No statics for solos, and a rant

[oldgrayrogue]

Just a thought: what about adding the PC's CON bonus to the amount of HP regained from resting? Of course, it would mainly benefit frontline fighter types, but they are the ones who tend to take most of the punishment anyway, no? Also it would help low level characters more than high level ones, having proportionately less significance when you have lots of HP.

Also, it seems realistic for 'IC' purposes to me. Why would a more robust person take longer to recover completely from serious injury than one less so?

This makes perfect IC sense, but could encourage min/maxing and twink builds to derive the benefit at starting level. It also could result in less diversity in terms of starting class. IMO the easy solution is to provide levels 1-3 with a "free" rest each day as I proposed above. I think TA's proposal should then be applied to the script for PCs level 4 and up. So a level 4 regains 4HP per rest cycle plus/minus his con modifier or some such. I am all for bonuses (and negative modifications) based on attributes and skills.

[SwordSaintMusashi]

Just throwing this out there, but I believe that in pen and paper you regain your level + con modifier after eight hours of rest. That seems like a pretty fair rate of HP gain per rest, as the average level 1 PC would regen 3 hit points (1 for level, 2 for a 14 con, which is I assume is about the average) and another above or below that is the player's choice in con modifier.

[JaydeMoon]

For that matter, make wildlife spawns neutral unless provoked.

I'm a big proponent of this.

Sorry but in the wilds, animals generally AVOID human contact. Sure there are times they will attack, out of hunger, sickness, desperation, etc... but not EVERY SINGLE critter with claws and jaws jumps on humans (ESPECIALLY a large group of them) at the first hint of them.

[oldgrayrogue]

The only animal spawns I have encountered in the wilds set to hostile are the more dangerous large predators such as wolves and bears. They only seem to attack if you approach within a certain radius of them, so they can be avoided. Not sure if this is how its scripted but it has been my experience. I think this is realistic bc if you get too near a bear or pack of wolves they just might attack you.

[Veilan]

Man-eating pigs are a staple of the server.

[JaydeMoon]

I think this is realistic bc if you get too near a bear or pack of wolves they just might attack you.

I agree! They just might. Or they just might head for the hills. Especially if there are a lot of you.

[Brother Humphrey]

For that matter, make wildlife spawns neutral unless provoked.

I'm a big proponent of this.

Sorry but in the wilds, animals generally AVOID human contact. Sure there are times they will attack, out of hunger, sickness, desperation, etc... but not EVERY SINGLE critter with claws and jaws jumps on humans (ESPECIALLY a large group of them) at the first hint of them.

Though I mean no disrespect or disparagement of the DM involved in the incident, this brings back to mind an event in which three of us tried to intimidate a small pack of wolves with agressive behavior and the lighting of a fire, hoping to frighten them away from our goal. Once we passed a certain threshhold, from what I could tell, the wolves automatically charged us. I would ask that a moral check be implemented, in general, and especially in such a situation as the one that transpired the other day with the wolves.

It might be that the DM did roll secret morale checks, and the pack's attack was perfectly legit. I don't know, and haven't asked, as it just occured to me when I saw this post. I did, however, begin thinking about morale checks the past few days when I considered the logic of one to three 1/2HD kobolds/goblins charging to engage what should be recognised as a superior force, be it a large party, or a clearly highly skilled and armed/armored warrior. Or, for that matter, wild animals faced with fire bearing, snarling, barking humans/humanoids.

All this yammering boils down to one thing: I would like to see scripted morale checks for creatures. I know it's possible, as we had them both in nwn1, and if I am not mistaken, they were also implemented on NWN2HAZE (though I could be wrong, in which case, for all I know, you might have to script the frackin' things yourselves, since I don't know a script from my bunghole).

[HATEFACE]

All this yammering boils down to one thing: I would like to see scripted morale checks for creatures. I know it's possible, as we had them both in nwn1, and if I am not mistaken, they were also implemented on NWN2HAZE (though I could be wrong, in which case, for all I know, you might have to script the frackin' things yourselves, since I don't know a script from my bunghole).

Dangit, they had this kinda thing on OAS2. Guards would tremble in fear of my lvl1 monk's fists of awful fury. While the system was flawed and hilarous. I think it could be tweaked for improvement. This would add a new level of realism and enjoyment not knowing if the thing you fight will retreat (unless its immune to fear.) or not.

[Wynna]

For that matter, make wildlife spawns neutral unless provoked.

I'm a big proponent of this.

Sorry but in the wilds, animals generally AVOID human contact. Sure there are times they will attack, out of hunger, sickness, desperation, etc... but not EVERY SINGLE critter with claws and jaws jumps on humans (ESPECIALLY a large group of them) at the first hint of them.

Though I mean no disrespect or disparagement of the DM involved in the incident, this brings back to mind an event in which three of us tried to intimidate a small pack of wolves with agressive behavior and the lighting of a fire, hoping to frighten them away from our goal. Once we passed a certain threshhold, from what I could tell, the wolves automatically charged us. I would ask that a moral check be implemented, in general, and especially in such a situation as the one that transpired the other day with the wolves.

It might be that the DM did roll secret morale checks, and the pack's attack was perfectly legit. I don't know, and haven't asked, as it just occured to me when I saw this post.

The DM was just too slow. Another member of the party was PMing the DM with a request (what he saw on the body) while one of them was lighting fires and waving hands and shouting. During this, one of the party members (not actually sure which) crossed into the wolves sight while I -- er -- the DM was unsuccessfully trying to get a response PM out. Combat happens very quickly when it happens. Fairly realistically, each member of a party may try different tactics or do different things -- any of which could have a bearing on what happens to the whole party.

Scripted morale checks on critters would rock. So would the other dozen things on Tech's to-do list.

[HATEFACE]

Wynna do you think the players are overreacting?

[Teric neDhalir]

Dangit, they had this kinda thing on OAS2. Guards would tremble in fear of my lvl1 monk's fists of awful fury. While the system was flawed and hilarous. I think it could be tweaked for improvement. This would add a new level of realism and enjoyment not knowing if the thing you fight will retreat (unless its immune to fear.) or not.

Flawed almost certainly, but hilarious??

[Brother Humphrey]

Wynna do you think the players are overreacting?

Hell, as I said, I don't mean to sound bitchy, I simply used that example to give a valid backdrop for the morale scripts. Sri, Wynna, if it sounded like a gripe. I know just how annoying it can be to be busy typing out a response to something when suddenly you find yourself in the middle of a fight for your life. As this incident proves, it can happen on both sides of the screen.

[NickD]

They were far too certain of their own correctness to hear any other opinion.

Oh the irony!




Oops, thread rez!