Just a note: The word "option" is not magic, and using the word "option" does not mean something which radically changes the rules of gameplay becomes trivially easy to design, test, and implement. .
Everything that the PC can use, a NPC can use.
Is not as if Fireball casted by PC and by NPC's have different ranges.
Look to NWN2 Spell fixes mod who UNnerf most of ridiculous nerfs made by the devs.
And are you saying that ToEE is easy because they din't nerfed spell ranges? Go play ToEE. ToEE is the most faithful D&D adaptation.
We are talking about a fantasy computer game, not about a realistic simulation. A game need to have some kind of balance, sometimes even at the cost of realism. If shooting enemies from miles away is often the best tactic, then half of the classes in the game would be completely useless.
Real world battle is not fair. Today if enemies fight each other at distances were they can see each other they usually shoot each other with automatic guns. If you have no automatic gun yourself you will probably end up dead. If you add an automatic gun in a fantasy game, everybody will use it and all classes who cannot use it will become useless. It makes no sense to have 100 classes in your game when 90 of them are useless compared to the other 10. Thats why it is more importent that the game is balanced (at least a little bit) than a fantasy game being realistic.
Prof. Dr. Dr. Mad S. Tist
World leading expert of artificial stupidity. Because there are too many people who work on artificial intelligence already
We are talking about a fantasy computer game, not about a realistic simulation.(...) Thats why it is more importent that the game is balanced (at least a little bit) than a fantasy game being realistic.
Nobody is talking about realism only that the ranges needs to be consistent with P&P rules.
1 - RPG's should be living breathing alternative worlds. Not just boring work like most modern games are. 2 - Nobody is talking about automatic guns. We are talking about having a 5e game with 5e ranges for 5e weapons like longbows. 3 - Other classes aren't useless on P&P. 4 - Even IRL, automatic guns are mostly used on short bursts or in semi auto mode. And the best weapon for CQB urban enforcement and for anti air warfare are completely different 5 - Balance is not only a immersion killer but a variety killer, fun killer and replayability killer. Look to VtMB. Nosferatu are cursed with deformity. In a highly social game, they can't even be seen in the streets without breaking the masquarede. If Troika was another game dev who likes to balance everything, they would probably remove the clan(reducing the variety of the game) or made his deformity being just -1 dot on seduction(balancing the clans and killing immerson) 6 - As i've said, what is the point of playing as a ranged character if the enemy can close the gap and knockout you in one round?
In open fields, range should be a massive advantage. Doesn't matter if the setting is fantasy or not. Did you watched Conan, the Barbarian? Conan NEVER mindless rush towards enemy archers because they can only hit a target at 13m. That would be silly in any action movie, in any novel, etc.
This is not a pen and paper RPG. It is a computer RPG. The source material is adapted to the medium. Changes happen.
Correct
In PnP the GM can adapt the game depending on the situation. He can create challenges depending on what characters you have and how the players play.
In a computer game everything has to be programmed before the player starts playing. The player cannot know what awaits him.
When I say the game must be a bit balanced I do NOT mean that each char needs to be good in every situation. But when you add a class into the game, this class should at least be able to get through the game without feeling completely useless. Its bad when the game presents a challenge that only one specific type of char can do well but the player cannot know this before. I see no problem here as they said there will be several ways to solve each situations.
extrem example: Enemies with longbows stand on a mountain and shoot at everything in a wide area below. The game expects you to disable them with a long range spell or you sneak up and shove them down the cliff. Oh, you created a char that cannot cast AoE spells or is extremely good in sneaking? You are an idiot who deserves to die. Everybody knows that it doesn´t work to fight archers when you are good in using swords.
You keep on mentioning the nosferatu. Its true that they added a monster class to a social game. But they also gave them the invisibility spell and you could reach most places through the sewers. So you have a class with a big handycap, but the game is balanced in a way that this class has also the means to deal with this handycap.
Prof. Dr. Dr. Mad S. Tist
World leading expert of artificial stupidity. Because there are too many people who work on artificial intelligence already
This is not a pen and paper RPG. It is a computer RPG. The source material is adapted to the medium. Changes happen.
Every change from P&P on D&D history was to the worst. Warlocks on NWN2 are unplayable without warlock reworked mod. Pale masters on NWN1 giving no +caster level and being limited to one summon are also useless.
Originally Posted by Madscientist
(...) Enemies with longbows stand on a mountain and shoot at everything in a wide area below. The game expects you to disable them with a long range spell or you sneak up and shove them down the cliff. Oh, you created a char that cannot cast AoE spells or is extremely good in sneaking? You are an idiot who deserves to die. Everybody knows that it doesn´t work to fight archers when you are good in using swords.(...)
Except that the game is a PARTY based game. And even if you are a solo warrior, there are scrolls that can cast invisibility, darkness, mirror image, etc. Also, most archers at least on 3.5e had good reflex saves, most rogues also can have evasion and improved evasion feats so fireballs aren't the best way to deal with then. Not mentioning that while casting it, you are subjected to attacks of opportunity. A solid fog would be the best spell for that situation https://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/solidFog.htm
And that is another problem of nerfing range of spells/bows/crossbows/etc; it renders some spells useless.
Maybe i an wrong, i never played much with martial classes but every martial soloing video that i saw end up using magic in some point, just like i had to use melee as a sorcerer in some point(tenser's transformation + BBoD) on my solo baldur's gate 2 run. Or slayer form. On 2e, among those who wanna solo, multiclass is extremely common, few people do pure martial or pure arcane or pure divine runs because they are very hard
edit - here is a video of myself dealing with enemy with very high magical resistance. I could use spells to lower his resistance, but i rather used slayer form + stop time + summons and killed him on melee.
Every change from P&P on D&D history was to the worst.
Then don't play them, because there will always, always be compromises made in the adaptation. Everything in a videogame must be specifically put in by the developer and programmed in. Nothing which has not been programmed in can be used. Because there is not an infinite amount of time and content which can be added, games can't take into account every possible thing a player might want to think of.
For example, the BG3 pre-alpha video starts off beside a river. In a PnP campaign, you can certainly try to swim the river and scale a cliff. But in a computer game, if the developers don't want you to swim across the river and scale the cliff, you cannot even try. The medium constrains the rules.
You can grapple in PnP. You won't be able to grapple in BG 3, because the animation for that would need to be put into the game. Given the number of creatures which exist in the game, the resources requires to make every possible combination of grapple animations look good would be prohibitive. The medium constrains the rules.
If you insist on a videogame having absolute fidelity to every rule in the PnP ruleset, you're not going to get it. It cannot be done for a reasonable budget in a reasonable amount of time.
Then don't play them, because there will always, always be compromises made in the adaptation. Everything in a videogame must be specifically put in by the developer and programmed in.
No, you din't got my point. Not implementing wish or implementing a limited wish list like BG2 did is OK. Uterly changing the rules and nerfing things NEVER was good.
That said, you can't have a 100% equal to a P&P screen experience but ToEE(Temple of elemental evil) is the most faithful D&D adaptation while SCL(Sword coast legends) is the least faithful. As for grapple, a lot of spells on NWN1 uses graples. Eg - Black Tentacles
The grapple check used to determine whether or not a tentacle hits a target is as follows: 1d20 + caster level (to a maximum of 20) + 4(tentacle's strength modifier) + 4(tentacle's size modifier) versus 1d20 + base attack bonus + strength modifier + size modifier. source > https://nwn.fandom.com/wiki/Evard%27s_black_tentacles
And note that pathfinder kingmaker has a lot of mobility checks to climb certain areas of the map.
There are a big difference between not implementing all possibilities of P&P to DESTROYING a class like NWN2 did with warlock, like NWN1 did with pale masters and necromancer specialized wizards.
>strawman what strawman? it wasnt me who said that magic should be the strongest force in a magical setting and that way its your own fault fo rnot playing a wizard.
You said that.
>muh wow inspiraiton and they also said they are inspired by a lot of other stuff. Thats why its reductio ad hitlerum "Wow is bad and thus 4e is bad"
No. 4e was hated because wannabe grognards that didnt play 2e or earlier editions thought htat 3e is what defined TTRPGs and because Hasbro expected huge revenue numbers out of DnD (4e sold better than 3,5, just so you know)
And i perosnally dont care friendo :^) ican play whatever i want at my table. And look at 5e apologists getting swarmed with cringey critical role content, MTG tie ins that are obvious marketing material you pay for and ridiculous politics. meanwhile paizo has starfinder fail and pathfinder 2e fail spectulary aswell. For the exact same reasons obviously.
Third edition and its derivatives is the single worst thing that has happend to TTRPGs and it spawned an absoluteley disgusting fandom that will not accept anything different from it. This is the future you chose.
"muh wizards op", i will try find a screenshot of the pathfinder kingmaker on the endless dungeon. My sorcerer was actually the 4th biggest damage dealer.
Arcane casters aren't more deadly than a well eqquiped buffed warrior. Amiri on my pathfinder kingmaker camkapign at lv 15 has 3 attacks per round with 15-34(d10+12+2d6 - Incorruptible Petal - the best melee weapon that i've found, a +5 glaive , holy ultrasound that worths 57900 gp) damage each, or 45-102 damage, while my lv 20 sorcerer with tsunami a lv 9 spell can deal only 24d6(144 max) damage. It sacrificing a tier 9 spell who allow FORT save for half damage If i put HASTE + Stoneskin + Legendary proportions + bull strength + all other buffs that i have, she can reach 200 points of damage per round. Something that even using the broken rods that pfkm has, i can only reach on 3 spells per rest if i an very lucky. 5 levels above her.
Sorcerer on 3.5e and pathfinder doesn't shine on damage. He shines on controlling the enemies, buffing alies, etc. Eg, the Sirroco spell, ice prison, summoning creatures like thanadaemons, etc. Spells that deals a lot of damage like hellfire ray generally require ranged touch attacks. But if all rays hit, it can be 45d6 damage...
Originally Posted by Sordak
it wasnt me who said that magic should be the strongest force in a magical setting and that way its your own fault fo rnot playing a wizard. .
Yep. Only wizards are capable of using magic. There aren't sorcerers, cleric, warlocks, hybrid classes, etc. Only wizards... /sarcasm. My point is. Giving supernatural abilities to martial classes in a high fantasy game would not be bad.
Also, in other games, be a magician is far harder than be a warrior. Example? Gothic 1 and mainly Gothic 2 NotR. You don't start Gothic 1 with magic, you need to find someone able an willing to teach you, Corristo only teaches on mid of chapter 2 if you joined his camp and answered rightfully his questionnaire. After it, you need to learn magical circles and expand your mana. A warrior can fully max his one hand and STr at lv 15. A mage at lv 30 still din't maxed his main stats if he din't saved a lot of LP before he turned one.
On lovecraft TTRPG, using magic is something so alien that will eventually lead you to insanity.
My point is that the game mechanics should reflect the fictional game world. Just this.
Originally Posted by Sordak
4e was hated because wannabe grognards that didnt play 2e or earlier editions thought htat 3e is what defined TTRPGs and because Hasbro expected huge revenue numbers out of DnD (4e sold better than 3,5, just so you know)
The initial sales. And note that piracy was more common on 3.5e times, the 3.5e had OGL releases, look to marketshare. 4e made D&D lost the title of most played TT game to pathfinder
Originally Posted by Sordak
meanwhile paizo has starfinder fail and pathfinder 2e fail spectulary aswell.
And i reminder. I an not against making martial classes more interesting to be played. I an against making arcane/divine casters LESS interesting to be played
edit : about 4e being heavily inspired by mmos wasn’t involved in the initial design meetings for the game, but I believe that MMOs played a role in how the game was shaped. I think there was a feeling that D&D needed to move into the MMO space as quickly as possible and that creating a set of MMO-conversion friendly rules would help hasten that.
Computer games need to change the rules if they are based on PnP rules.
A good example was the Realms of Arcadia trilogy, which was elected as best computer RPG 1991, 1993 and 1995. They used exactly the PnP rules with all classes, spells and skills. The games were good, BUT: - 80% of spells and skills were useless, some examples: You could spend points in the riding skill but you could never ride anything in the game. You could cast "purify food and water" but there was no bad food in the game. You could cast rainbow bridge ( a spells that creates a bridge that allows you to cross obstacles, such as rivers ) but it had no effect because the map was as it is. You used only a few spells or skills often. Some spells and skills are extremely situational. You can learn the spell "banish ghosts" and it is useful in exactly one situation in the whole trilogy. When you open a specific chest which is guarded by a ghost you can get great items if you have the spell or its game over if you don´t. - Part 1 and 2 of the trilogy are almost impossible to finish without a guide. In part 1 you have to find a treasure map that shows the location of an artifact that helps you to end an orc invasion. Parts of this map are scattered all over the world. There is a tiny chance that a merchant appears randomly in a tavern and sells it for a high prize. He does not proc or you do not have enough money when he does, too bad. There is a tiny chance to get it from a sailor who shows up randomly in a harbor. One piece has a person and when you meet him you have 2 options " I am looking for the treasure." or " The lord of this country has asked us to find the treasure." The first option gets you the map piece, the second one not because this guy does not like his lord. And so on. Yes, the game used exactly the PnP RAW. But in a PnP session when you need an items to continue the story and the source material says you have a 5% chance to get it from a sailor in the harbor but you have been in 100 harbors already without success the GM can just say that the sailor is in the next harbor without rolling a dice or find another way to let you get the item so that your story can continue. - In a tavern in the starting town comes a visitor and tells you a wall of text about a ghost ship. This wall of text includes several names. 20 hours or so later you have a random chance to encounter the ghost ship. If you want to get off the ship you have to enter one of those names. I hope you have written down who was the brother of the previous owner of the ship ( or something similar ) or else you are trapped there forever.
Personally I consider a computer game just as what it is: a computer game. The game has the rules it has. I do not care if those rules are based on PnP rules or not. If they are based on PnP I do not care if they are 100% the exact PnP rules or not. I care about that I enjoy playing the game and the rules should make sense in the context of this specific computer game. Personally I am happy that they went from the DOS system to DnD because I dislike inflating numbers and completely random items. But I do not mind if they make changes compared to the PnP rules, because PnP and computer are different kinds of games.
@ OP: The devs have confirmed they they had to make changes in some things compared to PnP because the PnP stuff was not fun or it is impossible to implement it properly with the time, money and technology they have. I am happy that they do. I have written above what happens if they don´t. If you really hate those changes that much then don´t buy the game
Prof. Dr. Dr. Mad S. Tist
World leading expert of artificial stupidity. Because there are too many people who work on artificial intelligence already
>muh wizard should be stronger >4e is trash >lies oh man, youre just trying to bait me into insulting you.
Casterfags are the most insufferable people that were spawned by the third edition craze. you literaly want all the toys to play with and be overpowered, but if someone else has something its unimmersive.
Computer games need to change the rules if they are based on PnP rules.(...) If you really hate those changes that much then don´t buy the game
There are a HUGE difference between not implementing a ultra powerful IA to allow you to cast wish like you can on P&P to change everything that can be easily ported to a PC and worked pretty well on previous D&D adaptations.
This mindset "lets change everything" is why we don't have a decent good D&D adaptation since NWN2(2006). 80s had Pool of radiance. earlier 90s had ravenloft and dark sun. late 90s, baldur's gate, earlier 00s, nwn1, mid 00s, nwn2 and after this, we only got mobile cash grabs wow clones like neverwinter mmo and sword coast legends. Pathfinder Kingmaker is a pathfinder adaptation, not D&D. I really wish that BG3 will follow the rules instead of being "DOS3"
Nobody is saying that BG3 should be 100% equal to P&P. If is like Dark Sun, is pretty good IMO
PS : I don't like ludicrous number inflation and wow style itemization too. Nor cooldowns and ultra limited range. Even pfkm who i love has his problems. Eg, horritid witling is almost useless because is hard to use without killing your own party too.
>Muh damage because damage is what solves encounters. Meanwhile wizards solve encounters throuhg spells, meanwhile spells that you cant miss, that enemies need to save. Meanwhile Mages will do all the utility that other classes do but better. Open locks? wizard, detect traps? Wizard. Social encounter? wizard, Dungoen exploration? Wizard, transport? Wizard. Stopping time? Wizard. What does the humble fighter do? he fights, but not very well compared to other classes.
none of that white room damage stacking bullshit applies. thats just theorycrafting for obsessed people.
>other casters than wizards yeah so that changes my point in what? Casters. >Giving martials magical powers or give them martial powers that let them compete. like tome of battle did, or 4e did. But oh no! then every class is the same.
>sales third edition had no competitors, then paizo split off from the team and became one. its not exactly rocket science. That doesnt mean that the sales of 4e tanked, it means that Paizo started selling stuff.
>pathfinder 2 is 4e yeah, only it does things in the exact opposit way. What pathfinder 2 is doing simmilar to 4e is doing a lets say "mathematical sound" system. but it still has class imbalance and it still plays like third edition. It does some work to balance it, but it doesnt change the underlyign structure, its still about stacking boni on top of one another.
SO yes, pathfinder 2 tries the same as 4e, but in a different way, so its not compareable. Also, im not even saying Pathfinder 2 is failing because it sucks. Im saying that its failing for the same reason 4e failed. because Grognards refuse to change their way and want to live in 3.pf land forever. Paizo made that bed, now theyll have to lie in it. And i personally find that amusing.
If you want something compareable to 4e, look no further than 13th age, which gets huge praise in the niche RPG space.
>DnD Needed to move into the MMO space By that they didnt mean the DESIGN of 4e, they meant the DnD online subscription service that they planned to roll out, it wa sbasically roll 20 with Heroforge incorporated. but the head designer comitted murder suicide so it was shut down before it came out. Dont misrepresent the facts.
>Dont make Casters less interresting ITs not about making them less interresting, but giving them more utility.
Riddle me this: Why is >Ranger - a guy who has an animal companion and shoots a bow >Fighter - a guy who fights things with weapons >Thief - a guy who can open locks and do sneak attacks >Barbarian - a guy who gets angry and hits things and is good in nature a class? But then why is Wizard - a guy who turns invisible, fights people with fireballs, flies, stops time, creates food, creates water, creates shelter, shoots magic missles, puts people to sleep, pits enemies against one another, teleports instantlyl, summons meteors, casts shields, casts lighning, talks to demons, talks to animals, summons ancient spirits, summons demons, summons celestials, summons monsters, creates magic items, creates magic scrolls, opens locks, disarms traps, finds hidden doors... and a lot more a class?
Do you not see the difference in scope? a wizard is not a very thematic character. >but muh sorceror does very much the same but casts it in a different way. Warlock is the only full caster class that is grounded in its theme.
Instead of "Wizard" and "sorcerer" there should be things like
>Pyromancer - who conjures fire and shoots fireballs >Summoner - who summons creatures >Illusionist - who turns invisible and bewitches people
Those should be classes. because they have the same utility as Fighter, Ranger and thief do. They have niches and roles. Which is good for a ROLE PLAYING game
I think it is a good idea to reduce range for bows, it would just feel silly, if you would need to move 2-3 screens and 2-3 rounds in order to hit the enemy in each fights. I also think, that with group initiative, it is good to nerf Aoe spells, otherwise they just fireball you, and kill your team, before doing anything...
So you keep close combat viable, you can still jump or push and move out of danger if needed, and shoot back if you need to...
I think it is a good idea to reduce range for bows, it would just feel silly, if you would need to move 2-3 screens and 2-3 rounds in order to hit the enemy in each fights.(...) Realistic ranges are not for TB.
Do you realize that there are a thing called map design and that 600 feet range longbow is something situational in most dungeon crawler games? That there are spells like Dimension Door or Haste to help you close the gap?
Originally Posted by Sordak
Wizard - a guy who turns invisible(...) creates food
You are so bias towars "muh wizards op" that you ignore that create food is a CLERIC spell, on 3.5e and on 5e.
In general on 3.5e / pathfinder, Prepared Divine caster > Spontaneous divine(Oracle for eg) > Prepared Arcane caster > Spontaneous Arcane > Martial. And wizards needs scrolls, otherwise they can't learn the spells and scrolls are expensive. Finger of Death costs 2.5k gold(not sure), imagine learning ALL spells of the same level.
divine casters are still casters. as said, clerics also got way too much utility. but not quite as much as wizards do. classes shouldnt make the roles of other classes obsolete.
Your problem is that you see D&D as a war game, not a a ROLE playing game.
If i an playing war thunder with me 262, i wanna feel like i an piloting that plane even if the game on non simulation setting is way generous with G force and etc. At the same way, if i an playing D&D as a necromancer, i wanna feel like i an a necromancer.
That said, if you have one party member being ludicrous more powerful than another, is due GM's fault. On most cases, wizards can go to shop and come back with ludicrous high amount of deadly spells that any non chaotic place would try to ban.If even on US is hard to get anti materiel rifles(some cases are considered DD) and a grenade launcher(always DD), why in a fantasy city getting a fireball scroll would be easy?I can picture every non chaotic major city outlawing spells like Finger of Death, Knock, Fire ball, etc.
On pathfinder kingmaker, the scrolls available on your barony shop is tied to his "arcane" rank and before you can raise arcane, you need to raise your domain divine.
I will re write your sentence "casters are op" to "wizards when they can get a complete spellbook with all spells in existance and have time to rest after every encounter are OP"
Warlocks, should get only spells that makes sense that his patron will teach him. A warlock who has Raven Queen as Patron for eg, should't cast wall of light. Same with a sorcerer, a sorcerer with golden dragon bloodline casting frost spells 24/7 would make no sense.
Yep the good ole days of Wizards having to roll to see if they can learn a spell are in short supply nowadays.
This who balancing thing, and people wanting to do everything that everyone else can do at the expense of others shining moments are the bane of good roleplaying. (The way the identify spell works, there is no working to identify objects anymore. Just hand them everything to them, there is no discovery about the item anymore.)
Everyone wants to Min Max their characters, they want that 20 in there main attribute. There is no room for that character to grow later. He is at his peak when they start.
You are exactly wrong Victor. I see it as a role playing game. you see it as a character building game.
Role palying imples ROLEs. a ROLE is a ROLE to play, as in, your character has a NICHE. WHich implies that your character is good at SOME things that the party needs. Meanwhile your party is NOT GOOD at other things the party needs. Because if you can do everything, youre not playing a role.
How is "do everything "thematic for a wizard? how is a Pyromancer and an Illusionist LESS thematic than a wizard who can mix and match spells randomly?
If your "Role" fantasy is beeing able to do everything, then maybe you should ask your DM to make a single person campaign for you. also
>Its the DMs fault Not a fucking argument. Why even have games when the DM can just houserule everything. no, rules are rules. Its Roleplaying GAME not Roleplayign Theatre. THere are rules. The Dm is gonna houserule one way or another, but having mechanically sound rules and restrictions goes a long way to not make the DM hate his fucking life because he has to do everything on a case by case bsis.
Prof. Dr. Dr. Mad S. Tist 
