Cantousent

That's a reasonable position. Fact is it's more if a risk to back a kick starter than waiting for o see how it turned out.

I just got a kickstarter email with the latest update and a video. I'll post it when I get home. I'm hoping they pull it off. They might just do it.

At this point, they have 10% of their goal with one month left. As it seems to me, the problem is that there just hasn't been sufficient buzz about the project. If ol' Infinit hadn't posted this here, I wouldn't even know about the project. ...and clearly, while I'm glad he did, it's not like they're going to get hundreds of thousands of dollars from our little CnC community. <.<

That's actually quite exciting, lam. Please, however, use spoiler tags when posting pages of the hint book. Posting pics of the hint book here without spoiler tags will get it moved out of this forum. ...But I do think it's cool you received the hint book already! Cool times!

First of all, potions and the gauntlets aren't meta game items in Baldur's Gate. I found them in normal runs. I was using +1 to make it simple, but that apparently didn't work because you continue the all or nothing approach. Yes, an advantage of +1 at first level will still be an advantage of +1 at level 5. However, with the increase in hit points, better armor, and other factors, that +1 won't be quite the massive deal breaker at level 5. This is entirely how the math works. At first level, even that lowly +1 is a tremendous advantage. At level 5, it's a small part of the character's overall score. ...Or, to put it this way, does a fighter with the much vaunted 18/00 strength, having +3 to hit and +6 damage wielding a long sword and wearing normal chain beat out a fifth level fighter with a 17 strength (+1,+1)wielding a +2 long sword and wearing +2 banded mail? You can conflate any advantage with all advantage, but once again, the strength matters far less than the advantages yielded by level and gear you can expect to find easily in the game. ...And that's rolling and rerolling so that you get 18/00 and you don't end up gimped in every other attribute. The math is clear, those initial stats, which yield precious benefit to your level 1 character become less important than other bonuses you naturally gain from other factors as the game progresses. BTW: I believe there are 2 sets of ogre strength gauntlets in BG with TotSC installed. ...AND you're talking about the stats in *one* game that has the lowest levels of any of the IE games. I don't care if folks believe or understand this, but initial stats are increasingly less important than other factors pretty quickly in BG1, even more briefly by the time we get to IWD, and are rendered even less important when 3.x comes into use. Not only that, I'm using the best example of any initial stat in 2nd ed. There is no exceptional Wis, Int, Con, or Dex. In fact, L jefe's example of the wizard doesn't even work because non-fighter template folks max the constitution bonus at +2. So, to recap, as I've already said, that +3 +6 will always come in handy. I said that for even the lowly +1, but its part of the bonus mix objectively lessens. Also, speaking of the RNG being capped, the array of monsters isn't capped. You might be faced with a horde of gibberlings who will go down with one shot from a well armed warrior of reasonable strength. Much of the +3 +6 bonus is wasted on overkill. You might face one badassed dragon with a huge amount of hit points, in which case the bonuses matter more, but certainly less than your level and your gear. EDIT: Damn you, Voss, sparring with you actually overcame my innate laziness and I looked up stuff on teh interwebs. Here's an article I thought was kind of interesting and shows basically my thoughts, especially in regards to 3.x and beyond. :Cant's huge grin icon: http://www.joystiq.com/2012/04/27/why-skills-are-in-attributes-are-out-in-modern-role-playing-gam/

I almost bought a bottle of gin (I think it was Tanqueray... Ragpur or something like that) instead of whiskey yesterday. Maybe I'll get a bottle of Bombay Sapphire and sip a glass or two in honor of you, my Shady friend.

Aw, it doesn't matter if Namutree disagrees with you or not. If you think you have something to add to the conversation, you should weigh in, Baro. Seriously, mud wrestling in the pits of WoT is best game in town. Just don't get gritty sand in your G-string and you'll be fine. After all, any response will just be... words. :Cant's friendly grin icon:

Yeah, I don't want to boggart this thread talking about the weights, but I did up the amount for each one, some of them substantially.

Hmm, well I've decided to back it, but I'm going to wait for a few days as I mull over the info and think about it. I might still support the Sword Coast game, even though I doubt if I buy it at this point. When I figure out that, then I'll back this one. Plus, if it's like Project Eternity, I tend to pledge and then up my pledge as I see things I like or get more excited. I'm already pledged for Tides of Numenera. For that one, I went in on... Silver I think? Anyhow, having thoroughly enjoyed Wasteland 2, I regret not pledging higher. ...But we can apparently use the same character in SDS and ToN, so that's certainly a plus. :Cant's sighing icon: I just tend to take my time with things like this. If only I were rich! EDIT: Okay, stupid to agonize. I pledged in at $65 hoping that if enough of us do that we can prime the pump and others will come in. If it looks good later, I might up the ante, but $65 seems reasonable for now.

Actually, I'm doing more altogether. I was doing two sets of twelve. Now, she has me doing three sets of ten. ...But I think it's easier to do three sets of ten than two sets of twelve because I find the burn is at the end of the set.

How would anyone know you'd done it, my canine friend?

I took the advice of the kinesiologist today and changed up my routine. She has me doing heavier reps and fewer of them. I was worried that my form was wrong, but I was actually doing all of them right with a couple of minor tweaks, like rolling my wrist a little on the lat pulldown, etc. I use freeweights twice a week at home and the machines twice a week at the gym. My Canadian personal trainer buddy suggested that instead of doing a long hike in the morning on gym days, I do one before and one after. Something to do with 'tissues' or whatnot. Ugh, but am I beat right now. Also, speaking of Canadian friends, the wife went to the post office to renew her passport for our trip this summer to Canada. I'm tremendously excited about that!

Yeah, exceptional strength provided a whole slew of bonuses and I personally disagreed with the rule from the very beginning. Just not enough to fight with the players who always wanted to use it. Of course, my campaigns used the same stats available for the players for every major encounter, which could be kind of tough on them. Low level DnD, like first and second level, is a lot of fun. One hit from a hefty critter can kill almost all the characters in a single shot. Hell, the characters could single shot each other most of the time. Except mages. Low level mages just sucked. I much much preferred 3.x. As far as the gremlins... :Cant's looking innocent while pushing gremlins behind him with his foot icon:

Not stealing their stuff, just... liberating it from the evil bastards! lol Crazy alien cat bastard!

the kinda guy that uses a label maker device to make a label for his label maker... says "label maker"? HA! Good Fun! Thanks, now I have to wipe coffee stains off my keyboard. I'm hoping it came out of your nose like a geyser. :Cant's whistling and shining his halo icon:

I think the idea that someone just picks BG1 off the shelf and says, "hey this looks interesting," then plays the game with no significant planning and finishes in 20 hours doesn't reasonable to me. Maybe it could happen, but it sure as hell isn't going to fit in the normal range. Accounting for quirks becomes pointless.

If we want to confine the game in question to BG1 and specific characters, that's cool, but my point is that generally initial stats have increasingly less impact than decisions the player makes. A +1 will always give an advantage, all things being equal, but a +1 at level one has a much greater impact on combat when compared to a character who has a net 0 or a -1. That's why you would find people railing about choosing to play an elf to get the +1 with long swords and longbows, which is quite powerful at level one. However, that huge advantage at level is not the same huge advantage at level 5. It's still an advantage, but at level 5, the base attack bonus contributes far more to the attack rolls. Now, assume we add magic weapons, even a single +2 weapon at level 5, which you will almost certainly have found by then. At that point, you've got +1 from your initial stat, +5 from your level, and +2 from your sword. Yeah, the +1 is better, but it's not like he stands over the +0 guy and scoffs at him. In a straight up battle, he'll win the majority of the time, but it's not certain in the least. Now, 2nd edition, since we're ignoring 3rd edition or other games with initial stats, many of which actually have a variety of ways to increase stats temporarily or even permanently, but back to 2nd edition. Yeah, if you're a fighter, you get the absolutely idiotic exceptional strength bonus. That's not small potatoes. You'll get +3 and +6 if I'm not mistaken. Those stats will be pretty hefty for a while. Of course, in a game where you find gauntlets of ogre strength and girdles and potions of giant strength, That doesn't just start to become less important as players gain BaB, it becomes a non-issue. Your fighter with gauntlets of ogre strength is just as strong as the fighter without them. The fighter with a girdle of even hill giants strength is superior. Keep in mind, unless you create the entire party, the NPCs have set values. You *choose* take Minsc. If he has superior utility as a fighter, then that falls under a choice you make. You can stack your guy all you want, but it's one guy in a party, and unless you're really metagaming, you're not going to solo everything. If you do want to metagame and dual class from fighter at level 3 or 6 or whatever the hell the cool kids are doing these days, I think you really will get a lot of mileage out of rolling and rerolling for your guy with 18/00 strength and as many other 18s as you can get, but my initial point is still the same and still true. Your initial stats become less important as the game goes forward. Hell, even if your initial stats really do have a huge impact the whole game, they still become part of what makes you awesome, not the sole grantor of awesomeness as they are at the first level through maybe third level. NOTE: I'm not arguing they don't matter and I never have. I have always said, they become less important. Even when I've run campaigns, initial stats could be important, and perhaps make someone shine, but where the players go, how they approach problems, their ability to think of novel and interesting ways to deal with obstacles was still more important.

I get ya, Voss. When I get home I'll cast minor wall of text on you. :Cant's wry grin icon;

I thought max HP for non fighters was plus 2. Memory might be failing me.

Okay puting aside tabletop, in the IE games, maxing startingbstata could make the early game much easier, but certainly wasn't a win.button for the game.

Fair enough, Grom. Personally, I agree that hate you can't help but feel is better channeled into a greater good. Even more, if you'be suffered such great injuries that you can't pit aside your hatred, better to hate your tormentors than yourself. Saved from wall of text by phone keyboard. ;D

I laughed out loud at that, Temerlane. Actually, while I agree that maxed initial stats can be damned useful, but disagree that they're of ultimate importance, I don't think the balance issue from rolling is because of people rerolling for big scores. The problem with rolling is more people who roll once, take a truly pathetic score, and run with it because of ignorance or some such. Huge scores will help, but aren't all that big of a deal in the long haul. Low ability scores can make the low level early game excruciating.

The bonuses from initial stats are less important than other decisions from the very beginning, even in table top. They can make a difference, as Grom points out, but in sheer number crunching terms, they become increasingly less important. We're talking initial stats here, and even 2nd edition stats which had some wildly different spreads in terms of bonuses and whatnot those initial stats weren't the end all be all. Sure, if you get huge stat increases throughout the game, you're going to see a great benefit, but the idea that even making all your initial stats 18 at character creation will make you invincible is just plain silly. Frankly, and I mean no offense and hope you take none, but it's an unserious comment to say that the *initial* character creation stats are the make or break moment in just about any CRPG game I've played. Even if high stats can be a huge benefit at lower levels, and in particular the first two or three, there's still so many other factors. ...And 3rd edition made those bonuses uniform, which means that you're not getting that huge spread of to hit and damage bonuses of an 18/00 STR from 2nd edition. Meanwhile, in a straight point buy system, you can already max your primary stat bonuses. Rerolling could conceivably allow you to spend a huge amount of time to get max bonuses in secondary or tertiary stats. So, the idea that the extra +2 bonus from a tertiary stat at, say, fifth level will be more important than decisions regarding skills, perks, gear, etc. is just crazy talk.

Could you guys cut out the damned quote trees? Good Lord! Okay, Bruce, I'll take some of the heat off of you by making a shocking admission. I'm... :looks over his shoulder and whispers: I'm a Republican! Anyhow, I'm friends with an extremely liberal democrat family and I've known them for a long time. The sons and I all get along and we're quite close, but we have some heated and spirited political debates, especially since the kids love talking politics all the time. One of the sons is particularly concerned about social justice issues. He's all about LGTB agendas and whatnot. We actually don't tend to fight much about that because I don't really care about other folks sexual proclivities. I mean, no animals or minors and you can do what you want. Anyhow, he'll says (and surprisingly often) "Republicans are all racist!" Then he'll remember that I *am* republican and add, "Except for you !" hehehe Racism is an overused word. It's also used as a weapon to shut down debate or attack political opponents, and that's just wrong. Debate the issue, not the person.

I didn't know there *were* any 'correct' stances in the crazy bin of WoT.