Gromnir

"Thanks for proving my point!" you really is delusional. in the aforementioned thread you went on a tear 'bout how magic is a crutch for bad story and the s'posed superiority or more "real" games like stalker. the fact that stalker is an real game has relevance how? you were making general statements 'bout fantasy genre and used a specific game to illustrate. so what is your point? we brought up eldar 'cause he were a 3rd party... and he saw the same contempt for all fantasy that did Gromnir in your posts. "Where I disagree with him(mk), perhaps less vigorously than Gromnir, is in his scorn towards magic in games." ... so if you loves, or even likes fantasy, then you clearly were misleading more people than Gromnir. is that what you is doing here in this thread? you made a stoopid point that you don't real believe in and you gets carried away a bit... will forget all 'bout it a few weeks from now? no doubt we have to go through this all again as your selective memory issues is unlikely to be limited to one previous encounter. "You mean looking more foolish than someone claiming lots of rubbish without backing anything up? Naah, don't think so, liar." huh? look, at this point we suggest medications for mk as you ain't even trying to make points. Gromnir suggested that your interp of a bad wiki definition is flawed.... used a real living example to illustrate point. you not respond save to suggest that we should find better sources? this ain't a university paper where we debates differing string theories. is there some recognized expert o' source for geek and nerd definitions such as metagaming? wiki is it? do you even know how wiki definitions is created? for all you know, the author o' the metagaming entry at wiki could be sand or vol or even Gromnir. in any event, we applied your seeming interp of the wiki definition to a realistic scenario and ended up with a ridiculous result. is there a better way to show flaws of a bad definition? maybe, but as you not bother to respond, we probably won't know. and as we noted already, your definition o' liar seems 'bout as screwy and extreme as your interp o' metagaming def... but o'course you again drags us away from your initial and unsustainable point 'bout the silliness of motb builds. now all you wanna discuss is whether wiwki definitions is a better way to prove point than Gromnir approach? getting kinda far afield, no? sit back... takes a deep breath... look where you has gone and how wacky you ha gotten. is this really what you wanted to say? hope not. HA! Good Fun!

wow. call us a liar? gosh. tell you what. go back and look at your comments 'bout stalker. heck, even eldar joined in and agreed that your realism pov were irrational. "Why do you guys always want supernatural things? And magic? And psionic powers? And divine beings and ****? "I would love a game where everything is based on reality, like Wasteland was. There's a certain charm to actually recognising the weapons you're using instead of just getting that next longsword +3. Bring me kevlar vests, AK-47's and RPG's and I'm happy!" etc. went downhill from there as you dug a hole trying to explains how stalker game were more real. HA! and we gotta love it when people use wiki based sources... tends to end up looking foolish. need an illustration to enlighten your misconceptions? prerequisite for the sacred fist prestige class: bab +4 knowledge (religion) +8 feats: combat casting, combat reflexes, improved unarmed strike, stunning fist ability to cast 1st level divine spells so, what is the acceptable level o' knowledge o' the rules such that a player who wishes to play a sacred fist can use w/o it being metagaming in mk's estimation? if a basic working knowledge of da rulez is metagaming in your book, then we suggest that you throw away the book. to simply understand the prerequisites o' the class a person ahs to have pretty comprehensive knowledge o' the rules. gott know skills and bab, and when monks get stunning fist and you gotta have some notions 'bout multiclassing, etc. to simple choose to play a stunning fist is metagamy? riiiiiigggghhhhhtt. and yeah... the deep end is exactly where you went. you has tried to pull the thread off on some tangent, but your original complaint were 'bout folks wasteful spending efforts on builds for motb rather than simply choosing through whim. when that nutty tactic not hold up you made some general criticisms o' d&d... as if such criticisms were having any real tendency to bolster your original point... 'cause again, even if d&d is as busted as you seem to suggest, then there is all the more reason for folks to try and limit the damage resulting from a bad system. ... am happy to continue this if you wish. as for the notion that we is brown nosing... well, no doubt josh finds that as amusing as does Gromnir.... but if it makes you feel better to somehow simply dismiss our observation, then more power to you. nevertheless, josh is a developer o' crpgs. gots more experience with crpgs than does Gromnir, and we suspect he gots more than mk. heck, we can pretty much guarantee that josh got more experience if mk not even know differences 'tween and twixt ad&d and current d&d given that the d&d brand is the most popular such game 'round. kinda likes a person claiming to be an english lit expert w/o any useful knowledge Shakespeare. in any event, josh is one o' those terrible metagamers that obviously spent some efforts on a character build. no doubt that means that he is simply a roll player, right? keep digging yourself in deeper. HA! Good Fun!

*chuckle* you like gothic? great! makes your previous criticisms of fantasy and lack o' realism all that much more wacky. as for the second part o' your response... huh? understand the rules is metagaming now? wow. am supposing that the only way NOT to be metagaming in mk's book is to somehow suffer selective amnesia. is there some way you can makes Gromnir forget that fighters has better bab progression than wizards? then maybe we can be a REAL role-player. HA! oh well. you went off the deep end a good while ago in this thread... if you can't create a character through whimsy then mechanics is busted and you is metagaming to boot... and real role-players only choose through whimsy. anybody gots a link to that screenie of josh's sorcerer/fighter/ek/neverwinter nine character? bet it makes mk blood boil to see such metagamy stuff being advocated by developers. HA! Good Fun!

"What you don't seem to realize is that I don't like the rules used in NWN2 at all." huh? why you assume that? we know that you don't like any game that don't let you use real modern weapons... even if those weapons is complete unreal in the crpg in question. *shrug* you gots your weird biases. regardless, your earlier criticisms 'bout people spending effort on builds were clearly misdirected and voiced from a position o' ignorance. whimsy choices not work so well... not so good for posting responses neither. HA! Good Fun!

"He on the other hand, had to install NWN2 first, and updated it to 1.10, THEN he installed MotB, and now all the MotB content that has text associated with it doesn't show up. For example, he can pick the Favoured Soul class, but it's nameless and doesn't have any information. New spells don't have names or descriptions either." Gromnir not have game, but there is repeated references to a hotfix(?) available at the bioboards that addresses missing text. ... found it. http://nwn2forums.bioware.com/forums/viewt...8&forum=121 HA! Good Fun!

"Actually, I thought THIS was called AD&D. I don't even know what the hell I am playing!" really? well then, you has actually learned something new today. golly. "That's indicative of a broken system." very possibly, but that not change the fact that it is what it is. you wanna screw your eyes shut and pretend that any choice is worthwhile or even viable? be our guest. regardless, your delusions and protests not change fact that whimsical picking of feats, skills and classes is not a good way to approach motb character creation. why does people spend some time on builds? 'cause your whimsy approach is stoopid given the realities o' the system and fact that this is a CRPG. dm can't tailor the game to your choices. "No, but I'm sure sitting for hours before a game calculating which class brings what feats and skills and learning thick nerd books about rules that have no relevance in real life is a much more rewarding experience." a pnp ROLE-play character will offer potentially hundereds of hours o' gameplay. a weekly session o' rp once a week or even once a month... a character can last a good long time. but six months ago you spent 15 minutes rolling some lame numbers and got stuck playing a generic ad&d vanilla fighter... and for as long as that character survives the only thing you can possibly do to change character is to change his equipment. wow. talk about a deep role-play experience. "As I said: roll-play." yeah, 15 minutes o' rolling determines... everything. fantastic. Gromnir will takes 3e and its many faults compared to the ludicrous scenario offered by ad&d. roll stats and choose kit. *shrug* is there too much crap in d&d nowadays? sure. is axiomatic that the more options you add to a rule system, the more difficult it is to balance the system. there is too much crap. nevertheless, ad&d is hardly an attractive alternative for various practical and mechanical reasons AND given a choice 'tween too many choices and a handful o' worthless choices we thinks that most would choose the plethora o' options. and the bit 'bout it taking hours of reading and calculating to come up with a d&d character is so much hyperbole. takes minutes to come up with a viable character. for those that wanna optimize it can take hours, but to jump in and play takes no more than it did with ad&d. regardless, your initial point were silly and myopic... ignores reality of crpgs and system in question. HA! Good Fun!

hmmm for motb don't evokers and transmuters both have conjuration as their opposition school? specialization not requires that you take your extra spell from your specialized school. is a few feats that depend on your school o' specialization, but not many. for all practical purposes, there is very little difference 'tween an evoker and a transmuter. keep in mind that if you is into crafting, by having no caster with conjuration spells there is gonna be some certain items you cannot create. is no big deal... but something to consider. HA! Good Fun!

huh? if we is talking 'bout motb and other sp crpgs, then the dm is a crpg developer... is no mysterious elephants. if we is talking 'bout pnp (which Gromnir weren't,) then you still runs into the problem where Mr. Perfect monopolizes the action. if rest of party is not Mr. Perfects, they tends to get bored sitting back while dm drops elephants on mr. perfect... but again, this is a complete different issue than the one Gromnir were talking 'bout. HA! Good Fun!

side note: what Gromnir don't get, as far as character builds is concerned, is the folks who try to find the Perfect Warrior (or mage or whatever) to play through motb. maybe combat is tougher in motb than it were in nwn2, but these games is never gonna be made so as to cause undue frustration. a relative newcomer to d&d is still gonna be able to get through motb combats with his crappy build, so what advantage is there in building the perfect warrior? there is all kinds o' ultimate pvp builds we seen posted... and we just don't get the point of using such stuff in motb. such folks is only cheating selves. ... the hilarious part o' the scenario is when mr perfect warrior comes to board and then complains that motb were ssssssooooooo easy. well duh. you makes a build that exploits every d&d loophole so as to render unto utter desolation all enemies who stood in your way.... and then complain that game were too easy. *shrug* HA! Good Fun!

ad&d were bass ackwards and retarded. kits were as bad as prcs and the rulez were a convoluted and counter-intuitive mass o' contradictions. if stoopidity = rp, then ad&d were indeed the system for real rp gamers... 'cause having all important character development choices happen only at level 1 enhanced rp. HA! as for just taking whatever feat or skill peaks your fancy... sure, you can do that, but such intentional wackiness don't result in a better rp experience. sadly d&d, (especially a crpg d&d game in which there is no genuine rp being done anyway,) is a game where the numbers matter. can you play a half-orc paladin/monk if you wish? sure. unfortunately, such a character is probably not gonna be particularly fun to play when you can't hit nothing in combat, and can't make any skills checks. combat and dialogues... both is highly dependent on numbers. wanna play 30 levels o' fighter is fine and dandy. take whatever feats and skills you want and you will still be good in combat... but 'cause of lousy skill selection chances are you won't be getting near as much from dialogues as some o' the people who worry over builds. what if you wanna Role-Play a character that can do more than simply cast spells or swing a sword? better consider the numbers, eh? heck, since the only thing that might be remotely considered rp in a single-player crpg is coming from dialogues, the genuine role-players is probably the ones who is gonna most worry over builds, 'cause w/o some forethought you may miss out on a great number and variety o' dialogues. is not like pnp where Gromnir's lack o' social skills is hardly a handicap. real live fellow players and a human dm means that we get as much out of an rp session as we put into it. sp crpg is not rp. you get put only so much as the developer allows... and 'cause o' balance and rulez issues, what you can potentially get out o' game is based 'pon a cold and hard numbers evaluation. welcome to the world o' sp crpgs. but then again, if willful stoopidity = role-play, then sure enough ad&d were supreme, and choose feats and skills and levels w/o forethought or considerations must result in a more genuine rp experience. HA! Good Fun!

(damn double posts) HA! Good Fun!

You know, that one sounds pretty fun. I'll have to try one out, all I need is to calculate what kind of Feats and Stats I should go for so that I don't gimp myself entirely in either arcane or martial matters. feats is the one problematic issue with this combo. sure, we gots all the skillz we could hope for, but we gotta takes skill focus: spellcraft & martial weapon prof to qualify for the 2 prcs... would take empower anyways, so that is no issue. gets skill focus concentration for free with ek... one less req to worry 'bout for asoc. probably wanna throw in a shield proficiency too... though that one is debatable. able learner is essential for Gromnir 'cause we is maxing skillz. we would get shield and martial weapon for free if we went traditional fighter/wiz/ek route, but this is a skills build. most o' your essential meta magic stuff you would have to wait on til you takes asoc levels... 'cause you gets loads o' good meta stuff for free with asoc. human gets most skills, but stoutheart halfling is gonna have a prettier character record sheet with better bonuses and stats. Gromnir am not a min/max stats guy so with spell casting prodigy and practiced spell caster feats we not feel any sting from starting with a 16 int or taking 4 levels o' rogue. str 12, dex 14(16), con 14, int 16, wis 12(10), chr 10. halfling stats is in parenthesis. not too worried 'bout str 'cause new feats allows you to eventually replace str with int modifier for bab. pretty much dump every available point into int... and make sure to takes tumble and umd. also, while saves is ok, they ain't great either. ek gets high fort. rogue gets high reflex. wiz gets high will. a 4/6/10 r/wiz/ek ends up pretty darn balanced, 'specialy if you go the halfling route with high dex. by the end o' motb you ain't gonna be particularly combat effective no more... but play through nwn2 and you ends up with 4 attacks and ability to cast 8th level wiz spells... not to mention access to virtually every useful skill in game. with motb you simply go 100% asoc and end up with a very powerful wizard who is having enough skills to take advantage o' just about any skill related dialogue check in game... but you does start to lag in the combat stuff. is not a pg build in the traditional sense, 'cause there is far better builds for arcane power and for combat efficacy, but this seems like a very nice build for taking advantage o' just about everything the game might have to offer. one serious drawback: you got no real room to add in crafting feats. gonna have to depend on your companions to do all the crafting stuff. *shrug* HA! Good Fun!

thanks for the feedback. Gromnir will probably stick with rogue/cleric and hope that the red wizard's homunculus has adequate thiefy skills.... though a rogue/wizard/ek/asoc would be a skillz hound and we would not need to depend on homunculi. oh, and 'fore we forget again, anybody know how motb warlock imbue works? HA! Good Fun!

is no spoiler or secret that the motb red wizard companion has a homunculus that boasts some thiefy skills. such info has been mentioned in a couple previews. even so, am curious if the critter is up to the task o' replacing a genuine rogue. one would expect that the dc for trap spotting and disarming in an epic level campaign would be pretty damned high. does the homunculus adequate replace a dedicated rogue for the trap & lock pick duties? HA! Good Fun!

thanks for feedback... will stick with rogue/cleric combo if ASoC not add something specific... unless there ain't no joinable rogues in motb. Gromnir took rogue levels to boost skills other than trap finding and disarming. will go a different direction if no motb rogues. so, any motb rogues for a mostly good party? HA! Good Fun!

am not sure if we played same torment game. wisdom gave luck bonus (which boosted amost all rolls), xp bonus and had the most numerous and important dialogues... whole power o' belief stuff that were at core of game, and those were almost invariably wisdom checks. *shrug* however, let us not turn this into yet another thread where we debates ps:t strengths and weakness. Gromnir only brought up ps:t to clarify a query 'bout motb... 'cause this is a motb thread. got something to add 'bout motb? HA! Good Fun!

not paying attention again? sand didn't play yet, so you don't know squat. clarification: there were maybe 2 or 3 bluff situations worth noting in all of nwn2. most dialogue encounters were simply diplomacy encounters... but there were a few times when bluff were helpful... but for 2-3 situations it would be kinda silly to spend 23 ranks in bluff. am asking if motb makes skills other than diplomacy more useful than they was in nwn2. diplomacy were near essential in nwn2 for those who were interested in dialogues. bluff and intimidate? sw, hmmm. sounds like maybe obsidian went back to ps:t roots. ps:t were pre 3e... no skills. many ps:t dialogue branches were revealed to characters with high wisdom. not have spot or listen checks or some other plausible wisdom based skill check, 'cause no skills were in ps:t. heck, the entire game were pretty wisdom centric.... were the one indispensable stat. 'course now we got skills. by chance did you play a character with high wisdom such as a monk or cleric? am wondering if people who played mages were seeing numerous intelligence based options. developers o' ps:t really didn't try to balance wisdom v. other stats... am wondering if they does same in motb. HA! Good Fun!

all Gromnir does is work... hardly any time to play. nevertheless, will probably get this thing... eventually. got some Qs for eldar and others who has played. 1) how does warlock imbue item work? is doubtful that we play a warlock, but the spirit meter stuff and new resting rules make it more appealing. crafting is kinda a neato advantage for warlocks, but crafting feats still seem to be off-limits for warlocks post 1.10. 3 essential factors for warlock to imbue in p&p: a) umd o' sufficient magnitude b) necessary caster level c) crafting feat. no crafting feats? so, how does it work in motb? 2) is ASoC immediately available in motb? eldar suggested that ASoC had some rp applications in motb... and even though Gromnir loathes prcs we will maybe give ASoC a looksee. after a glance at the prerequisites it not seems as if ASoC is like shadow thief or neverwinter nine prcs from nwn2... not have some in-game requirement such as joining a guild or somesuch, but am gonna double-check anyways. 3) is there a rogue companion available in motb, and if not, how necessary is a rogue? unless the one-o'-many, or the spirit bear is a rogue, we not see no rogue companions. was not a big fan o' neeshka in nwn2, but we kept her in party til late in game for useful rogue skills. so, if Gromnir wants rogue skills in the party, does we need to take... or is rogues a waste o' space in motb, or... 4) for those who has played motb, what skills would you recommends to those who wish to maximize dialogues? how much ESSENTIAL skills integration into dialogues? there were a few encounters in nwn2 when Gromnir noticed that some skill check other than diplomacy were made... but not many were noteworthy. ... feedback and insight would be appreciated. anyone? anyone? HA! Good Fun!

What's wrong with that? the official epic rules kills continued usefulness of melee classes. why take levels o' fighter or even monk if you not get any better bab or more attacks than you would by taking archmage or somesuch? 'course now we gots a novel kinda argument that suggests that continued bab progression makes the taking levels o' melee... compulsory. 'cause with 40 levels the gap ' 'tween caster and melee classes becomes prohibitively great. is some truth to argument if you compares 40 levels o' wizard to 40 levels o' fighter, and then set up an encounter that forces the wizard to fire his crossbow at an Epic Dragon. ... epic rules in d&d is stoopid and broken, and while obsidian approach is maybe less broken than wotc standard epic rules, the munchkins who has seen their super-caster builds gets busted should have sand support, 'cause obsidian clearly abandoned da rulez. we all know how sand feels 'bout deviation from rulez. honestly, Gromnir has not looked close at numbers... 'caues we generally dislikes the d&d Mechanics beyond levels 12-15. clever prc combos and equipment configurations determine outcomes of encounter before they happen... might as well leave your dice at home. epic is already a big stinking steamy pile in our estimation, so am not particularly concerned if obsidian or wotc version gets some gold star for managing to be the more terrible incarnation. HA! Good Fun!

fo2 ai were retarded... which is one reason that bis were gonna give the player control of npcs in bg3. even the slow learners at bis knew that a d&d party based game has gotta give the player control... bis and obsidian developers has specific noted that they would never makes a d&d game w/o player control. not care if you feel that the party leader situation for dialogues is feeling silly. is kinda obvious that without such a model you got some serious balance issues resulting. am all for adding more npc independence during non-combat encounters (and even infrequent during combat,) but the fo2 crap just ain't gonna happen again from obsidian. even the obsinaties has learned and moved forward. HA! Good Fun!

why? 'cause of balance concerns. in d&d you plays a single character. you play a character with crappy int or terrible chr and you is gonna pay the price... though wotc did a terrible job balancing usefulness of attributes in any case. still, with a competent dm, there is gonna be some disadvantage to having low int or chr in pnp d&d. in a crpg in which you control a party with no designated leader, chr and int becomes serious dump candidates... lower 'em to basement and it not gonna hurt the Party. dumbest character in world still gets at least 1 skill point per level. with a pool of even 6 characters you can be pretty damned sure that at least one character is gonna be maxed in every useful skill. and as for communication, you might as well make the paladin or sorcerer do all the diplomatic stuff 'cause they need charisma already. why makes your dwarf fighter have an int or chr 'bove 5? maybe for some feat or prc prereqs, but otherwise... d&d is a squad based tactical combat game. in pnp, 'round which the rulez is balanced, you control a single character. in a party-based crpg you controls a full squad, and typically have a recruiting pool from which to draw as well. why not let your crappy dwarf fighter with the 1 chr and 3 int avoid all the talking? for balance... so that there is some value to be taking points of int or chr, and commensurate cost if one chooses to tank such stats. HA! Good Fun!

"When a game, such as PS:T, tries to rise above its third class standing, a number of people in the gaming community pillory the effort as

has to do with the numbers and not tactics of players... which is the problem. and yes, a kobold with a spear can very easily slay a 1-3 level character with a single critical hit... as you is quite aware. dms is forced to cheat to keep 1-3 level players alive. once players get to level 4 or so it ain't such a struggle no more. clearly there is some flaws in the system. even if sand honestly believes that levels 1-3 is ok, the fact that those levels is much more dangerous than levels 4+ should be obvious to anybody that there is a problem with the system. HA! Good Fun!

cr guidelines don't help too much 'cause of simple problem that weakest opponents gots weapons capable of doing criticals. weakest and most worthless kobold adversary with spear is still capable of killing you with a single blow... but starting at level 3 or 4 is helpful... and simply cheating as a dm is most common scenario. HA! Good Fun!

oh, well, sure enough once people is down and unconscious they is complete safe... and trying to heal 'em with heal skill not makes you a target or nothing neither, right? how many heal spells does average level 1 cleric got? and Gromnir is talking 'bout sub-level 1 cr goblins for chrissakes. "Again, adventuring is DANGEROUS." it can be, depending on the dm... but more important is the fact that d&d is disproportionately dangerous at levels 1-3... if you use d&d guidelines for crs. honestly, you is being silly. HA! Good Fun!