NWN2: Patch Discussion

[Gromnir]

am still curious 'bout why so many things not show up in nathan's list o' fixes for 1.04.

 

missing feats? did developers ever even acknowledge that augment summons and practiced spellcaster were missing feats? posters at bio mentioned that those feats could be added via console, and they not seem to thinks they were broken. were left out for balance maybe? Gromnir checked pretty regular at bio boards before and after 1.03 release... but nothing from developers, 'least not as of a week ago. didn't see nothing in nathan's post 'bout many-shot neither.

 

pre 1.03 patch many weapons that did bonus damage would do positive or divine damage, but those items all seems to do magic damage now? as far as we know, developers never addressed reason for change.

 

undeath to death, meteor swarm, and disintegrate cannot be scribed to scrolls... mirror image can't be scribed or added to a wand... is more than a few other such spells that seems to he unscribable or inappropriate for wands. is no mention in nathan's post 'bout fixing such stuff.

 

is quicken spell still busted? shouldn't be able to have a quicken spell interrupted.

 

bracers o armour and ac bonus stacking in general seems to be busted.

 

is there a reason why some warlock invocations bring 'bout an arcane spell failure check and not others?

 

*quasi patch related*

 

as Gromnir has noted before, nwn2 domains is a mystery to Gromnir... looks like obsidian chose expediency and simply chose smae format as nwn1 cleric domains. fine. am accepting that domains in nwn2 is just as busted as domains in nwn1... but does anybody know of a fix? am not sure why obsidian not adds a feature to makes prestige classes and domains customizable this time 'round, but if somebody knows of such a mod, let us know.

 

let us try to keeps this thread 'bout the patch, eh?

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited January 13, 2007 by Fionavar

[damonors]

I'm really interested in cleric domains and why the remained the same. It seems that it couldn't be hard to make them the way they are supposed to, but it was obviously a low priority. How warlocks would even be made a medium priority is beyond me, but the time spent on them could have been spent on making cleric domains and a whole slew of other things. I still don't understand the purpose or allure of warlocks, and I refuse to have [spoiler-free name guy] in my party.

 

So, my question is, if Sawyer was lead the whole time, would he have put good better best implementation of domains on a higher priority? I know he mentioned a while ago that he didn't see the point in warlocks (that decision was with Ferret as lead), and without warlocks comes more resources for development.

 

Anyway, back to non-cleric part of the patch:

I haven't installed it yet, but can you put voice commands and emotes/behaviors/whatever in the quickbar yet? What about custom text macros? I used these ALL the time when I was multiplayering with friends on NWN1.

[steelfiredragon]

i wish they had the complete domains instead of nwn partial.

better they had been left out of the game itself until the time needed to spend on it correctly was allowed.

 

 

and dont post here telling me they are a part of 3.5 rules and to get used to it, i know that, im not against domains, im only against partial ones.( ie domains only give 2 spells when taken + domain power, they are suppose to give 9 spells 1 each lvl + domain power.

 

i got cheated out of holy smite in nwn and nwn2.

[Sammael]

I would have preferred a correct implementation of cleric domains over the warlock class, even though I am playing a warlock in NWN2 now.

 

Warlock is a very nice class, if a bit boring (for a "spellcaster").

Edited January 13, 2007 by Sammael

[SteveThaiBinh]

and dont post here telling me they are a part of 3.5 rules and to get used to it, i know that, im not against domains, im only against partial ones.( ie domains only give 2 spells when taken + domain power, they are suppose to give 9 spells  1 each lvl + domain power.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Is that the only difference? You wouldn't have thought that would take long to implement. At least they seem committed to slowly, slowly fixing all this stuff.

[aVENGER]

missing feats?  did developers ever even acknowledge that augment summons and practiced spellcaster were missing feats?

 

Heh, maybe they want to delay those feats until the expansion so that they can boast with a larger number of "new" feats it introduces. :D

 

didn't see nothing in nathan's post 'bout many-shot neither.

 

It works fine for Rangers with Archery Combat Style, not sure if it's pickable by anyone else though.

 

 

pre 1.03 patch  many weapons that did bonus damage would do positive or divine damage, but those items all seems to do magic damage now?  as far as we know, developers never addressed reason for change.

 

I don't think the DMG explicitly states what kind of damage Holy, Anarchic and Axiomatic weapons should deal so it's pretty much open to the devs to implement that as they see fit. Granted, my PnP knowledge is somewhat limited, but I think switching Holy weapons from Positive Energy to generic magical damage does make some sense since positive energy is supposed to heal living creatures and only harm undead.

 

bracers o armour and ac bonus stacking in general seems to be busted.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

IIRC, Josh made a comment about that issue a while ago, before the game was released. Basically, they didn't have the time/resources to implement correct stacking rules for different bonuses due to Aurora's legacy limitations, so they simply made most stat bonuses non-stackable with anything but Barbarian Rage.

[Fionavar]

Moved to Skeeter's ... Thanks Gromnir for indicating a 'hole' in the NWN2 focused threads ...

[J.E. Sawyer]

am still curious 'bout why so many things not show up in nathan's list o' fixes for 1.04. 

Nathaniel compiled the beta patch notes without being able to confirm all of the fixes that had gone into it (not all programmers were back from their holiday vacation at the time). The final 1.04 patch will have a full fix list.

 

Warlock is a very nice class, if a bit boring (for a "spellcaster").

I think it's the dullest base class in NWN2.

[Gromnir]

i wish they had the complete domains instead of nwn partial.

better they had been left out of the game itself until the time needed to spend on it correctly was allowed.

 

 

and dont post here telling me they are a part of 3.5 rules and to get used to it, i know that, im not against domains, im only against partial ones.( ie domains only give 2 spells when taken + domain power, they are suppose to give 9 spells  1 each lvl + domain power.

 

i got cheated out of holy smite in nwn and nwn2.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

1 domain spell per spell level. that means ONLY one domain spell per spell level. 1 use of holy smite per day is nice, but nowhere near as useful as is, for example, simply adding call lightning (which is busted BIG time in nwn1 and nwn2,) and chain lightning to your cleric's spell list. is understandable why obsidian not give 9 spells per domain, 'cause that would be wacky busted, but am not sure how they come up with the spells/powers that they did... and am not sure why they not spend a little more time reworking domains to be more like d&d... or less. after all, if you ain't gonna do like d&d, then why not does better?

 

all the talk of brand new engine for nwn2 makes us laugh... 'cause there ain't no way in hell that you makes all new engine for nwn2 and simply does same as nwn1 for domains. developers gots some weird definition for what they means by new engine.

 

and does josh comment mean that there is more stuff gonna be fixed in 1.04 than is listed by nathan? anything noted by Gromnir as busted?

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Gromnir]

"I think it's the dullest base class in NWN2."

 

given the lack of an xp penalty for crafting, not to mention the huge 'mount of gold a party can aquire, umd coupled with warlock invocations makes 'em boring & powerful. dc for 9th level scrolls is 34 or somesuch? am always forgetting new scroll dc for 3.5. regardless, with high charisma and free umd feat, warlock is bestest umd character in game... and interesting takes a backseat to power every single time... which you shoulds know by now. iwd2 kits?

 

is somewhat lucky that most folks not seem to realize just how useful umd can be, or warlocks might be more popular... and as we agree that they is pretty boring, Gromnir not wanna see 'em become more popular.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Sammael]

While a UMD-using warlock can be pretty devastating in PnP, I have yet to see UMD play anything more than a marginal role in my NWN2 game.

 

I have it maxed out, of course. I believe my warlock's total UMD bonus is +16 or something. However (A) I haven't found any really good wands yet (B) I don't have enough cash to craft even a 1st level wand. I have no idea whether this will change after the area I am currently playing (and got bored with).

 

Oh, and my UMD performance on scrolls is lackluster. I fail roughly 50% of the time.

 

So, all in, as I doubt that the majority of NWN2 gameplay will happen at uber-high levels (and, hence, uber-high UMD bonus), I don't think it's unbalanced. I could be wrong, of course.

 

BTW, I simply don't see how a warlock is more boring to play than a fighter. Compared to true spellcasters, sure. But fighters have done exactly the same thing since the dawn of D&D, and people still play them. Wash, rinse, repeat.

Edited January 13, 2007 by Sammael

[damonors]

Moved to Skeeter's ... Thanks Gromnir for indicating a 'hole' in the NWN2 focused threads ...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Seems like an odd decision.

 

Warlocks get UMD? Another odd decision, but I know nothing about t3h r000lz version of the warlock. Of course, maybe they can patch the UMD as cross class for warlock? Seems like a fair compromise (since umd is forbidden(!) for the other classes, I think).

 

Joshy, how many man/woman-hours do you think the Warlock took in implementation?

[Sammael]

Warlock should have been failry easy to implement. Much easier than all other spellcasters.

 

And warlocks are PnP kings of UMD.

 

BTW, I agree that moving this thread was unnecessary.

Edited January 13, 2007 by Sammael

[damonors]

Sorry if this derails the thread too much, but it IS about UMD, and any future patches have to take into account how easy it is to abuse (maybe across the board increasing the skill check for it? See! Patch related!).

 

Take all this with the grain of salt that I usually play bards or thief/mages, so my characters are all UMD maxed, but can use lots of stuff anyway.

 

While a UMD-using warlock can be pretty devastating in PnP, I have yet to see UMD play anything more than a marginal role in my NWN2 game.

Try using class-only clothes (especially monks), evil- or good-only equipment, or class-only items/weapons. Add that onto scrolls and wand usage.

 

 

 

I have it maxed out, of course. I believe my warlock's total UMD bonus is +16 or something. However (A) I haven't found any really good wands yet (B) I don't have enough cash to craft even a 1st level wand. I have no idea whether this will change after the area I am currently playing (and got bored with).

How much cash does a wand take? I haven't crafted any, but what, you need a bone wand and a wand crafting feat? Give [again, I'll leave names out] that feat and you'll have all the evocation spells you ever need and won't need her at all.

 

 

 

Oh, and my UMD performance on scrolls is lackluster. I fail roughly 50% of the time.

You can fail? That has never happened to me, but I try not to overuse scrolls except in big battles or tough battles [will leave out examples].

 

 

So, all in, as I doubt that the majority of NWN2 gameplay will happen at uber-high levels (and, hence, uber-high UMD bonus), I don't think it's unbalanced. I could be wrong, of course.

In chapter three with a 19th level bard. My high charisma bard with maxed UMD and CHA buffing equipment has been able to use pretty much anything I've come across during the entire game. You get levels fast and furious in chapter 2 and 3. (wait, can't remember if I am in chapter 3 or 4. My character just had steamy hot cybersex, what chapter is that in?)

 

 

BTW, I simply don't see how a warlock is more boring to play than a fighter. Compared to true spellcasters, sure. But fighters have done exactly the same thing since the dawn of D&D, and people still play them. Wash, rinse, repeat.

True, very true. Withe 3 and 3.5, fighter are less boring, and in NWN2 they can knockdown, power attack, different archery things (variously patched, but I am not an expert), parry well, use expertise, etc etc etc. Not the bag of tricks that a wizard, cleric or bard has, but still lots of stuff. Plus, they can use almost any weapon effectively, and an armor. So all martial loot is available to them.

 

But I think the point was that while fighters tend to seem boring and all, the warlock is nothing more than a spellcaster with all the interesting stuff and variety taken out of it. Taking a fighter has a boringness to it implied, but taking a 'spellcaster' that is boring?

 

So, to make sure that it is obvious I am talking about the patch: Would any future patch change UMD skill check?

[Gromnir]

fact that umd becomes more powerful at high levels counters the fact that warlock abilities/invocations is most powerful (relative speaking) at low and mid levels. compared to other casters, the unlimited castings at low and mid-levels is pretty powerful up until 'bout 10th or 12th level. 'course by that point mages now gots loads o' spells and they is doing considerable damage with those spells... and that is almost the eaxct point at which umd becomes very valuable. keeps warlocks ahead of curve throughout game.

 

2 no-brainer feats we seen for warlocks in nwn2:

 

1) skill focus umd

2) shield proficiency ('cause a small +5 mithril shield o' fortification is nothing to sneeze at,)

 

scroll dcs is rough... but those 3 extra ranks makes a big difference. scroll dcs ain't really proportional. start tough, but not get exponential more difficult as one might expect.

 

as for wand costs...

 

*shrug*

 

is a matter o' perspective. how much does that chime of opening cost from merchant? is pretty expensive. a wand with 50 charges of knock is far cheaper. by 12th level is probably not hard to have wands for most useful mage spells (self-buffing stuff that not have a dc involved,) though absence of mirror image is making less useful.

 

heck, for nwn2 we would reccommend having casavir and bishop taking craft wand feat if you plays a warlock...holy avenger, bless weapon, remove blindness, restoration, death ward, cremove disease, bakskin.... etc. is excellent wand spells for nwn2.

 

in any event, is 'nuff class and race specific items to make umd worthwhile.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

ps dc for scrolls is 25 + spell level of scroll... if game is hardcore or tougher.

so, breakdown typical warlock w/ skill focus umd at 12th level

 

wizards is casting level 6 spells at 12th level. for warlock to cast 6th level spell from a scroll at 12th level requires beating a dc o' 31

 

15 - ranks in umd at level 12

6 - 18 or 19 charisma boosted to at least 22

4 - deceive item feat

3 -skill focus umd

 

+28 umd at level 12?

 

is not a gimme, but gets easier from there 'cause you goes up 1 rank per level and will gets even greater charisma mods and wizard only gets new spell levels every odd level.

Edited January 14, 2007 by Gromnir

[Spider]

am still curious 'bout why so many things not show up in nathan's list o' fixes for 1.04. 

 

missing feats?  did developers ever even acknowledge that augment summons and practiced spellcaster were missing feats?    didn't see nothing in nathan's post 'bout many-shot neither.

 

Practiced spellcaster is definitely in the patch. I've seen it in the feats list myself. Don't know about Augment summons, but I'd guess no (ie I don't recall having seen it, but I haven't looked for it either).

 

What is wrong with Manyshot? I thought it was Improved Rapid Shot that was busted? Manyshot is in the game, but I'm pretty sure it has been all along so that's apparently not the problem. I wouldn't know of course, since I don't care much for the feat.

 

Edit: I am also in the crowd that can't understand why patch threads are delegated to Skeeters. If a mod could explain the reasoning it'd be much appreciated.

 

(the technical difficulties thread I could kinda see, but this is much more a game discussion than a technical one)

Edited January 14, 2007 by Spider

[J.E. Sawyer]

Joshy, how many man/woman-hours do you think the Warlock took in implementation?

I wouldn't be able to give you an accurate estimate. Certainly the renderer and toolset took more effort, but in terms of gameplay features, warlocks took more time to implement than anything else. Their GUI requirements alone took up an enormous amount of time.

[damonors]

To put that amount of time spent on a new class that adds pretty much nothing almost amounts to incompetance (sp?). I am not attacking anyone personally, but seriously, who thought this would be a good idea to spend time on? [rhetorical question, please no answers especially since they are not too hard to figure out].

 

I won't fawn with giddy reverence and say "that wouldn't have happened if Sawyer was around from the begininning", but...

 

 

As with the patches*, if there was an expansion**, who would be the head designer/decider for such issues?

 

 

 

*see on topic!

**yeah, like there is any doubt

[Gromnir]

To put that amount of time spent on a new class that adds pretty much nothing almost amounts to incompetance (sp?).  I am not attacking anyone personally, but seriously, who thought this would be a good idea to spend time on? [rhetorical question, please no answers especially since they are not too hard to figure out].

 

I won't fawn with giddy reverence and say "that wouldn't have happened if Sawyer was around from the begininning", but...

 

 

As with the patches*, if there was an expansion**, who would be the head designer/decider for such issues?

 

 

 

*see on topic!

**yeah, like there is any doubt

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

to be fair, it is the new stuff that peoples thinks is kewl... new prestige classes and new classes and new 10075 and spells n' such. simply fix all the basic stuff might makes serious d&d fans happy, and would probably please the hardcore crpg fan, but new stuff is what gets folks all giddy. go back and see just how many people on this board were looking forward to playing warlocks. were more than a few... surely more than were complaining 'bout how terrible the cleric domains from nwn1 were.

 

oh well.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[J.E. Sawyer]

I'm confident there are other glee-inducing base and prestige classes we could have implemented with fewer resources.

[metadigital]

I assume this has been passed on to the relevant lead developers for the expansions.

[Dark_Raven]

Since we are discussing the patches, why is 1.04 a beta? How can a patch be a beta, it's either done or it isn't. If it isn't done than it should not be released to the public.

[Gorth]

It isn't really "public" as you can't find it with the official updater tool. I think it's mostly for the geeks who hang around message boards and look for the information and availability of patches.

 

Who knows, they might or might not listen to the feedback they get from the voluntary beta testers

[metadigital]

It helps them find extra bugs before the public release.

[Gromnir]

I'm confident there are other glee-inducing base and prestige classes we could have implemented with fewer resources.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

no doubt you is correct... but if an appropriate cost v. benefit model for manhours had been in place for nwn2, you might not have a job at obsidian as lead... so be thankful for the ineptitude of those not so easily forgotten.

 

HA! Good Fun!