragons and 5 less than shadow dragons.

For example they tend to be "soloing", whic makes them vulnerable versus a "dragon-slayer" party of attackers.

It's not compulsory : the AD&D manual second edition says : solitary OR clan (so, it's theoretically possible to encounter a group of dragons). But, still, you're right, they tend to be soloing, because they view other dragons as competitors.

"first, I doubt he has talons sharper or bigger than Firk (to do 1D10 damage each, comparing with the 1D6 of Firk), "

red dragon claw 1-10
silver 1-8

I don't understand your point here, Schatten. That's what I have said too.

Edited by Feanor, 10 August 2004 - 05:46 AM.

[Schatten]

those are the actual damages of the claws of the dragons. tgm has upped the numbers a bit for bg2. the numbers tgm uses has nothung to do with how much talons they have or something.

[Feanor]

those are the actual damages of the claws of the dragons. tgm has upped the numbers a bit for bg2. the numbers tgm uses has nothung to do with how much talons they have or something.

Yep, I clarified this, I insisted a little because I did not realize that TG views that damage as the cumulative damage a dragon could do with his melee attacks.

[the bigg]

I'm not sure if this has be covered before, but has there been any consideration of giving the dragons an attack that does crushing damage? you know.... when they fly up high and decide to just drop their dead weight on you.

Giving extra attacks isn't that easy to create & script, given that a dragon jumping on you will kill a giant with his weight, given they usually live in caverns and so can't fly high, I'd say no.
@ the dice size & number issue: really, is 3d6 that different from 2d10? medium damage is 3.5*3=10.5, in second case 5.5*2=11.
Unluckily, we cannot follow the manual, since the usual 1d10 1d10 1d12 is too lame for 40 meters long, 1000+ years old magic and mythic creatures. With my friends, we used the custom rule that every age cathegory over 1 (baby, 0-5 years) will result in 2 plusses to the damage. EG Firkraag, who is AR (age rating) 12, will score a basedamage + 22.
Then, if you TGM prefer to use more luck, and prefer a 3d6 for wider range than a 1d6+7, I can work out the numbers (going to study Maths, you see eheh ).
But: chances of scoring a 10 with 1d6+7 is 1 over 6, with 3d6 is 1 over 4 approx (won't figure out the numbers since it is 5 AM in Italy )

[Feanor]

I'm not sure if this has be covered before, but has there been any consideration of giving the dragons an attack that does crushing damage? you know.... when they fly up high and decide to just drop their dead weight on you.

It would be easier to give them an additional 1D6 crushing damage to their attacks, but TG already kicked that suggestion. Thought I wonder if he shouldn't, because some creatures (golems, for instance, are immune to slashing damage) ?

[the bigg]

I'm not sure if this has be covered before, but has there been any consideration of giving the dragons an attack that does crushing damage? you know.... when they fly up high and decide to just drop their dead weight on you.

It would be easier to give them an additional 1D6 crushing damage to their attacks, but TG already kicked that suggestion. Thought I wonder if he shouldn't, because some creatures (golems, for instance, are immune to slashing damage) ?

You can't summon a Clay Golem, so this isn't really a problem. OK, a conjurer can summon a Magic Golem, but Crushing damage won't help anyway... and the only time I summoned one he lasted zero time zero against Imp Bodhi. For some reason, she was getting through his PFMW (while, with much relief, she is helpless against mine)