213374U

Oh. You are right, I read it myself. This memory of mine... Then the conclusion is that the list isn't complete?

I wasn't able to find Malak's armor in that list. A hoax?

No, you haven't dealt with the imbalance such a character would create in combat when compared to an all-STR or an all-DEX char, because it would be next to impossible to. You made up some lame excuses for balance patches regarding character creation, but nothing more. You still don't get it, do you? Such a character would be at an advantage due to the way the rest of the characters are designed. I don't know why I bother to explain this to someone so utterly obtuse. Must be this thing I got for slow people. Okay, here I go again. Focused characters are unbalanced. That unbalance is a weakness, but a measured, controlled, and expected one. Rounded characters lack that imbalance, but in exchange for that they have lower total bonuses. Now, if you give the balanced character greater bonuses, you are not only giving it more power when compared to the all-DEX or all-STR builds, you are making it much more powerful than most enemies, PCs and NPCs that aren't built with the 'weapon finesse' development in mind. I'm tempted to make a puppet joke here, but I'll leave that to you, since that's what you do best. Agreed. The system is imbalanced enough as it is. We don't need your powerlaming lust. Go cheat yourself up to level 99 or something. I'm not going to argue the maths there, because I already admitted they are correct. However, and as I said before, maths alone don't make game balance. Can't you see past that? Now, your idea would not only restrict character creation due to the 'balance fixes' you would like to add, but because anyone who wanted to play an all-STR or all-DEX char would be at a disadvantage. Not a numerical one, but from a gameplay standpoint. You seem to have your head stuck up your ass a bit too deeply. When you pull it out some and read a bit of what I write, you might actually get a clue. For the nth time, maths alone don't make a game balanced. It's not the maths I'm arguing. It's your interpretation of those maths what doesn't hold water. Perhaps the difference between both concepts is a bit past beyond your grasp? True. A game in which every enemy was Darth Nihilus would be challenging alright. It would be a POS, too. You lose. You are twisting reality badly on this one. Where to begin? Well, to say that having an army of level 20 enemies it's fine just because it's a game is not only plain dumb, it's also a lie. The game is based on the D20 system, and in that system, you can count level 20 characters with the fingers of one hand. So, your point here basically is, 'since rules have already been modified, let's f*ck them up completely', right? Wrong. To begin with, having an army of level 20 enemies would not make sense, not only from a gameplay standpoint (since there are other ways of making combat challenging), but also from a story standpoint. I mean, why would a level 20 dark Jedi be apprentice and subordinate to another level 20? Getting to those levels would imply the baddies performing epic feats or cheating. I hate AI cheating on me. I'm not saying that the game needs to be absolutely true to the movies. After all, you need a ruleset and some balance to be able to play. What I'm saying is that it should stay absolutely, positively true to the ruleset it's adhering to. Giving XP like crazy to a ton of baddies just so you can have a mathematically perfect character isn't exactly the epitome of sensible thinking. You want them to have the advantages of the focused builds, without their disadvantages. If that's not the definition of getting all of everything, can you explain what is? Thanks to you and people like you, I have guaranteed fun. After all, there are dumbasses aplenty. )

The bolded words are the key there. Yep, you can have a bit of everything, but not as much as some people seem to want.

Whatever. Keep yelling, n00b. A pity you're not as good reasoning game mechanics as you are making puppet jokes. No doubt you're the soul of all parties, but that isn't going to be enough to prove right something that's wrong. You are out of luck. Do some more jokes, however. They're somewhat amusing and we can never get enough message board buffoons. Those changes aren't going to be implemented anytime soon, among other things because the game is already out. You still haven't been able to deal with the greatest issue of your modifications, that is, balance. However you keep charging ahead even though you are aware of that. Talk about being retarded. You have skilfully evaded what I said about restricting character creation freedom and destroying NPC usefulness by flaming, however that only proves you have no real argument to counter it. Again, you lose. And after that you say you support the idea of enemy leveling to make up for the munchkin-ness you are proposing. Yeah that's a real bright idea, after all, the galaxy is full of level 20 Sith lords. Your math appears to be flawless, however math != game balance. Perhaps you should go to WotC and tell them of their error, it seems they don't playtest and think through their rulesets thoroughly enough. Characters aren't supposed to have everything, which is proven by the fact that the game is ridiculously easy as it is. If you have characters with insanely high attack bonuses, DEF scores, that on top of all that deal extra damage, there would be no reason at all to go for an all-DEX or all-STR build, due to the advantages of a rounded up char. No, no amount of flames or math is going to change the fact that what you're proposing is powerlaming.

Don't mistake not listening with not agreeing, n00b. No. The percentage of people who actually use blasters with Jedi characters is marginal. Therefore the feat cost would mean nothing. There is no balancing for what you're asking. A Jedi with 24 strength doesn't add anything to its DEF. A Jedi with 24 DEX deals no extra damage. It's that simple. A Jedi with 18 STR and 16 DEX has a little of both. Yeah, real cheap modifications to the core ruleset that would actually decrease the players' freedom in character creation and that would destroy any use the NPCs may have just so you could have your powerlamer feat implemented. Sorry, not gonna happen. Huh? Perhaps you should clear your ideas before posting? You are suggesting some deep changes to the ruleset and you still don't know exactly what you want? Stop wasting my time.

That sucks man. I mean, it's good for OE and stuff, but it only encourages those twits at LA to keep treating KotOR like crap. If they sold so much without giving a f*ck about the game, why change? <_<

As kirottu said, that's what they thought 50 years ago, too.

Wouldn't you be lacking the characters?

As I said, I would like to see every guy and his dog to drop their stuff when they die AND have realistic inventory management. That however would result in players leaving behind huge loads of useless garbage. So, you want them to drop their things just so you can *look* at them and then go on about your business?

No. Weapon finesse is supposed to be a special case in which the character is able to use its DEX OR STR modifier for attack roll purposes. Not both. Its original purpose was to offer defensive/high DEX characters a chance in melee combat. It was never meant to be an automatic feat, so it was a cause for unbalance in K1. It was not meant to buff the characters up even further, either. It's not supposed to be a 'must have' feat. If that issue has been fixed, then there's even less reason to have the characters add both bonuses. Jedi classes already have huge class and SQ defense bonuses. If you allow the feat to add both bonuses to attack rolls, you will have Jedi juggernauts with 16 STR and 18 DEX stomping all opposition even easier (in case you thought that's impossible), with natural attack bonuses of +7, +3 to damage rolls, and +4 to DEF, effectively making it the most unbalanced feat EVER.

No. You are building your whole reasoning upon false premises. An 'all-STR' fighter isn't more effective than an 'all-DEX' fighter, or vice versa. And none of those two are more or less efficient than a balanced character. They are just different ways of playing your character. You see, if you sacrifice STR, you are closing the door to greater damage, in exchange for higher DEF. The attack bonuses will be the same. If you do the opposite, you will have a more vulnerable character which deals greater damage. And if you put points into both STR and DEX, you will have a character which has both advantages, but to a lesser extent. Implementing your idea would not only be detrimental to 'all-DEX' and 'all-STR' type characters, but also it would incline the game balance even more towards the player. We don't want that. We already have the 'weapon finesse' feat for free, I think that's lame enough.

I played the original HL and I still think HL2 had no story at all. You may consider 'go there, kill things, go somewhere else, kill some more things' a story, but I don't.

Heh, I'd never imagined I'd take lessons about my mother language on these boards. Now I've seen it all. :D You are right. Partially right at least. Primero is the ordinal form and it's more of an archaic/highly formal way of putting it, therefore not usually applied to dates. But yes, I've seen it and it certainly is correct. However I didn't think it would have much use outside of logs or official documents, and even then, I think it would be regarded as an archaism.

Any excuse is good, eh Hades?

3 words: No Story Whatsoever.

I knew you would like it. However this is one of those few changes that actually favor game balance instead of destroying it. Besides, it's not the core ruleset we're talking about here. You almost managed to get me confused. Almost. Still, it's unrealistic that the characters can carry 3 or 4 heavy weapons, 2 armors, a ton of ammo, grenades, and stimpacks, and be able to fight as if they were carrying nothing apart from their weapon. The only RPG i've seen come close to 'realistic' inventory management was Deus Ex. It had really strict size (and weight perhaps?) limits and if you wanted to carry even two heavy weapons, you wouldn't have any size left at all. And still it was somewhat unrealistic. I don't think you want Counter-Strike sized inventories, do you? You want the rules to make sense? Me too. But having every thing you kill drop their stuff and then being able to carry inhuman amounts of thrash just doesn't make sense.

I don't feel dumber for visiting the LA forums. Quite the opposite in fact. The comparison favors me in that case, you see... "

It's not like they're missing anything...

You can, just don't expect to win that bet. "

Unfortunately, that doesn't work from a game balance standpoint. CRPGs are not PnP RPGs, hence you can't have the same rules, period. I'm all for realism in that sort of things, but then again, how do you justify carrying around 25 armors and 500 lightsabers?

I know you're fond of the absurd but... this time you've outdone yourself.

To have something to look forward to while waiting for the game? You, sir, are a weirdo. And quit blasting my arguments!

Star Control II. It came for free with my copy of SC3 and it actually made the whole purchase worth it.

No.