Those handicapped Dwarves

[SixOfSpades]

I think it's unfair that Elves get a natural +1 bonus with the Long Sword and Bow, and Halflings get the same bonus with the Sling, but Dwarves don't enjoy a similar bonus with the Axe. (Or Warhammer, if they're a Cleric.) So, let's say I make a Dwarven Fighter and give him Axe++ Bow++. Then I open up Gatekeeper and change it to Axe+++ Bow+. How many of you would consider this to be cheating? And please don't say "Whatever YOU think is fair, is fair,"--I want to get YOUR opinion.

------------------
Boots of Stealth: 1125 gp
Shadow Armor: 7875 gp
Slipping an Oil of Firey Burning down the back of Sarevok's armor: Priceless

[JR Jansen]

I think it's definatly cheating. Every time you chance something using a third party program or hack, it's bloody well cheating.

------------------
JR

Damned i lost cousin Jan's techno gloves



Forest runner and first gnomish demiranger-protector with slightly rougueish tendencies and a natural dislike for Aerie

[Lord Brass]

Come now JR, tell us what you really think.(j/k, j/k) In all seriousness though, I do see your point. However, the redundancies in AD&D, which should have either been taken out or counterbalanced, are still in the game. The Elf/Halfling bonuses follow preconceived notions about these races, yet where are the typical associations for the Dwarves?

If you want to talk about race definition, then MERP is probably the game for you. No surprise that it's all about LotR then. Each race is defined in terms of stats and background skills. The choice of profession is limited, but as in any p&p rpg, you are constantly told to change something if you do not agree with it. Surely there is some of that advice in here? After all, in this most amazing setting, Halflings have no spiritual guidance? Elves cannot protect the weak, the innocent and the helpless like a ranger (or a paladin for that fact). I like to think that the Palladium RPG had some influence on 3AD&D. You can certainly see some of the changes bearing a close proximity to race and character generation in Palladium.
It's a bit of a shame that the new edition wasn't out before BG. If it was though, you have to stop and ask yourself if you can dual an elf, if you can have a dwarven mage, if your gnomic bard was the talk of Faerun would you ever bother playing a human again. The answer, in the main, would be no.

My advice, not that you want it, is that if you've completed the game fair and square, then by all means play around and enjoy yourself. I guess I'm a bit of a purist like you in that respect JR.

------------------
Making running away an art form

[This message has been edited by Lord Brass (edited 11-01-2001).]

[SecretMaster]

I WOULD NOT consider it cheating. I'm right with u on this one. Come on guys, dwarves do so much(make cool armor and weapons) so give them a bonus. I love dwarves, and i definately think they should get a bonus.

------------------
Tis your lives to waste
-Drizzt do Urden

[SixOfSpades]

Thanks for the input, JR, and you know, in light of your response, I really should rephrase the question. Instead of "Do you think this is cheating?" let it now say "Do you think this is UNFAIR?" There are many types of cheating that aren't unfair. For instance, I've got an Elven Thief/Mage, and I got tired of him looking like he was wearing hooded Spandex. So I changed his Appearance from Thief to Mage, so now he looks like he's got Mage robes on, which is what he's actually playing. I'm sure there are some people out there who would take offense at this, because I hacked the game. But you know, the change didn't affect the game at all, it simply satisfied my own aesthetic tastes.
Going back to the subject of the Dwarf, that change WOULD affect the game, but only to give that Dwarf a proficency with the Axe that I would consider his natural right as a Dwarf. After all, I did subtract a weapon star from his Bow skill, resulting in the typical Tolkien Dwarf: Loves his axe, but not that good at ranged fighting. I would not consider that unfair. How many of you do?

[Lord Brass]

Trouble is Six' is that people may find it difficult to distinguish between unfair and cheating. I have no objections to people doing what they like with their game. As for your dwarf, then go ahead. I could see some people reacting to mastery in axe at level 1, but if you think it won't seriously unbalance your game, so be it. Only You will know what style of game you like and whether it disrupts the game.

------------------
Making running away an art form

[SixOfSpades]

P.S. I agree with a lot of Lord Brass calls the 'purist' issues. For example. I won't use any of the items you can find in little holes in the ground, such as that second set of Ankheg Plate, because I know there's no way in hell I would have found it on my own. (I'll SELL the stuff, but I won't use it.) And racial abilities should remain fairly rigid: If you could make a Halfling Cleric/Thief, or an Elven Fighter/Illusionist, nobody would ever play a Gnome again. And if you could Dual-class an Elf, no one would ever play a Human again (unless that 1 point of Constitution is really important to you). So the rules and restrictions are good in some ways.

Of course, again echoing Lord Brass, if you've beaten it fair and square, go ahead and edit some things to what they SHOULD be.

[SixOfSpades]

Brass, you and I really have to stop posting responses to the same question simultaneously.

[Lord Brass]

Soz Six' .

I know it's a little off-topic, but you can understand some of the conventions that make up our world (the Real BG one, not the one outside your window). I have many experiences of being the only human in some p&p games I've played - and I've taken them because no-one else seems to bother about the the geography of where the setting takes place, being predominantely human, or the (supposed) scarcity of some races available for play.

I did this in IWD, where I made up a team and found out that not one of them was human. Strange I thought, but then consider that you no longer have racial level-limits to impede your progress, and lets face it make you roll up a new character when you reach the "end", so why bother limiting yourself? Have an elf on the books.

In fact, have several...and have one on me.
------------------
Making running away an art form

[This message has been edited by Lord Brass (edited 11-01-2001).]

[Lemernis]

This is a game, after all. It's meant for our enjoyment. I say go ahead and tinker around. Do whatever you like and see whether the results make the game play better, or make it more interesting in some way. The real question here isn't whether it is 'okay' to alter some things here and there, but rather whether any such modifications significantly affect the difficulty of play. Obviously if you make the game too easy then it isn't going to be as fun.

I guess if you wished, you could always compensate for the game being made easier by certain adjustments via game editors if you slide up the difficulty bar.

I'm not sure how faithful BG is to 2nd edition rules with respect to implementing some of the finer details. For example, I'm not sure whether some of the racial features like a half-elf's 30% resistance to charm and sleep spells ever actually made it into the game. But in any case perhaps the developers must have felt that the Con bonus was a big enough advantage (ability to acquire high HP, and at a certain point the ability to rapidly regenerate HP) that to also give them a bonus with a weapon would make them too powerful? But intuitively, you would think that dwarves ought to receive bonuses for both the hammer and the axe. They are the favored weapons of that race. I mean going by any of R.A. Salvatore's books set in the Forgotten Realms, for example, you would think that dwarves should be capable of grandmastery in those particular weapons.

In practice it probably won't make all that much difference if you add the extra prof, and it might be fun to watch the little guy plow through gangs of hobgoblins, etc. Giving a dwarf an extra prof in axes wouldn't really make the character overpowered, nor make the game a total cakewalk, etc. And the game's AI does adjust to the party how tough the party is, although I'm not sure just how detailed the parameters are (i.e., whether it would include something like the number of profs for each character).

The other side of the coin is that with 18 strength and gauntlets of dex or weapons expertise, two weapons profs will still chunk many opponents. Three profs may really not be necessary.