ToB effects in SoA

[Neomi]

I think I see the problem here. It's a fundamental flaw in the plot of the entire BG series. You are SUPPOSED to achieve godhood (or maybe demigod status, whatever that means). It's written into your blood. The game is designed to give enough XP so that your characters reach a level that in all honesty was never meant to be obtained in P&P. Seriously, when was the last time you had a P&P campaign with level 30+ sorcerers, clerics, fighters, etc. wandering around?!?!

Dundee is right that the computer's AI isn't complicated enough or creative enough to put limitations on the player's actions in the same way that a flesh and blood DM would be able to. So therefore the higher level powers have to be tempered by the game design.

I think that's why it always seems so much more fun and exciting to me when I'm starting a new character fresh out of candlekeep or a new party in SOA... every new spell level, proficiency slot, thieving skill, etc made a huge difference to the character. Once you get to the TOB party (not to mention soloist) the power level gets redundant and game balance almost impossible.

My only gripe was that the mage/cleric classes get the shaft as far as HLA's (alchemy and scribe scrolls) after they've taken all the truly powerful options. So what if they're overpowered at that point, so is everybody else. What difference would it make to keep adding additional spells per level or a couple of minor skills like detect illusion? None, compared to the game-breaking Time Stop.

As far as the Bard goes, as far as I can remember in my original AD&D player's handbook, the Bard class was actually a separate category, something akin to a dual-class (except you completed some fighter levels, then some thief levels, then added mage skills when you became a true "bard"). I don't know how it was implemented in later PnP editions but I assume that this type of class progression would be precluded by the game design and therefore bards were "nerfed" into the rogue class.

[mad=dog]

All right. It's just that I have personally felt my Blade stall a bit after level 30. All I can show for 3.6 million XP is one spell and a few traps and greater evasions. I think it is very reasonable to decrease the potency of certain classes, but in the case with bards they have made the level progression steeper after level 30 (you need 100000 xp more pr. level than you should have according to DMO-HLC) and slaughtered the spell progression table completely. I happen to think it disrupts the bard character concept.
To compensate fighters they have included a far more liberal version of the HLA "All-around attack" called "Whirlwind". Originally a whirlwind attack would root the figther in the same fashion as the blade class power Defensive Spin. They even have Greater Whirlwind without penalties. I think (but I don't really claim to know) that GM'ing was nerfed because it would make some fighter kits too powerful. Not true fighters. With twohanded weapons you can place two stars in the weapon proficiency and three stars the twohanded weapons and gain almost the same effect as the "old" BG1 GM. Of course this is not exclusive to figthers anymore.

Last but not least you are absolutely correct about the traps. I find it out of character and I would have preferred a bit more magic, but I cannot claim I am underpowered. Actually this ordeal is an attempt to remove some of the traps and replace them with a bit more magic. Not make bards even more powerful. I hope that this last bit have been apparent all along this discussion.

EDIT:
I was writing this before Neomi's reply. Bards have been placed into the rogue category in AD&D 2ed, but as I said merely for convinience. They might as well have been placed elsewhere.
I would never EVER place readily available Timestop in a Blade's hands. It's kind of nice to have a few scrolls as a last resort though.

[ 04-28-2004, 11:01 AM: Message edited by: mad=dog ]