AMIA ARCHIVE • View topic

Amarice-Elaraliel wrote:

And even if they are devs they do not get just whatever they want to fiddle around with it/look at it, if it is not something that is not decided already that it needs changing or fixing.

this is intentional then? a design feature? it was put in with the consensus of the team?

Are there many enemies/NPCs/bosses with bonuses like this? I'm curious about the reasoning behind this myself. It sounds like this would be particularly tough for someone who has built their character around a form like dragon shape. Also, aren't summons as valid as other methods to attack? From an outside perspective (who doesn't know how the balance of this has been studied) it can seem quite arbitrary or unfair to certain builds.

I can understand the idea that it may be seen as a method of balancing a class like druids who have powerful summons and might just stand back, but at the same time, how many tons of people solo bosses with heavy melee builds as if they were nothing?

I suppose I'm not asking that this be changed, but I'm curious as to the reasoning behind it :3

Side note. I think more will get accomplished in this thread and on better terms without things like "dumb as hell", "shitload", and "fuck over" being used. Ask an angry question, expect an angry answer. (Not that I see Tormak or Amarice's replies as angry). Let's just try to be more.. amiable ................. *crickets*

SuicidalStyle wrote:

Are there many enemies/NPCs/bosses with bonuses like this? I'm curious about the reasoning behind this myself. It sounds like this would be particularly tough for someone who has built their character around a form like dragon shape. Also, aren't summons as valid as other methods to attack? From an outside perspective (who doesn't know how the balance of this has been studied) it can seem quite arbitrary or unfair to certain builds.

I can understand the idea that it may be seen as a method of balancing a class like druids who have powerful summons and might just stand back, but at the same time, how many tons of people solo bosses with heavy melee builds as if they were nothing?

I suppose I'm not asking that this be changed, but I'm curious as to the reasoning behind it :3

Side note. I think more will get accomplished in this thread and on better terms without things like "dumb as hell", "shitload", and "fuck over" being used. Ask an angry question, expect an angry answer. (Not that I see Tormak or Amarice's replies as angry). Let's just try to be more.. amiable ................. *crickets*

I personally see no value in some monsters randomly (it is not all boss monsters so I see the distribution as random) having absurd (at least 15) bonus AC against some player builds. I also don't see any RP to justify it, at least looking at the descriptions of these monsters or their names. +15 ac vs you specifically is a lot to just surprise someone with.

I would like to see it changed because it is so arbitrary.

I think the inference here is that there is little point in giving bosses A.C. against one class. The fact that most other classes (except for low tier builds) can run through there with impunity and murder the boss rather quickly, only to throw a stink bomb at druids is kinda silly. Undoubtedly, I understand the logic, as dragonshape is about to become the only viable soloing solution for druids again..and it's quite possibly over powered, but making bosses almost impossible... If a bard/KC can do it..

I'm actually on commie's side here... again.

Why? Why does it need defense from certain builds? If you want to make a boss unsolo-able, there are other ways to do that, that screws over everyone. (Hell, add one or two more casts of GR, that does the trick well enough)
And, is it al summons, or just certain summons? Because this is one of the things that makes summons unequal. Unless there is an IC way to know, other than 'I just happened to notice this after I've been doing things for a while', it seems pretty weird. Same with the Sahuagin, and their oh-hit kill undead. (Unless I'm remembering that wrong) It's so arbitrary? Why are Sahuagin so against undead? Why is there no reference to that, anywhere, as far as I could see? Then, suddenly, someone is screwed over.
And especially something like dragon, where you have to invest at least one feat, and notice that feat is wasted in certain areas (and don't even know which areas) it makes me not want to invest that feat. On something like construct, I can understand that. But the dragon, you invest two feats for nothing more than the dragon, and are screwed over for it. And a Wizard will not be able to do much, then, if he is, say, focused in Conj and Abj.

SuicidalStyle wrote:

From an outside perspective (who doesn't know how the balance of this has been studied)

I'd like to emphasise this. Yes, we are not a part of the team. But still, if certain things were slightly more transparent, perhaps even by having Duergar Dragonslayers, or something, there would be more sense, and you would know which place you might want to avoid on a certain build.

Well, what thunderbrush brought up... Dragonshape was not buffed. Why this way? If dragonshape is OP, shouldn't it be nerfed at its core, not just some side effects? I'd say there is enough PvP going on to balance partly for that as well. Why should an OP build be ountered just in PvE, and not in PvP, especially where PvP is the one where balancing is more relevant. (Let's be honest, most builds can solo enough. It doesn't matter if you kill four in four round, or five in four rounds.

It's not OP in pvp you can just play ring around the rosie with a tree or rock and it will never catch you, or go into any door or any room or any cave and it has to stop.

Even then I think the most discipline you can get on it is like 65? Because you only get skill + base strength + one skill item. So knock it down.

Yes it was intentional and made many years ago (before my time as a DM) when people used to just hide behind their EDK and solo all bosses in dragon shape.

So certain bosses (two come to my mind atm) were given a +10 AC vs. Dragon.

Amarice-Elaraliel wrote:

Yes it was intentional and made many years ago (before my time as a DM) when people used to just hide behind their EDK and solo all bosses in dragon shape.

So certain bosses (two come to my mind atm) were given a +10 AC vs. Dragon.

it's a lot more then 10 as my animal companion is hitting on a 56 and im missing on a 75.

http://i.imgur.com/bPLFgjc.jpg

it's at least +20 ac.

think it's also 4, mindlfayer, druegar, snowbeast, and I think darkness.

Mindflayer and Duergar is the same, so yes, both of them. Snowbeast is the other, indeed.

Not sure about darkness.

Amarice-Elaraliel wrote:

Mindflayer and Duergar is the same, so yes, both of them. Snowbeast is the other, indeed.

Not sure about darkness.

i knew i wasn't going crazy about snowbeast! Ugh I was always like 'why does snowbeast take so long to kill on my dragon!?'

ah ha! sweet validation! +20 ac will make a boss harder to hit!

Yeah it is +20. I found that out the hard way with Levy, and proceeded to go wtf.

can this be changed?

Probably not. Not till there is a better solution. EDK is a bit much when it comes to boss running without the penalty, but I do think the flat +20 AC was a bit much as well.

how about cut the bonus in half or to a third?

The Mindflayer/Duergar, Snowbeast and Darkness were all made before the EDK(and many other epic summons) were nerfed in 2007 or something silly like that. This was also when the only Epic Mummy Dust was the Pharaoh Sentinel* and the Black Blade of Disaster was invulnerable and Vorpal-ish but had no AB worth dick.

Back then, all you had to do to stomp any boss was have an EDK, watch it fuck the boss up with 50+AB, and feed it no-cooldown Heal potions.

Shifters were still in their default NWN mode, give or take, so were almost unheard of.

I actually can't remember giving the aforementioned bosses +lots AC vs Dragon, but it's exactly the sort of thing I'd do, given the circumstances.

*Still think it's bullshit that EMD was opened up to non-undead.

Is the nerf no longer needed them?

Uberuce wrote:

The Mindflayer/Duergar, Snowbeast and Darkness were all made before the EDK(and many other epic summons) were nerfed in 2007 or something silly like that. This was also when the only Epic Mummy Dust was the Pharaoh Sentinel* and the Black Blade of Disaster was invulnerable and Vorpal-ish but had no AB worth dick.

Back then, all you had to do to stomp any boss was have an EDK, watch it fuck the boss up with 50+AB, and feed it no-cooldown Heal potions.

Shifters were still in their default NWN mode, give or take, so were almost unheard of.

I actually can't remember giving the aforementioned bosses +lots AC vs Dragon, but it's exactly the sort of thing I'd do, given the circumstances.

*Still think it's bullshit that EMD was opened up to non-undead.

I think it was Mosh, not you. Or some collective hivemind of you/me/Suney/Mosh, or something.

Natural Spell Resistance (RDD, Drow, Monk) verses gear Spell Resistance. Is there a difference?

There is no difference between "natural" and item SR, except that Monk SR cannot be reduced via breaches.

For whatever reason.

If you were to go 12 lvls monk in a build, would gear SR stack with Monk SR?

SR never stacks, from item, feat, or racial ability. Only the highest is applied. *Unless it's a bug

Monk SR also doesn't follow the rule of Palemaster+Mage levels stacking when it's a Necromancy school spell. Dunno if that is considered an IC fact, but it's only true because of OOC engine limitations.

Dark Immolation wrote:

SR never stacks, from item, feat, or racial ability. Only the highest is applied. *Unless it's a bug

Unless it was changed SR from feats does stack with monk SR. http://nwn.wikia.com/wiki/Improved_spell_resistance

TheWok wrote:

Dark Immolation wrote:

SR never stacks, from item, feat, or racial ability. Only the highest is applied. *Unless it's a bug

Unless it was changed SR from feats does stack with monk SR. http://nwn.wikia.com/wiki/Improved_spell_resistance

Yes, that one is the exception. (I mean, it's an epic monk feat, would be weird if it didn't stack, lol) Don't know how that one behaves with item spell resistance though.

TheWok wrote:

Dark Immolation wrote:

SR never stacks, from item, feat, or racial ability. Only the highest is applied. *Unless it's a bug

Unless it was changed SR from feats does stack with monk SR. http://nwn.wikia.com/wiki/Improved_spell_resistance

That's not exactly what "stacking" means in the context of what I was saying, but yes, Improved Spell Resistance still works.

I was replying to and talking about the SR you have from an item stacking with the SR you get from feats, or racial ability.

Do SDDs (Shadow Dragon Disciples) get Black dragon stuff (wings and tail), or is there something hidden somewhere that I can't get to show in the toolset?

SDDs have their own colored wings and even tail that looks like the actual shadow dragon (it's not a true black color in game, kind of a dark grey?) But they are called something different, I can't remember.

My SDD has actual shadow dragon wings.

robbi320 wrote:

Do SDDs (Shadow Dragon Disciples) get Black dragon stuff (wings and tail), or is there something hidden somewhere that I can't get to show in the toolset?

i think you can also pick the dragon wings that go off your skin color, if you don't mind being shadow-colored yourself as a SRDD.

What these dudes said.

Shadies have the purple-ish wings like NWN's Shadow Dragon model has, as far as matching to type. You can also ask for PLT wings, which are the ones that sync colors to your skin color (and I think some of them also use Tattoo 1 and 2?) If I remember rightly there are two options for PLT wing shapes, the tucked, narrow profile ones, and the big floppy ones. There also might be the smaller, flappy ones but I'm not positive, it's been a while since I looked.

Same goes for tails, there's a PLT option or two.

can we use the spell changes as a justification for a spell-focus rebuild?

it is an, as far as I can tell, IC phenomenon.

also, while characters get one 'free' feat change, would changing a spell school 'tree' be eligible for the feat re-do? or would just one feat of the three (spell focus, greater, epic) qualify for the redo?

my situation is thus; Kilmar liked abjuration for globe of invuln, and walked around with it up a lot. But now it's just part of shadow conjuration, if you have illusion, which he has. I'd like to change his redundant-to-him spell school from abj to conj so his 4 epic school focus's can each be more distinct. This isn't so much that I like the spells better, it's just that the one spell I wanted the 3 feats to get is now just also in another spell school he already has, diminishing the uniqueness of the school for him specifically.

so DM's what's the rebuild type going to be for this? At the moment he has 3 abjuration feats that, frankly, he isn't really using due to the illusion change.

Yea, you can ask to change to one of the PLT wings, as long as you have a color matching to your Dragon type. That change is free and does not require a request. Same goes for changing from the "open" wings (default) to the ones that look more folded.

1. can we use the spell changes as a justification for a spell-focus rebuild?

Not really. You can change your Spellschool, but it will require RP and an IC Story. A mere ooc one, will not suffice.

2. also, while characters get one 'free' feat change, would changing a spell school 'tree' be eligible for the feat re-do?

No. One feat means one feat. One feat tree is not one feat but three feats. This means you have to do either a DC rebuild or a self rebuild. For a DC rebuild IC RP with training and with screenshots needs to be provided, as you do not just change a full spell focus from normal to epic over night.

works for me.

just to clarify, because I don't think you quite understood or I didn't explain it properly;

Kilmar noticed spell school X changed, as an IC phenomenon. He wants to, therefore, study that school. Ergo he opts to ic focus less on one school he already knows that got no changes recently, and instead focus on the school WITH changes.

Using that IC magic exploration as justification for a DC rebuild with proper RP.

Yeah that works.

Though mind abjuration had significant changes in amia timeline aswell (IC and OOC). Just around 2 years earlier.

Can you reskin a Familiar and Mummy Dust Summon to Human and craft there gear appearance and head choice for them?

What about a summon wand request for a Human Bodyguard, could you then craft there uniform and head appearance?

No.

The Bottled Companion is the only thing that can do that.

Okay, Thanks for the quick responses.

you could use one of the base models though, i know some people have used humans as a familiar/MD before.

What Familiar would best represent a human swordsman for a reskin?

None really fit except the skeleton, tbh.

Chupacabra wrote:

What Familiar would best represent a human swordsman for a reskin?

yeah i never saw the other request for the human familiar so I can't help you here. Don't know what got swung for that one. Pretty sure it wasn't undead though, otherwise lots of people would be requesting 'human' undead companions.

best bet just make the request, see what they say.

Okay, my Toon will be a Necromancer with Epic Spell Focus. Would i be aloud to reskin a Skeleton Familiar and Mummy Dust into a human Swordsman Reskin who are Fully Armored with a Helm and put in there Bio's that there Undead?

Chupacabra wrote:

Okay, my Toon will be a Necromancer with Epic Spell Focus. Would i be aloud to reskin a Skeleton Familiar and Mummy Dust into a human Swordsman Reskin who are Fully Armored with a Helm and put in there Bio's that there Undead?

Probably not.

Boooo! Would adding that there Undead in the floaty name text above the Familiar and summon make any difference?

Chupacabra wrote:

Okay, my Toon will be a Necromancer with Epic Spell Focus. Would i be aloud to reskin a Skeleton Familiar and Mummy Dust into a human Swordsman Reskin who are Fully Armored with a Helm and put in there Bio's that there Undead?

Left field answer, but how about going for that swordsman thing? I feel it'd not be too hard to justify as undead (if it's available on the Amian's hak, that is)

Thanks for the Option but i'm looking for Uniformed Solider looking guards.

There are a few of those. Go in the toolset and look at the Human appearances. I think theres also a Militia Guard apperance with an open face helmet. The Purple Dragon Knight models are also a possibility if you want a full helmet.

Additionally, if you see a human model you like that doesn't have a helmet, we have VFX helms with the HAK. There's a chance you can figure out what looks good and make it work.

There's ways to get what you're looking at from a visual side. How and if you can explain it for RP is a different question. I think you'd have more luck saying it is just a different sort of undead familiar and use the skeleton as a base. Saying it's a human bodyguard is difficult because a familiar and a body guard would operate in very different ways. Not to mention how you'd have to explain why it is critical immune and also vulnerable to anti undead things.

PDK's were exactly what i had in mind. I wanted to make a New Merchant char and call the Company the Lavender Wyvern Trading Company. What i was thinking was her Skeleton and EMD were her older Brother and Sister who died and she raised them from the dead to protect her.

If you want NPCs, request a bottled companion for things like that. I'm afraid most of us will want an Undead NPC to look undead, and the models you're suggesting for your familiar and EMD do not really show that sadly.

General Questions

Who is online