Improved (Current Version Tactics) Bodhi (Spoilers)

[Hank Parsons]

Originally posted by Rataxes: [QB] Why didn't you just say that a dozen posts earlier? I think the whole core of this debate isn't whether a mod is realistic or not, since I think you've demonstrated how even the poorest game design ideas can be explained as realistic, but rather is it fun? Does it enhance the gaming experience?

I *fully* agree that is what the debate should be about, Rataxes. If you frame the debate as you just stated -- is it fun? -- then you don't have to worry so much about whether something technically breaks some supposedly-sacred rule, like if a powerful mages casts 2 spells at the same time with no casting delay. It's no big deal, it's fun, and if you have a good imagination, it is plausible (but we've agreed plausibility doesn't matter as much as fun).

The problem is that the critics here are not answering this question: is it fun? Time and time again, they are claiming it is unreasonable, wrong, unprofessional, implausible, unrealistic, etc. I am merely answering those accusations (which are, in many cases, patently incorrect and unimaginative, and contrary to the flexible and creative spirit of D&D).

Here, maybe we can simply agree to disagree on what is fun. This debate would be a lot better if people would admit "I don't think that's fun" instead of trying to prove that Tactics is so wrong for offering the option. I thought the Tactics componants I've defended were fun (except Improved Faldorn which was impossible for me to beat legitly and therefore not fun; and Small Teeth Pass which I haven't played). For example, I think Improved Ilych, and Improved Bodhi, are fun. If you don't think it's fun, just say so, and I will have no disagreement with that, because "fun" is the player's opinion and the player's choice. Compare:

"I don't like the sky being blue."
vs.
"The sky cannot be blue, it's not realistic."
"The sun should not make the sky pink and purple, it's unprofessional."

I believe it is important for a good game mod to keep within it's respective world's realm of plausibility, but the reverse doesn't fly. Ie, a mod or game design idea isn't good just because it's plausible.

I agree, but also these corollary statements:

A mod isn't bad just because some player can't think of (or you failed to read) a story justification. E.g. one player here said that Bodhi should be a normal vampire with no special powers due to this player's perception of Bodhi's unflinching role in the story. I say that you can reimagine Bodhi's role and see her as a powerful adversary.

A mod isn't bad just because it doesn't adhere to every stat in the Monster Manual. The dungeon master in traditional D&D can modify a monster's statistics at any time to make the game more fun. I only ask that Weimer be given the same consideration, if you choose Tactics as your DM/adventure-giver.

A mod is bad if it is not fun. Tactics, on the whole, is definitely fun.

I could make a mod that randomly kills of the entire party when exploring caves.

Ah, you mean the old p'n'p D&D module, Temple Of Doom? (Did I remember the title right? Surely someone knows this killer module.) That happens in that module, and you're right: it is not fun. The party simply chooses the wrong tunnel, and BOOM: buried alive. A good DM would really emphasize the falling-rocks and creaking sounds, giving the party some chance of avoiding that cave or escaping. If you played this module though, it was out-of-the-frying pan, into the fire. Traps just got worse around the next corner.

It's an unfair argument trick to say something is wrong just because an extremely exaggerated variation of it would be wrong. For example, it's not fair to say that Libertarians (want less gov't) are wrong just because Anarchists (want no gov't) are wrong. Another example, it's incorrect to say that drinking alcoholic beverages will kill you, just because drinking 2 gallons of Vodka in an hour would kill you.

The killer-cave mod is not a Tactics componant. If you think some componant of Tactics is equal to a killer-cave (in fun, or in quickness of death, or impossibility), then say that directly. Don't just say that killer-caves are wrong and therefore Tactics is wrong.

I don't see why the last dozen posts in this thread has been about the plausibility of a 20d10 fireball annihilating your entire party immediately upon entering the Small Teeth Pass, when at the end of the day it is still a terrible idea for amping up the challenge of the area.

Some people are really averse to anyone in their party dying, and would define someone dying as "not-fun." They went through the whole game and no one died. For me, that takes away the fun of the game. I want to play with the threat of death, the challenge to survive to epic victory. For me, the possibility of dying makes the game fun again.

I love the idea of walking into an area, a dragon kills 2 of the party members, and yet you survive, win, and ressurect. Heck, even if someone gets chunked, you'll always have that epic story of the time you faced nearly-impossible odds and won, and put a plaque where Nalia got obliterated. That is epic heroism, in game-terms, to me.

Before someone says it's wrong, they should claim it's impossible. I remember the days when people said soloing with a druid is "impossible" and that was proven wrong. Calling "impossible" issues a challenge to other players, to see if it really is impossible. If it's really impossible, then there is no point in playing it. And if no one plays it, then obviously it's not fun, and it's not a good mod.

For me: "impossible to beat legitly" is the worst (and also the best) criticism you can lay against a mod. If SixOfSpades did testing and determined that Improved Faldorn was impossible to beat legitly, then I would agree that componant should be changed (AFIK, he did, and I do). For me,
Impossible To Beat Legitly = Not Fun.

I still disagree strongly with the pervasive idea that "Not Playing By Every Sacred Rule" = Unprofessional / wrong / unreasonable. For example when people say that Skeletons should not be able to cast a Horror spell because they didn't have this ability in BG1 or in D&D - I disagree with that. Skeletons casting adds to the fun, and is therefore good (regardless of whether it is plausible or realistic, which, by the way, it is. If you have imagination.)

[ 08-31-2004, 07:36 PM: Message edited by: Hank Parsons ]

[JrKASperov]

Originally posted by Hank Parsons: I'm not necessarily saying this is fun or good-gaming, but it IS realistic. I don't think you can argue against the realism of a flying dragon slaughtering a party of humans and demi-humans. What's unrealistic is the party killing dragons, the most powerful mortal creatures in the world, without sacrifices and loss of life. Dragons sitting on the ground and falling to sword-pricks and giving up their thousand-year hordes is unrealistic. If you kill them with heroic valor and realistic losses, then it is epicly believeable.

No, it is not reaslistic that you don't see the dragon before it breathweapons you, no it is not realistic you don't have some time to buff up. I just looked some stuff up, and the larger dragon categories all have one thing in common: they cannot hide. They have an even worse move silently score! E.g. a very old red dragon: Hide +2, MoveSilently +0. A lvl 14 party (that's a minimum) is going to see that from a LONG distance away. Making it very unrealistic that you're suddenly bombarded by a fireball that will ultimately kill at least one person.

Originally posted by Hank Parsons: The problem is that the critics here are not answering this question: is it fun? Time and time again, they are claiming it is unreasonable, wrong, unprofessional, implausible, unrealistic, etc. I am merely answering those accusations (which are, in many cases, patently incorrect and unimaginative, and contrary to the flexible and creative spirit of D&D).

All these things you named, and the fact that the mod cheats against you(beholders seeing where an invisible character is to target it with antimagic ray, mind flayers suddenly casting 6 unavoidable vamptouches, colossal dragons being able to not be spotted in time, a undead vampire actually not being undead, every lowlife sahuagin being far a better archer than the party, trolls that cast spells clerics have to train YEARS for to possibly attain them) , do indeed make it not fun.

[ 09-01-2004, 07:46 AM: Message edited by: JrKASperov ]

[Imrahil]

Originally posted by Hank Parsons: Ah, you mean the old p'n'p D&D module, Temple Of Doom? (Did I remember the title right? Surely someone knows this killer module.)

Temple of Elemental Evil, maybe?

That happens in that module, and you're right: it is not fun. The party simply chooses the wrong tunnel, and BOOM: buried alive. A good DM would really emphasize the falling-rocks and creaking sounds, giving the party some chance of avoiding that cave or escaping.

For the same reasons I'm all for "Bodhi will never die in one hit", I'm against Improved Small Teeth Pass - a good DM would never let it happen (if he wanted to keep his players, that is).

DM: "Ok, so... you're walking through the woods & a Dragon breathes fire on you... roll your Saving Throw vs. Breath Weapon."
Player: [spitting out Doritos] "Whuh? How'd that happen?!? Where'd it come from?!?"
DM: "It was flying overhead... oh, I see you've failed your roll... that's... 146 points of damage. Wow. Sorry, you're dead. By the way... never mention Azuredge to me again."

The DM should, to some extent, take care of the players & the enemies, making sure neither dies in an unforseeable, unavoidable way (& yes, that does basically equate to "keep it fun", but a little more specifically).

- Imrahil

[Link]

Okay, maybe it would in fact be a wise idea to change this thread from a "Tactics Bashing Thread" to a somewhat more supporting one. So far I've seen only Six and myself (might be self-centered me, yes) spout off some improvements.

Is it an idea to change this thread to a discussion on how to make Improved Bodhi more challenging and less cheating?

[Rataxes]

Originally posted by Hank Parsons: I *fully* agree that is what the debate should be about, Rataxes. If you frame the debate as you just stated -- is it fun? -- then you don't have to worry so much about whether something technically breaks some supposedly-sacred rule, like if a powerful mages casts 2 spells at the same time with no casting delay. It's no big deal, it's fun, and if you have a good imagination, it is plausible (but we've agreed plausibility doesn't matter as much as fun).

Right, I don't care much about whether a certain mod breaks individual rules, but as I've already stated, I do believe plausibility is vital for a good mod. It's not just about whether something a mod does is even possible or not given the basic laws of physics, magic, and whatever other forces are at work in the world of Baldur's Gate. A moderately infamous thug like Mencar Pebblecrusher donning a legendary artifact-class weapon (he does in the Imp Battles mod from what I've heard, undroppable as well) may well be a possibility, but still strikes me as unreasonable. Similarly, the power that Imp Faldorn possesses seems very unwarranted considering her background and other factors.

The problem is that the critics here are not answering this question: is it fun? Time and time again, they are claiming it is unreasonable, wrong, unprofessional, implausible, unrealistic, etc. I am merely answering those accusations (which are, in many cases, patently incorrect and unimaginative, and contrary to the flexible and creative spirit of D&D).

I think most critics here are already through with the question of whether a particular mod is fun or not though. If you enjoy a mod I doubt you'd bother pondering about the plausibility of it.

Here, maybe we can simply agree to disagree on what is fun. This debate would be a lot better if people would admit "I don't think that's fun" instead of trying to prove that Tactics is so wrong for offering the option. I thought the Tactics componants I've defended were fun (except Improved Faldorn which was impossible for me to beat legitly and therefore not fun; and Small Teeth Pass which I haven't played). For example, I think Improved Ilych, and Improved Bodhi, are fun. If you don't think it's fun, just say so, and I will have no disagreement with that, because "fun" is the player's opinion and the player's choice.

I think it would be a very short debate Defining the reasons for you not enjoying a certain mod makes it easier to come up with ideas to make it enjoyable, and I agree with Link that this is what the debate should be about.

Some people are really averse to anyone in their party dying, and would define someone dying as "not-fun." They went through the whole game and no one died. For me, that takes away the fun of the game. I want to play with the threat of death, the challenge to survive to epic victory. For me, the possibility of dying makes the game fun again. I love the idea of walking into an area, a dragon kills 2 of the party members, and yet you survive, win, and ressurect. That is epic heroism, in game-terms, to me.

Sure you should be able to die, absolutely. Going through the game trying to keep your entire party alive at all times should be a major and difficult struggle, but I do believe the lives of my party should always be dependant on my decisions and my skills. A 20d10 fireball exploding right smack in the middle of my party within seconds of entering an area leaves me very little chance of even trying to keep my party alive. At least on Insane difficulty, it's a little like the trap corridor on the first level of Bodhis Gauntlet that instantly and unavoidably crushes anyone who enters, you either try to enter the corridor and die, or you stay away from it. The Small Teeth Pass works similarly, only it's an entire area instead of an insignificant portion of one. There is no point in trying to pass through that corridor, and in my opinion there is no point in entering the Small Teeth Pass either as long as that 20d10 fireball is there, just waiting to annihilate you and your party.

For me: "impossible to beat legitly" is the worst (and also the best) criticism you can lay against a mod. If SixOfSpades did testing and determined that Improved Faldorn was impossible to beat legitly, then I would agree that componant should be changed. For me, Impossible To Beat Legitly = Not Fun.

Depends alot on how you define legitly, doesn't it? Some people would consider using HiS to hit and run Ilyich & Co to death with a backstabbing thief to not be legit. For me, the enjoyability of a mod is down to more than the beatability of it.

For example when people say that Skeletons should not be able to cast a Horror spell because they didn't have this ability in BG1 or in D&D - I disagree with that. Skeletons casting adds to the fun, and is therefore good (regardless of whether it is plausible or realistic, which, by the way, it is. If you have imagination.)

Skeletons casting Horror is not only plausible, but a very fitting ability for them and any other undead. Also, I don't believe Six was really opposed to undead casting Blindness, just to the fact that it lasts ages upon ages, which is simply more of a frustrating annoyance than that mod is worth.

[ 09-01-2004, 04:46 PM: Message edited by: Rataxes ]

[chimaera]

Originally posted by JrKASperov: beholders seeing where an invisible character is to target it with antimagic ray

Tactics beholders do not see through invisibility.
And, IMHO, improved mindflayers were a lot of fun to fight against.

[Feral]

Originally posted by chimaera: Tactics beholders do not see through invisibility.

Not all, but a hive mother sure does.

[Dace De'Briago]

I'd like to see a minor mod that allows characters with high intelligence see through invisibility as per 2nd edition rules.

Anyone up to making this?

[Rataxes]

That wouldn't just be a tad overpowered you think?

[Hank Parsons]

I know we want to get back to Improved Bodhi suggestions... but since there isn't a thread for Small Teeth Pass, and most of the comments on it are in this thread already, I have this explanation to add. From the author of Improved Small Teeth Pass himself (Mike Barnes, not Weimer):

Mike Barnes said: I always thought that Small Teeth Pass (AR1700) was incredibly boring. Basically, you get to fight three ankhegs and maybe have some crimson mists or similar creatures if they spawn in. I suspect that most veteran players don't even bother exploring that area anymore. I was inspired to modify this area because of the Incarndine Elven Chain (Item Upgrade Mod - Hank). I am a huge fan of the red dragon armor. There is NO way that I would save the red dragon scales until Chapter 8. Thus, I decided to kill two birds with one stone. I'd make a boring area better and still have a chance to create the new chain armor. I have attached the modified AR1700.are and dragred.cre files. All I did was remove the three ankhegs and add three dragons! One purple, one brown and one red. The brown and purple are not modified. They simply replace the ankhegs. The red dragon is from KR's random wilderness encounters. As most people won't see this creature anyhow, I felt free to mod it. I simply increased its XP to 63,000 which is comparable to the brown and purple dragons. I gave it 15,000 gold. Yes, that's a lot of gold, but I figure that's about 5,000 per dragon as the other two give you nothing. Finally, I gave it red dragon scales. Obviously, one can now have the red dragon armor after killing Firkraag and still create the Incarnadine Chain. The Small Teeth Pass area is probably the most optional area in the game. You can't even find it on your map until Chapter 6 until you talk with Elhan. If you don't want to fight three dragons, simply don't go. - Mike Barnes

And my own reply, about when you can reasonably spot the dragon(s)... Plus a real suggestion to make this componant slightly better for all you people who want to buff...

JrKASperov said: No, it is not reaslistic that you don't see the dragon before it breathweapons you... the larger dragon categories all have one thing in common: they cannot hide. They have an even worse move silently score! E.g. a very old red dragon: Hide +2, MoveSilently +0. A lvl 14 party (that's a minimum) is going to see that from a LONG distance away.

The dragon is not hiding in shadows, that skill is not relevant. In no case can your party see beyond your line-of-sight (except Wizard Eye / Farsight / Clarvoyance spells). Also, being "level 14" does not increase your eyesight (someone cited elves; and it's true their eyesight is better). You can't see through tree-trunks, boulders, cliffs. You can't watch sky and forest at the same time, you must tell your Dungeon Master if you wish to scan the skies*. If the tree canopy obscures the sky, you will have a limited view. Small Teeth Pass is a "pass" between the mountains, with many trees, boulders, hillsides, and canyons. You cannot see for miles and miles.

In this (easy) game, you can ALWAYS buff before you get to enemies. Many times the player has used this unfairly to his advantage, throughout the game (yawn). Can you not accept this one handicap, of not pre-buffing to invincible, on this one battle?

Truly good players are proud of their handicap, like in golf. You give yourself a disavantage in order to give the enemy a chance against you. That's what Tactics offers.

* I will offer a suggested improvement for Small Teeth Pass. There could be a one-round timer and dialog when you enter the area:
"You notice the chirping of birds has ceased. There is an eerie silence. You hear the rush of winds, leaves rustle and the trees creak, as if large wings in the sky. Do you wish to:
(1) Scan the sky.
(2) Peer into the shadows of the forest.
(If 1...) Suddenly, over the green tree-tops, you catch a glimpse of a massive reptilian figure flying towards you, just above the tree-tops, with it's gaping maw open! You have 5 seconds to hide before it is upon you. It is currently too far away to hit it with ranged weapons or spells."

Then, you could optionally turn around and "travel" to a different area immediately. Or you could spend maybe one round applying a quick buff, or attempting to Invisble, scatter, or hide.

It should be not-enough-time to apply the usual onslaught of buffs, though.

Imrahil said: Temple of Elemental Evil, maybe?

ToEE doesn't have killer-cave type of traps. The module I meant is way more... over-the-top. EDIT: I've just looked it up, and it is... drumrolllll please....
Tomb Of Horrors by Gary Gygax (supposedly for levels 10-14). It's made quite a franchise, over the years, as they've released a novel of the same name, 7+ editions of the game module, in 1998: Return to the Tomb Of Horrors, and 1999: the Tomb of Horrors box-set.

Most info:
http://www.acaeum.com/DDIndexes/ModPages/S.html

Download the module for like $5:
http://www.svgames.com/tsr9022esd.html

I like (and own) the 5th edition, with the green cover and the (awesome) illustration of the Lich, and the cleric brandishing his holy symbol while the party cowers in fear. The lich appears clearly more powerful in this illustration. But the lich is nothing compared to a cave that simply collapses and buries you alive, or a spike trap in the floor with no escape.

Rataxes said: A moderately infamous thug like Mencar Pebblecrusher donning a legendary artifact-class weapon (he does in the Imp Battles mod from what I've heard, undroppable as well) may well be a possibility, but still strikes me as unreasonable.

I haven't played Improved Battles mod, and I'm not defending it. But I will point out that your 7th-10th level characters may aquire insanely powerful artifacts, weapons and armor (P.S. why didn't some other Bhaalspawn aquire Lilacor, Carsomyr, and other powerful items before letting them fall into your hands so easily?). I will not begrudge the enemies access to equal weaponry.

As for "undroppable" that is merely a smart way to keep the game balanced (to keep the players from getting copies of unique items, or from getting so many items). If you require greater justification on this, imagine that you've destroyed the weapon as you killed the enemy, or that the particular item they used was somehow tied to their life-force (just like your own Valgyr's Family Armor, Xan's Moonblade, Imoen's Belt, etc.).

See? It's not very hard to imagine something, unless you're dead-set on the prejudice that it's "impossible" because you don't like when the enemy uses your own medicine against you. For some people, I think losing the battle is clouding the vision of what's possible and fair. We're so used to the idea that if we don't win the battle, it must not be fair.

Hank said: For me, Impossible To Beat Legitly = Not Fun. Rataxes said: Depends alot on how you define legitly, doesn't it?

Of course. I can't and won't try to stop anyone from using Cheese (Tactics already does a decent job of countering many common cheese; for example stuck open doors to prevent cloudkill and slamming the door shut). However, I personally do not use what I consider to be non-legit techniques, and many things I avoid are commonly agreed cheese (Staff Of Magi for infinite invisibles; wearing 2 Rings of Gaxx; Mislead and Project Image are too easy to abuse; etc.). Regardless, as I said: if SixOfSpades defines it as impossible to beat legitly, then I'd agree. I agree with SixOfSpades on what constitutes cheese, only difference is he won't accept the enemy using cheese (and he'll point out if the player is resorting to it), and I won't accept the player doing it. For example, SixOfSpades explained how you can beat Improved Faldorn using minor cheese available to the player; for me, that battle is still impossible to beat legitly.

[ 09-01-2004, 05:29 PM: Message edited by: Hank Parsons ]