class changes and balancing Again..

[Rusty]

But when I read that a bard inspiration that gives him a +2 skill buff is "overpowered" I cringe.

Presumably you also hallucinate, as that statement is not to be found on these forums. Pay attention, please.

Unless, of course, you are reading this somewhere other than ALFA's forums. In which case the information re. you cringing is nice an' all, but not particularly relevant.

[Mulu]

It's a suggested nerf to make it "useless in soloing," actual quote. To me, that connotes it is "overpowered," or somehow an exploit, otherwise why bother. Learn to distinguish scare quotes from post quotes.

[Brokenbone]

Re Warlock:
http://nwn2.wikia.com/wiki/Flee_the_scene

Current vanilla implementation is more in the theme of "stay in combat with enhanced effectiveness", rather than fleeing to anyplace.

PnP implementation would be "dimension door someplace, leave a Major Image of yourself around for one round" (which'd vanish if it took damage anyhow... guess high Will save on observers might make them ignore it too, during its short lifespan).

NWN1 current haks include both the ability to dimension door (dimdoor.nss or similarly named script) and to make doppelganger NPCs with the omega wand. I assume one could make a one hitpoint, lootless version of the doppelganger, possibly with no movement or AI to just stand there like a punching bag (since a Major Image dies when first struck) and that would destroy itself anyhow after one combat round... or longer if that was too short in a real time combat sequence for some reason. Maybe a *poof - the illusion vanishes* would need to be sent as a message to observers who wondered "what the hell happened?"

I do not know how portable NWN1 scripts are though, maybe it's the 80/20 rule.

Anyhow, it's kind of like the difference between Expeditious Retreat (wiz 1) and Haste (wiz 3) if one was talking about getaways. Both give a movement burst, but one's designed to jack up combat effectiveness in other ways too.

[Dorn]

I hate overpowered characters.

Generally when i'm level 6 and they are level 10.

It's all a d20 really. Even with the little bits of good and bad amongst them a bad role (or good by opponant) may = death.

As long as exp -ves are in place for ECL races properly (my pet issue), i dont see it mattering THAT much to the masses gaming experience what class they take.

And if someone exploits a trick of the game like that warlock thingy....have DM drop a solar/archduke of hell on them.

[AlmightyTDawg]

Standards is starting to remind me of the Tennessee Valley Authority. Having fulfilled it's purpose with wealth standards (running power lines to rural folk), it now strives to find a reason for its continued existence.

Just to clarify a few things - I'm not really with standards. I'm only marginally with ALFA, really. I made a suggestion in Admin, which like Vendrin suggests, recommends treating the use of the infinite/unbeatable combo as presumed powergaming. Legitimate use of the invocations would be unaffected.

I'm only responding to what I think is weak logic. Responding to nerfs on the basis that they affect classes not as powerful as clerics is a weak argument. Responding that warlocks independently are weak in the SP campaign and thus should not be nerfed is a weak argument. Responding to nerfs by saying that all of them are bad because they are nerfs is a weak argument.

Now none of that makes any nerf or any rule right in and of itself. I don't really know what anyone else is suggesting, nor do I express any opinion on it. I just believe the infinite combo problem is a real one depending on how the server runs its CvCs and static content. I just figure if I can take down a 300+ hp, CR high-teens creature with a solo 10th level warlock, it needs some kind of addressing.

[Mulu]

I'm only responding to what I think is weak logic. Responding to nerfs on the basis that they affect classes not as powerful as clerics is a weak argument. Responding that warlocks independently are weak in the SP campaign and thus should not be nerfed is a weak argument. Responding to nerfs by saying that all of them are bad because they are nerfs is a weak argument.

But they are stronger than the counter arguments presented so far of CvC balancing (an impossibility) and PnP fidelity given that we aren't playing PnP.

[ç i p h é r]

Now none of that makes any nerf or any rule right in and of itself. I don't really know what anyone else is suggesting, nor do I express any opinion on it. I just believe the infinite combo problem is a real one depending on how the server runs its CvCs and static content. I just figure if I can take down a 300+ hp, CR high-teens creature with a solo 10th level warlock, it needs some kind of addressing.

But the Warlock isn't the only class this "issue" pertains to. All melee characters have infinite attacks (and multiple attacks per round) and all ranged warriors can stock up enough ammo to make ammunition moot for any given encounter. Plus, they get much better armor. A warlock has virtually no melee defense other than retreating.

I guess I'm the on the other side of the fence in that I'm very much opposed to looking at a single scenario and trying to figure out how to "fit" a character's abilities into it. The game is so much more than one scenario. What we all want, I think, is a fun and challenging gaming experience. And ultimately, that's where DM's fit into things. They're the dynamic element to the game that keeps it fun and challenging no matter what one-off scenarios we happen upon.

[AlmightyTDawg]

But they are stronger than the counter arguments presented so far of CvC balancing (an impossibility) and PnP fidelity given that we aren't playing PnP.

Sadly that's not quite the argument - it's the two of them together. It's the lack of fidelity causing a CvC imbalance that's the issue. It's when one directly causes the other that I think you have an actionable issue, not merely for aesthetic balancing considerations. A short-range dimension door (Flee the Scene invocation) requires cover/concealment to really make good use, even with the major image - where it's relevant is in the ground that can be covered in the time it would take to pop off a walk unseen effect. It's not that warlocks can't go infinite on paper - it's just much harder and much more situational and they can be frequently put in awkward situations simply based on the path an escaping PC takes. Those problems really aren't quite the same here in the NWN2 format, both because of the haste effect and the infinite nature of warlocks (coupled to the abstract LOS system, invis system, and capped movement system among others).

But the Warlock isn't the only class this "issue" pertains to. All melee characters have infinite attacks (and multiple attacks per round) and all ranged warriors can stock up enough ammo to make ammunition moot for any given encounter. Plus, they get much better armor. A warlock has virtually no melee defense other than retreating.

I guess I just disagree - the question for me is to what extent the expendable resources of the PC are at risk. Melee characters have infinite attacks, but on general terms expose themselves to retaliation strikes. And, once you eliminate overwealth/over-AC conditions, there generally should be an exchange rate here. I would strongly not recommend trying to take on a 300+hp CR 18 thwacking mob with a solo 10th level fighter on +1/+2 gear, for example. Anyone want to take a guess how long that fighter lasts on 28 AC against a marilith? The warlock involves a decent-die attack at extreme range (Spear) with high hit percentage (ranged touch), and more than enough time to pull off the two escape abilities with sufficient planning. There are some limited options as stopgaps, but most are limited in scope. Ranged response is possible, but involves switching, targeting, etc. and is a marginal strategy - and many opponents do not have that option.

So in the end, I'm not sure how it constitutes "looking at a single scenario" to say that this mindless rinse-and-repeat technique against things without counters is presumed powergaming. I think a couple of technical tweaks to Flee the Scene would be helpful so that it's more - as intended - a retreat option than a party offensive buff, but in the meantime the only must-solve issue is the combo. Maybe that's not convincing enough to anyone. Maybe rezzes and/or IC ramifications will lead to a balance. In the end a hunted warlock is in a lot of trouble. But I think the characterization of this argument as trying to justify the existence of Standards or something is pretty thin. You may not buy it, but the argument's certainly colorable.

But here's a simple question from me - I think that use of the warlock is equally offensive to camping and ambushing off of an AT. If I saw a warlock doing that to me, ATing and camping it would be my instinctive response. Now the latter will get me a strike and a CvC reversal, so why wouldn't the former?

[Mulu]

But now you've just shot yourself in the foot, as the AT camp is controlled by a simple rule rather than a tech intervention, so why not make a simple rule for any game-breaking combos?

As it stands, I actually do believe in tech fixes for game-breaking combos, I just have a hard time seeing how inspire competence on self breaks the game.

And I figured you'd like the TVA reference, it's a law school favorite.

[AlmightyTDawg]

But now you've just shot yourself in the foot, as the AT camp is controlled by a simple rule rather than a tech intervention, so why not make a simple rule for any game-breaking combos?

Here would be my brief, and minimally invasive, recommendation for Warlocks:

- Treat use of walk unseen/flee the scene as presumed powergaming without DM oversight. This includes static hunting and CvC. Further, as another check, make sure Flee the Scene doesn't affect party mates (if this wasn't already patched) and removes invisibility (even though it's not hostile). The latter does something to prevent preemptive hasting, though doesn't remove it completely.

- Treat single-level warlock multiclass with Leaps and Bounds as presumed powergaming (class build), particularly if other factors are apparent, such as fighters maxing out STR and leaving DEX at 8 or a DEX-build PC. Alternately, recode Leaps and Bounds as DEX +2, Tumble/Jump +5, and give it a Longstrider +10% overland movement effect.

Both of those recommendations are soft and involve no significant recoding. The single-level warlock build would not really be detectable until mid-levels or so (a Ftr3/War1 is perfectly valid if the endgame is not Ftr12/War1), so I believe both of these recommendations would have months before they need to be fully decided. All that would need to be done now would be to preliminarily establish these as expected guidelines so there's no surprise to warlock players in the future.

I believe in a soft rule, and because violations of soft rules tend to cause equivocation and confusion amongst the crowd, it should eventually be solved by a tech rule so everyone can use their "powers" as close to freely as possible. But my soft rules are the rough equivalents of the AT-camp rule.

Just please don't equate me with what other folks are doing. I have my own opinions on other classes/builds, like I think perpetual bard inspriations are a bad thing (they should be activateable and fixed duration drawing from the same 1/day pool as other effects) but probably won't be so bad as to be considered gamebreaking. Until, like with the warlock, some enterprising young proto-faction gets a couple of these support characters to mid-level and folks see how the stacking just pwns house (though, technically by midlevel a bard's use/day limit would be irrelevant over most encounter periods). I also think FS while less flexible, will do better at what people don't like clerics doing, which is buffing and fighting - but considering ALFA's love of the undead, may end up being weaker overall.

And I've already shared my opinions on the cleric, and honestly think given everyone's understanding of their uberness would even go so far as to support a intentionally anti-canon cleric nerf. But I claim no responsibility - I just think a couple of the recommendations got bad reps they didn't deserve. It's not that a nerf is necessarily bad - people should just a) make sure there's wider agreement about the problem first and b) apply a solution narrowly tailored to address it.

[Brokenbone]

I'm not sure anyone complained about inspire competence, where it ought to target (ally, self)? I think just some items were raised as "huh, how do these work" without a concrete proposal to alter. I am imaging any of that = long discussion, not like the one taking place in GD here, which is kinda all over the map.

I guess though one'd need to figure out if we'd be using "music and poetics" as in PnP to keep an inspiration going. Singing to inspire move silently for instance, on yourself or even on others might be wacky. I.e., sure, here's the +2, but here's a DM discretionary -10 circumstance bonus too for SINGING WHILE SNEAKING. Playing guitar while trying to climb a tough slope, maybe crazy too. Same with swimming. *glub glub, I swallowed the ocean while singing* Again, plenty of fun made of bardsong in OOTS. (Sneak sneak sneak! Past the something or others...)

Again, there's a series of decisions one'd have to make. Is this a bard music ability (PnP) or an aura even a blind/deaf/dumb/handcuffed bard radiates? Then one looks at all the inspirations and says to each "good enough, too good, not good enough"? I've only been really surprised about the Regeneration one, everyone's opinions'll vary though, someone may have valid arguments about preserving it as is, in some lesser form, whatever. Stuff gets discussed & compromised / figured out though. Always seems to.

[Mulu]

I'll say one thing about bards and regeneration, my own experience with mid and even high level bards is that if the party members start getting dropped, the bard is one of the first ones to go down. So much for regenerating out of a bad circumstance. Compared to a cleric of the same level, the bard's regenerate is pretty slow healing, slow enough that it could easily be interrupted and buffs will burn out waiting for it. A heal/rest cycle at mid level is much more effective, and at high level I don't even notice bard regeneration.

[indio]

My bard is completely unstoppable.

[Mayhem]

Re the bard healing.

Can you imagine anyone going into a challenging battle in which they expect to take some damage saying "we don't need a cleric, we have a bard!"?

[indio]

Heck, I don't know Mayhem...I play bard so exclusively that I wouldn't know how a cleric does, but my bard easily keeps a party alive. But I'm very one-eyed.