Mask of the Betrayer

[Atreides]

I've made copious complaints about that very issue. It still exists. I hate it. As I see it, I don't have to be standing right next to an enemy, who is clearly set to attack me any minute, to exchange words with him. Why not have the PC speak but have the fighters and other meat shields between him and the bad guys?

I think the real issue is distance - in particular initiating risky conversation at point blank range. Even in hostile situations people talk without goons standing in front of them, blocking the view. They'd usually do it further away, with the goons flanking them, maybe in slightly advanced positions. The difference is they're far away enough that it's not a blade in your heart as soon as the dialogue window closes.

[Spider]

nope. you should up it to hardcore... there are other things it effects, too. the game is much too easy on the default. there are maybe 2 or 3 fights that are hard otherwise, that i can recall.

 

taks

 

The game is still much too easy on Hardcore. In that mode it's where I've discovered 2-3 challenging fights. Played Hardcore on my first playthrough and had to reload due to combat maybe 5-10 times. Subsequent playthroughs has had me do that one time (and only due to the stupid "get knocked down and forget you're fighting") rules. Currently playing on highest difficulty and still don't lose any fights.

 

So difficult NWN2 is not.

[Tigranes]

Been playing some random hall of fame module, its good but it crashes too much. Maybe that's the 1.07 patch though. It took the approach of just giving opponents much better AC and THACO (whatever their equivalents are in 3.5ed), which gets really really annoying especially on early levels. Instead of having all enemies able to thump you for six every turn you want some sort of tactical challenge; sadly, NWN2 wizards seem to buff up for 3 minutes then still be susceptible to a Khelgar Smash. I think the game needs more BG2esque, insidious protections and 'status effect' spells on players (who get plenty of saving throw items anyway).

 

I just might try the OC in the hardest difficulty and see how it goes.

[Starwars]

Which module is that?

 

I've been reading that plenty of modules have been having all kinds of trouble with the 1.07 beta.

 

I think Nighthowls in Nestlehaven had challenging combat (in fact, I got pwnd quite a lot). Though I also think it had a bit to much combat in certain areas. But it was pretty fun, I liked that mod.

[Tigranes]

Subtlety of Thay, Hall of Fame. Played a couple of hours into that and it's not bad, but monster summoning and some other random things crashed me. I suppose I should wait for a patch-reconciled version or something then.

[Aegeri]

I've made copious complaints about that very issue. It still exists.

 

Urrrrgghhhhhhhhhhhhh.

 

So much for playing the character I wanted to play.

 

Sigh. Fighter/Cleric and other derivatives it is then...again.

 

Edit: one day I'll be able to play a character with skills like diplomacy like I actually want to play. One day.

Edited September 12, 2007 by Aegeri

[Tigranes]

You still can, even if MOTB is harder you should be able to quickly run back after the dialogue ends. I play wizards all the time.

[Aegeri]

You still can, even if MOTB is harder you should be able to quickly run back after the dialogue ends. I play wizards all the time.

Why should I bother? I can just stand where I am and mince the idiot involved straight away. It also neuters my favourite class, which is the rogue. Why the hell am I going to come out of shadows and stand in front of some moron (who wants to kill me) when I'm at the advantage striking first anyway? It's just plain stupid and ridiculous. I really don't see why just doing things like BG2 did is so wrong.

 

Edit: I have decided that if I buy the game, I will call my character Brave Sir Robin, in mockery of this.

Edited September 12, 2007 by Aegeri

[Spider]

It also neuters my favourite class, which is the rogue. Why the hell am I going to come out of shadows and stand in front of some moron (who wants to kill me) when I'm at the advantage striking first anyway? It's just plain stupid and ridiculous. I really don't see why just doing things like BG2 did is so wrong.

 

Although one rank in Shadowdancer or a few in Assassin removes this problem. Hide in Plain SIght is awesome.

[Gorth]

It also neuters my favourite class, which is the rogue. Why the hell am I going to come out of shadows and stand in front of some moron (who wants to kill me) when I'm at the advantage striking first anyway? It's just plain stupid and ridiculous. I really don't see why just doing things like BG2 did is so wrong.

 

Although one rank in Shadowdancer or a few in Assassin removes this problem. Hide in Plain SIght is awesome.

One thing that iritates me with that "teleport pc to front of party and initiate dialogue" feature is, that it makes it pointless having npcs with any conversational skills. What good is it having a Paladin with charisma and diplomacy or a bard that can bluff and sweet talk his way out of any situation if they are doing the old oyster trick :sad:

 

Not that this is unique for NWN2, as a couple of previous games in recent years have made a mockery of skills in a similar way.

[Sand]

In my ever so humble opinion, this is Neverwinter Nights 2 os horrendous design flaw. I do hope that in future incarnations and Obsidian's newer works will not have this flaw. It destroys any point of playing an actual rogue in the game.

Edited September 12, 2007 by Sand

[Tale]

You still can, even if MOTB is harder you should be able to quickly run back after the dialogue ends. I play wizards all the time.

Why should I bother? I can just stand where I am and mince the idiot involved straight away. It also neuters my favourite class, which is the rogue. Why the hell am I going to come out of shadows and stand in front of some moron (who wants to kill me) when I'm at the advantage striking first anyway? It's just plain stupid and ridiculous. I really don't see why just doing things like BG2 did is so wrong.

 

Edit: I have decided that if I buy the game, I will call my character Brave Sir Robin, in mockery of this.

No matter how skillful a person is at hiding, there is nobody who can open a heavily watched door and waltz into a room without being noticed barring some major obscurement on the side of the watcher.

 

The hide skill in D&D is not actually your character turning invisible, but an abstract of using concealment and timing and all sorts of other activities related to being unnoticed. However, many of these activities are just plain nonreasonable in several situations. Namely when there's nothing to hide behind and people are trying hard to pay attention.

 

So, it's not unreasonable to script an NPC to notice a completely unobscured individual in the open regardless of his hide skill anymore than it is to expect that same hiding character to be able to get away with that.

 

 

I do however agree with the base complaint about being forced into a specific range. And that perhaps if you could get another character to initiate dialogue that would be a reasonable distraction to use for bringing the hiding character into the room unnoticed.

Edited September 12, 2007 by Tale

[Sand]

That is why we should use windows. Wait, there are no windows in the Realms.

Edited September 12, 2007 by Sand

[Aegeri]

No matter how skillful a person is at hiding, there is nobody who can open a heavily watched door and waltz into a room without being noticed barring some major obscurement on the side of the watcher.

 

You and I both know that many of these situations happen in areas where you never needed to open any such kind of door or similar. Oh I walk up to some guy on the road, in the middle of the forest and he somehow sees me and strikes up a conversation with me. Even though he couldn't have possibly noticed me given that I'm wandering around in favoured terrain at night.

 

...

 

No.

 

The hide skill in D&D is not actually your character turning invisible, but an abstract of using concealment and timing and all sorts of other activities related to being unnoticed. However, many of these activities are just plain nonreasonable in several situations. Namely when there's nothing to hide behind and people are trying hard to pay attention.

 

I am well aware of what the actual rules are trying to do, they are actually an abstraction. Of course, I could point out to you that in PnP, if we're going to get truly anal, I don't have to use a door. I can teleport into the room, use a window and other kinds of magical concealment/silencing to help. None of these things NWN2 permits me to do, just so we're aware. So within what constraints it gives me, I'm willing to forgive it some things but definitely not others.

 

Again, why can't NWN2 do right what BG2 already did correctly?

 

So, it's not unreasonable to script an NPC to notice a completely unobscured individual in the open regardless of his hide skill anymore than it is to expect that same hiding character to be able to get away with that.

 

...

 

Except these are actually extremely rare in game terms, because most of these ridiculous examples actually occur in areas I could make an argument definitely would offer a great deal of concealment. But again, your arguments foundation is built on mud from the get go because you're denied basic rules of 'real-world' logic by the game like alternative routes like windows from the begin with.

 

And yeah, I did notice Sand beat me to the window thing :/

Edited September 12, 2007 by Aegeri

[Tale]

Again, why can't NWN2 do right what BG2 already did correctly?

Because I recall numerous times in Baldur's Gate 2 where your party would be approached while your character hid and any time you so much as transitioned a simple area you would lose hiding. You couldn't use stairs without losing it. It always kind of irked me in BG2 where no matter who the NPC initiated dialogue with he would still talk like he was talking to the main character. It's kind of awkward to see Minsc talking about being a Bhaalspawn.

 

BG2 did not do it correctly. It may have done it in a way you consider better and I would consider it better, too. But it's a leap to say it did it correctly.

Edited September 12, 2007 by Tale

[Aegeri]

Again, why can't NWN2 do right what BG2 already did correctly?

Because I recall numerous times in Baldur's Gate 2 where your party would be approached while your character hid and any time you so much as transitioned an area you would lose hiding.

 

Which was reasonable enough, but there are many situations in BG and BG2 (in fact, possibly even IWD) where you can stealth up to something that is scripted to talk to you, yet it won't recognise a character that is stealthed. Alternatively, my main character (a rogue) can stand at the back while stealthed and Viconia can say whatever, then I can backstab the idiot (as I should be permitted to do). This is entirely different than NWN2, which takes the most offensive and insipid solution (teleporting you and making sure everyone can see EXACTLY where you are). What you've said sounds to me like you have characters that are not hiding in shadows, that are seen and then spoken to, which is fine. You don't actually lose your stealth in this situation (though I do believe the game keeps making checks, it's been a while).

 

Again, BG2 did it right. The game doesn't have the engine to permit you things that you should be logically permitted to do anyway like jump through a window. So it gives a fair and reasonable abstraction given its limitations. NWN2 does not. Hence the objection.

 

It always kind of irked me in BG2 where no matter who the NPC initiated dialogue with he would still talk like he was talking to the main character. It's kind of awkward to see Minsc talking about being a Bhaalspawn.

 

hmmm.

 

Minsc talking about being a Bhaalspawn.

 

Vs. the potential having my mage/rogue PC teleported right up to talk face to face with the likes of Demogorgon.

 

I'll weigh these up on the scales of "What potentially aggravates me more" and get back to you.

Edited September 12, 2007 by Aegeri

[@\NightandtheShape/@]

It also neuters my favourite class, which is the rogue. Why the hell am I going to come out of shadows and stand in front of some moron (who wants to kill me) when I'm at the advantage striking first anyway? It's just plain stupid and ridiculous. I really don't see why just doing things like BG2 did is so wrong.

 

Although one rank in Shadowdancer or a few in Assassin removes this problem. Hide in Plain SIght is awesome.

 

HIPS is a f***ing joke, it shouldn't even be included its way way way too overpowered, I mean lets face it, it's pretty much invisibility at will.

[Tale]

Again, why can't NWN2 do right what BG2 already did correctly?

Because I recall numerous times in Baldur's Gate 2 where your party would be approached while your character hid and any time you so much as transitioned an area you would lose hiding.

 

Which was reasonable enough, but there are many situations in BG and BG2 (in fact, possibly even IWD) where you can stealth up to something that is scripted to talk to you, yet it won't recognise a character that is stealthed. Alternatively, my main character (a rogue) can stand at the back while stealthed and Viconia can say whatever, then I can backstab the idiot (as I should be permitted to do). This is entirely different than NWN2, which takes the most offensive and insipid solution (teleporting you and making sure everyone can see EXACTLY where you are). What you've said sounds to me like you have characters that are not hiding in shadows, that are seen and then spoken to, which is fine. You don't actually lose your stealth in this situation (though I do believe the game keeps making checks, it's been a while).

 

Again, BG2 did it right. The game doesn't have the engine to permit you things that you should be logically permitted to do anyway like jump through a window. So it gives a fair and reasonable abstraction given its limitations. NWN2 does not. Hence the objection.

 

It always kind of irked me in BG2 where no matter who the NPC initiated dialogue with he would still talk like he was talking to the main character. It's kind of awkward to see Minsc talking about being a Bhaalspawn.

 

hmmm.

 

Minsc talking about being a Bhaalspawn.

 

Vs. the potential having my mage/rogue PC teleported right up to talk face to face with the likes of Demogorgon.

 

I'll weigh these up on the scales of "What potentially aggravates me more" and get back to you.

 

I do however agree with the base complaint about being forced into a specific range. And that perhaps if you could get another character to initiate dialogue that would be a reasonable distraction to use for bringing the hiding character into the room unnoticed.

[Cantousent]

Hey, conversation skills come in right handy in this game. One of the advantages of my build is that I have full diplomacy, which I use. Don't get me wrong. The problem is that all conversation hinges on the PC. Hell, that's one of the advantages of playing a class, like the rogue, who has both diplomacy and bluff (if I remember right) as class skills.

 

The problems isn't that the PC doesn't use conversation skills. The problem is that the PC ends up teleported right next to the bad guys which, in my opinion, resumes my disbelief. The PC should not be forced to stand next to the person in order to use conversation skills.

[Spider]

I can actually understand this though. Obviously it's the player deciding on the dialogue, so it should be the player's avatar that does the talking. I'm not sure I agree with the concept as such, but I understand it. Alas, it doesn't really bother me since I always chose dialogue skills for "me" anyway.

[Gorth]

That would make sense in a game where you had little or no direct control over party members. If i can remote control my smart ass wizards spell casting, using that same wizards skills and attributes in all other situations, why not also when communicating?

[Cantousent]

That's a good point, Gorth. NPC conversation skills are a loss in the current scheme.

[Tale]

That would make sense in a game where you had little or no direct control over party members. If i can remote control my smart ass wizards spell casting, using that same wizards skills and attributes in all other situations, why not also when communicating?

So, you're arguing either that:

 

A) You should not have companion control.

B) During interparty conversations, you should be selecting responses from both your PC and your NPCs. Essentially a bout of talking with yourself.

 

 

I can actually see a method for using companion conversation skills without taking control of a companion's personality. Such as the PC character makes a suggestion to the NPC for how to speak, but the NPC still maintains their personality, the dialogue changing depending upon their skill level to appear more convincing or intimidating or whatnot.

Edited September 12, 2007 by Tale

[Spider]

Sort of like the ME style dialogue, but applied to all parties?

 

That would make sense in a game where you had little or no direct control over party members. If i can remote control my smart ass wizards spell casting, using that same wizards skills and attributes in all other situations, why not also when communicating?

 

Which is why I said I'm not sure I agree with it. The thing is, the dialogue mini-game is an entirely different beast than the combat mini-game. Since the player character is typically expected to be the leader of a party and the one making decisions for it, it does make a degree of sense that that's the person who does the talking. On the other hand a good leader knows how to delegate...

 

The flip side to all of this is that if I as a player have full access to all my party members skills (and this holds true for every skill, not just conversation ones), it practically makes all skills meaningless. This since I'll pretty much will be able to have max value in each and every one of them. Maybe not EVERY one in a game like NWN2, but all the ones I'd use. Hell, I practically have the through ONE character in my current game, but that is a skill based character.

 

I have no easy solution to the problem either, other than going non-party based. Character progression was a lot more meaningful in VtM:B compared to NWN2, or any party based D&D game for that matter. Meaningful choices and all that.

[Gorth]

I have no easy solution to the problem either, other than going non-party based. Character progression was a lot more meaningful in VtM:B compared to NWN2, or any party based D&D game for that matter. Meaningful choices and all that.

That would be a job for the AI programmers... If Fallouts Ian can shoot you in the back when equipped with a burst weapon, why couldn't a game AI decide, that the paladin you appointed to negotiate with the 50 strong orc horde blocking the pass, is telling the chieftain that his mother was a elf and his father smelt of elderberries?

 

They have the skills, but their personalities decide how they apply it. You, being within earshot get to hear what is being said

 

If you don't trust your party members to speak on your behalf, well, then it's your own character skill that decides how the dialogue runs.

 

You could even have it as an AI setting on party members, that within the scope of their personality, they will chirp in or stay silent, be polite or abusive etc.