Ironworks Gaming Forum - View Single Post

weimer · 03-11-2003, 01:21 PM

-- Dundee -- everything you have said is true, but I can't see it is an argument against Tsuki per se. Mordy's Sword is still a better wall. You don't need Solaufein to dominate the game if you're careful with Sim (or Mislead or PI).

The traditional weakness ascribed to Solaufein is that he is too distant -- most players seem to wish that he were a bit more affectionate. There is much more activity in the Solaufein forums now discussing possible flirts for him than there has been discussing his tactical merits. Similarly, the perennial topic of possible romances and redemptions for Valen gets much more attention than her phenominal cosmic powers, itty-bitty living space, or her deadly hunters. In my personal opinion, Solaufein's weakness is that he lacks integrity: there's a part of me that always wishes I had made a less accepting Solaufein that would reject players that gave philosophical responses with which he disagreed.

To answer your question with a more tactical slant, Solaufein's two big weaknesses in my mind are fragility and poor spell memorization. The romance will address one of these but not both.

-- Six -- I think this is the point in the debate where we should recognize that nothing constructive will be gained by going forward. As much as I would love to discuss spelling (see AR1202.ARE for another example) or the Cloak of Cheese vs. Cone of Cold, I think it will be more useful for me to state a bunch of tautologies and then a bunch of opinions.

Utility is subjective (or context-dependent). Fury is generally considered to be a strong weapon. However, in a party of six clerics it cannot be used (bladed weapon). The Shield of Reflection is useless against Firkraag. Ages won't help you against Kangaxx. Similarly, the utility of Sola's blade must be measured in context.

It is almost certain that we have different average contexts in mind. For example, I don't recall ever encountering an enemy that used 3x Cone of Cold in BG2. As a result, I tend not to judge things based on it. In my mind, there are really only about ten difficult battles in the game (and I wrote five of them expressly for that purpose). Thus I find it particularly easy to compare items like Tsuki to one-shot items like pro-mw scrolls of special potions: if you are only concerned about a dozen fights, rationing your equipment so that you can use some 'good stuff' in each one is not difficult. Just to restate this: in my mind I don't really care about, say, the Trolls in the Druid Grove because you are going to beat them no matter what. This is my personal opinion: I don't try to judge the differences between Ravager and Foebane based on how they do against shadow thieves.

My context assumes players who have access to the identified descriptions and can do the math. Given that Ages and Fury already exist in BG2, items that are vastly inferior but available at the same time will only be used by players who have a specific (unique, presumably) role-playing reason to do so. Want to use Namarra because your character's backstory makes the silence power or the fact that you got it from a skeleton king particularly appealing? Great! However, if you already have a reason like that then it doesn't matter what I do with some newly introduced weapon: it could be the Rift Device on a stick or a -3 dagger: you're still using Namarra. Barring that, and given that BG2 already exists, new items must be competitive with existing powerful items or they will not be used. I could make a weapon that was comparable to the bard-killing scimitar. It would get a comparable amount of use.

I write mods for myself. I am not interesting in spending the time to code up an item and its backstory and the challenges you must overcome to obtain it ... if I'm just going to sell it in all cases.

Given this subjective context, your "realism" is my "weakness". Actually, it is my personal opinion that BG2 features an incredible wealth of over-powered magical items. However, *given that*, new items must also be powerful. Otherwise only characters with special backstories or low INT will take them. I judge new items against the items that characters are actually using. ( Exception: the item upgrade mod was created for a different reason and is based on the averaged input of a large number of people. )

Some people think that the purpose of playing a game is to be fair (or realistic). I disagree. I think that the purpose of playing a game is to have fun. When I play chess against my grade-school sister I often remove some of my pieces before the start of the game or give her extra ones. This unfairness is introduced in order to make the game more fun for both of us. Interestingly enough, it is a fairly exact analogy for what happens in BG2. The enemies are given queens that you don't have (mind flayer psionics, red dragon breath, special immunities, massive numbers, whatever) in order to keep things interesting. In a "fair" fight your human intelligence would win every time.

-- Rataxes -- Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I must have failed to take into account the extra Str bonus (or the jump from 25% to 50%) when I did the math a long time ago. It was never my intention to make Tsuki a particularly *damaging* weapon.

Time to change that. While I don't agree that Blindness is as powerful as Slow, the 50%/blind/18 could stand to go back to 25%/blind/12 following your math. In addition, it was recently pointed out to me that the NPP ability on the blade is largely irrelevant: while I'm here there's no reason not to remove it.

In general, however, we never seem to include the STR damage bonus when looking at weapons. For example, Crom Faeyr:

Crom: 2d4+3 +5 elec +14 (str damage bonus) = 5+3+5+14 = 27

... also ends up being just as high. I'm not saying that it's not real, just that it's not normally part of the consideration.

[ 03-11-2003, 01:22 PM: Message edited by: weimer ]

03-11-2003, 01:21 PM	#34
weimer The Magister Join Date: November 6, 2002 Location: Berkeley, CA Age: 47 Posts: 118	-- Dundee -- everything you have said is true, but I can't see it is an argument against Tsuki per se. Mordy's Sword is still a better wall. You don't need Solaufein to dominate the game if you're careful with Sim (or Mislead or PI). The traditional weakness ascribed to Solaufein is that he is too distant -- most players seem to wish that he were a bit more affectionate. There is much more activity in the Solaufein forums now discussing possible flirts for him than there has been discussing his tactical merits. Similarly, the perennial topic of possible romances and redemptions for Valen gets much more attention than her phenominal cosmic powers, itty-bitty living space, or her deadly hunters. In my personal opinion, Solaufein's weakness is that he lacks integrity: there's a part of me that always wishes I had made a less accepting Solaufein that would reject players that gave philosophical responses with which he disagreed. To answer your question with a more tactical slant, Solaufein's two big weaknesses in my mind are fragility and poor spell memorization. The romance will address one of these but not both. -- Six -- I think this is the point in the debate where we should recognize that nothing constructive will be gained by going forward. As much as I would love to discuss spelling (see AR1202.ARE for another example) or the Cloak of Cheese vs. Cone of Cold, I think it will be more useful for me to state a bunch of tautologies and then a bunch of opinions. Utility is subjective (or context-dependent). Fury is generally considered to be a strong weapon. However, in a party of six clerics it cannot be used (bladed weapon). The Shield of Reflection is useless against Firkraag. Ages won't help you against Kangaxx. Similarly, the utility of Sola's blade must be measured in context. It is almost certain that we have different average contexts in mind. For example, I don't recall ever encountering an enemy that used 3x Cone of Cold in BG2. As a result, I tend not to judge things based on it. In my mind, there are really only about ten difficult battles in the game (and I wrote five of them expressly for that purpose). Thus I find it particularly easy to compare items like Tsuki to one-shot items like pro-mw scrolls of special potions: if you are only concerned about a dozen fights, rationing your equipment so that you can use some 'good stuff' in each one is not difficult. Just to restate this: in my mind I don't really care about, say, the Trolls in the Druid Grove because you are going to beat them no matter what. This is my personal opinion: I don't try to judge the differences between Ravager and Foebane based on how they do against shadow thieves. My context assumes players who have access to the identified descriptions and can do the math. Given that Ages and Fury already exist in BG2, items that are vastly inferior but available at the same time will only be used by players who have a specific (unique, presumably) role-playing reason to do so. Want to use Namarra because your character's backstory makes the silence power or the fact that you got it from a skeleton king particularly appealing? Great! However, if you already have a reason like that then it doesn't matter what I do with some newly introduced weapon: it could be the Rift Device on a stick or a -3 dagger: you're still using Namarra. Barring that, and given that BG2 already exists, new items must be competitive with existing powerful items or they will not be used. I could make a weapon that was comparable to the bard-killing scimitar. It would get a comparable amount of use. I write mods for myself. I am not interesting in spending the time to code up an item and its backstory and the challenges you must overcome to obtain it ... if I'm just going to sell it in all cases. Given this subjective context, your "realism" is my "weakness". Actually, it is my personal opinion that BG2 features an incredible wealth of over-powered magical items. However, given that, new items must also be powerful. Otherwise only characters with special backstories or low INT will take them. I judge new items against the items that characters are actually using. ( Exception: the item upgrade mod was created for a different reason and is based on the averaged input of a large number of people. ) Some people think that the purpose of playing a game is to be fair (or realistic). I disagree. I think that the purpose of playing a game is to have fun. When I play chess against my grade-school sister I often remove some of my pieces before the start of the game or give her extra ones. This unfairness is introduced in order to make the game more fun for both of us. Interestingly enough, it is a fairly exact analogy for what happens in BG2. The enemies are given queens that you don't have (mind flayer psionics, red dragon breath, special immunities, massive numbers, whatever) in order to keep things interesting. In a "fair" fight your human intelligence would win every time. -- Rataxes -- Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I must have failed to take into account the extra Str bonus (or the jump from 25% to 50%) when I did the math a long time ago. It was never my intention to make Tsuki a particularly damaging weapon. Time to change that. While I don't agree that Blindness is as powerful as Slow, the 50%/blind/18 could stand to go back to 25%/blind/12 following your math. In addition, it was recently pointed out to me that the NPP ability on the blade is largely irrelevant: while I'm here there's no reason not to remove it. In general, however, we never seem to include the STR damage bonus when looking at weapons. For example, Crom Faeyr: Crom: 2d4+3 +5 elec +14 (str damage bonus) = 5+3+5+14 = 27 ... also ends up being just as high. I'm not saying that it's not real, just that it's not normally part of the consideration. [ 03-11-2003, 01:22 PM: Message edited by: weimer ]