NWN2: Deviations from 3.5

[Ithildur]

Veilan, as far as the wizard vs fighter thing, notwithstanding that anyone's going to be throwing around finger of deaths anytime soon...

pnp lvl 13 wizard (to cast fod): 4.5*13 (con 14), 58.5 HPs on average
pnp lvl 13 ftr: 7.5*13 (con 14), 97.5 HPs on average

nwn1 lvl 13 wiz: 6*3 then 5.5*10, 73 HPs on average
nwn1 lvl 13 ftr: 12*3 then 9.5*10, 131 HPs average

nwn2 lvl 13 wiz: 6*13 78 HPs every time
nwn2 lvl 13 ftr: 12*13, 156 HPs every time

It's pretty clear that nwn2's system is a gain for the fighter, virtually no gain for the wizard from nwn1. At lvl 13 gaining 20 HPs or so above pnp doesn't really help unless the lvl 13 fighter uses a mug to hit him. More realisticly for alfa (I didn't see too many FOD wizards in ALFA1), the HPs gained by the nwn2 fighter means he laughs off the wizard's, say, lightning bolts. Gets worse the higher the lvl. Plus, remember it's a real time environment, which is why nwn1's system might be a good compromise... real time environment clearly favors ftrs.

[Riotnrrd]

I'm not for max HPs, you're misrepresenting. On average the affect is greater, but if we used set dice - like always the average - we'd be golden. With max HP, however, there's no possibility that someone has more hp with less invested stats. With random rolls, there is. In fact, one of the arguments for random HP was that it's somehow "cool" if someone got more hp than someone else even if they had invested.

Apologies, I believe I misunderstood your position. Deviation from averages is most common on single rolls, i.e. at lower levels. As the number of dice increases (i.e. number of levels for HP rolls), convergence to an average is expected. The higher the level the PC, the more chance there is his or her HPs are close to average. I guess I'd be OK with flat average HPs for every level, just not the max, which to me is clearly wrong.

Well, we agree on a lot actually - I'd prefer HP averages to max HPs, and if there's people doing the work, let them at it. Randomisation is a non-starter with me, and I'm still curious how to get around the re-roll issue, since that would include hassling those players, as well as DMs.

Once that is solved, we're good.

Thank you for the clarification. I'm glad we have some common ground

For those whom are naturally argumentative, or whom feel max HPs are a good idea, I have answered some of Veilans other points below, but for others they are probably not very useful.

Thanks to all parties for keeping the discussion civil. Healthy debate is a good thing.

Spoiler:

Think again. I said that a wizard has a better chance to use a spell twice now. Getting to force two saving throws vs. death magic is vastly more powerful than the ability to survive one fireball more. Balance, it seems, is affected both ways, with no clear conclusion to be drawn.

The fighter also has twice as many chances to disrupt the casting of the spell, so where is the gain? The special case of a rare death spell ignores the much greater variety and availability of variable damage spells, which are half as effective under max HPs. You're also ignoring that combats will take twice as long, because weapon rolls are also variable, while HPs are not, so durations of any combat specific spells (i.e. anything a round per level, of which there are many) are also halved. There may be ways to play around this, but the point is maximum HPs still drastically affect the balance of the game.

Then you're being hypocritical by not having made the same push in ALFA 1, where we were pretty close to current numbers.

Some compromise is often acceptable, as it was to me in NWN1. Complete divergence from standard is usually not, as it is in NWN2

We can't trust everyone, so we should make rules and systems that require no trust, let alone DMs to be on the lookout.

Two of your three examples involve DM abuse. If the policy is clear and communicated, DMs should be trusted to follow the rules. If they abuse their power, they should be removed. I hope and believe this is less of a problem than you suggest.

[hollyfant]

Now that we got the Hitpoint business out of the way, how about this one:

Creatures can't die or become incapacitated from Ability score drains.

[ballonger]

How about this one:

Time moves way too quickly in game.

[HEEGZ]

HEEGZ, quick question, so ALFA2 monsters are all topped out currently at max HPs, what about canon NPCs and non hostile NPCs in general?

Once I get home I can compare them with my monster manual stats. If I remember correctly, all of the monsters I checked (mostly goblinoids and orcs) were all at maximum hitpoints per hit die.

[edit]
I'll have to do this on saturday when I have extra time to do the comparison. sorry I can't get to it sooner.

[Rotku]

Is there anything new to add? I think both sides have explained their points of view (in a nice civilized manner, if I may add). If there's no further points, let's finish up this discussion and go and put it up for Admin vote.

[HEEGZ]

Is there anything new to add? I think both sides have explained their points of view (in a nice civilized manner, if I may add). If there's no further points, let's finish up this discussion and go and put it up for Admin vote.

Put what up for vote, exactly?

[Rotku]

The whole "Do we change the HP system" question - you know the thing that has been discussed here the last how many pages

[Veilan]

I'd rather let this run proper course, to be honest. Riot should be well placed to liaise with AL on the technical feasibility and effort, giving us the proper frame to have an educated assessment of possible changes and their cost. If we like, you could then perhaps poll the playerbase for additional input (though such issues, of course, should not be decided solely on popularity). We could then go from there, as we already established PA input on the matter, in form of you .

[Rotku]

We could then go from there, as we already established PA input on the matter, in form of you .

Hah, I don't think I've said one constructive on topic thing this entire thread. Hardly counts as giving input! This is ALFA - any input needs to contain at least 8 quotes taken out of contents and 3000 words.

[oldgrayrogue]

Have read through most of this very long thread and I am with Mr. D on this one. Frankly, if all PC's and monsters get max HP's per level then its all relative and what's the issue? By giving everyone the average per level you just lower the "max" number of HP they get each level. For what beneficial purpose? So we can say no PC on ALFA has more HP's than canon heroes like Elminster? I just don't see the benefit to that. The RP benefits of randomized HP are also negligible IMO. Does a PC even know what his own HP are, let alone the HP of others? If someone has high HP does that automatically make him a tough guy? Maybe he is a total wuss who is just hard to kill =)

IMO all this change really accomplishes is making certain spells potentially more lethal to a greater number of PCs and NPC's, and thus boosting the caster classes in terms of game balance. Yes, casters, especially mages, have a bit of a raw deal at lower level, but at higher level their magical abilities more than make up for this IMO. I agree with JLM's posts. I vote to focus our technical efforts on more class skill based content (for all classes).

Plus, call me a PGer or whatever, but finally hitting that new level and then rolling a 1 or 2 on your HP just plain sucks. There I said it. =P

[HEEGZ]

Now, I also respect and admire that some may extol our virtues and honestly promise they have no hard feelings about randomisation, and I believe them. However, some brief examples of things that actually happened in ALFA 1:

- people asking for, and getting, rerolls on low level up rolls
- tech raises often saw rerolls if the HP roll was lower, but very seldom when it was higher
- people oocly planning their character progression to maximise the guaranteed max rolls for the first 3 levels

Opportunity for abuse always creates abuse. Our policy should be one that requires the least policing.

These are the most compelling reasons for not changing our current system. Not to mention the amount of work involved to integrate the change, plus testing, etc.

I think we should probably use this thread for discussing other deviations, and carry the HD disussion over to the standards forum.

[Riotnrrd]

Feel free to move the thread, one last point: some may have missed Veilan's suggested compromise, which is to automatically give average HPs for HD past 1st level. This eliminates the potential for 'abuse' by players or DMs, eliminates the chance of low rolls, is more balanced for all classes, is supportive of the ALFA charter, and equivalent to canon for NPCs and monsters.

I like it.

[ballonger]

Feel free to move the thread, one last point: some may have missed Veilan's suggested compromise, which is to automatically give average HPs for HD past 1st level. This eliminates the potential for 'abuse' by players or DMs, eliminates the chance of low rolls, is more balanced for all classes, is supportive of the ALFA charter, and equivalent to canon for NPCs and monsters.

I like it.

I agree. That was a good idea.

[HEEGZ]

Okay. I will start a discussion thread for this in the Standards forum. Please only use this thread for adding new Deviations from 3.5. If you are interested in participating in the Standards Team discussion of the HD issue, please shoot me a PM so I can add you to the team.

Thanks for all of the input from everyone!