Rebalance Skill modifiers

[zhazz]

If we were to lower the numbers, then spotters would have an even bigger advantage, allowing spotters to have to invest much less into their spotting. The only reason that sneaks can get higher than spotters right now is due to item stacking. If sneaks and spotters could get to the same maximum as each other, I could drop 20 points in my spot and still see them.

To just flat out saying it without dancing around the subject, this is honestly my biggest fear and why I've been passionately against this change. We sneaks have it rough already with the exception of stealth which we dedicate our characters life too. For many of us, our RP is focused around this-- spying, intrigue, and being an unseen shadow.

Since the proposal would change stacking for Hide, Move Silently, Spot, and Listen together (and all other skills too), rather than in a vacuum, I fail to see the issue.

If you get to e.g. 100 Hide today with bonuses from every item slot, and 80 Spot also with bonuses from every item slot, then this change would (assuming all items grant +3, and wearing 11 items, now only getting bonuses from 1 item) reduce the maximum Hide to 70, while also reducing the maximum Spot to 50. End result being that you are in the same situation as now, but can make more interesting item choices than "maximum Hide".

No one is proposing changing things independently.

[Kayan]

Lots of very good points have been made. I'd like to say that as a new sneak, I'm about to drop somewhere in the neighborhood of 1.5 million gold on sneak gear. It would be really great if that didn't suddenly become redundant to me and all the other characters who have spent significant amounts of gold or time trading and adventuring to acquire sneak gear.

The point could be made that "Well, with the new system spending that much on sneak gear wouldn't even be necessary," but this is the system we have, right now, and have had for the life of the server.

[Garnet]

Since the proposal would change stacking for Hide, Move Silently, Spot, and Listen together (and all other skills too), rather than in a vacuum, I fail to see the issue.

If you get to e.g. 100 Hide today with bonuses from every item slot, and 80 Spot also with bonuses from every item slot, then this change would (assuming all items grant +3, and wearing 11 items, now only getting bonuses from 1 item) reduce the maximum Hide to 70, while also reducing the maximum Spot to 50. End result being that you are in the same situation as now, but can make more interesting item choices than "maximum Hide".

I completely disagree it's not the same. It takes a lot of dedication to get too 100 hide or 80 spot. Those who can get there are making sacrifices to be a cut above the rest in that specific facet of the game. I'll steal "JustAnotherGuys" phrase of "dedicated spotter" in the sense that this becomes a game of cat and mouse (dedicated spotters vs dedicated stealther's) and it's absolutely lovely to be apart of . By capping equipment, your going to end up with this sort of situation (example below) and ruin the cat and mouse game:

Spotter (non dedicated)
"My class gets spot, ill dump 33 points into it because I have the class skill, or its a background trait I added through the pop-up and its... only 33 points to block all sneaks from hiding from me basically across the board. add my one +3 spot gear, and with the +d20 spot dice roll, I now have the potential to see all sneaks with 56 or less. I don't need to do any more here cause I'm basically the max now to see them as its very unlikely they can get any higher, no other sacrifices needed... So I'll wear all my +4 AC gear or other +3 gear instead knowing I can see them."

Sneaker (Dedicated)
33 points in Hide and Move-silent (we need two skills to stay hidden), get +3 for each ... sacrifice feats so I can get the 'skill focus x2' to add a measly +3 more points, stealthy +2 points, and I end up with a total of 41.... which means I'm basically going to get spotted every time with no ability to get it higher). I guess if I want to take it higher, I am forced to play bard so I can use heroism... skill song... and other potentially 'non-fitting' rp classes just so I can sneak reliably again since those 'beat the cap'. A regular 'Rogue' who doesn't want to play magic and bards is basically dead at this point in the stealth game."

Like someone mentioned, a sneak really needs to be 20/21 points higher than a spotter to make it even viable. That spot check dice roll is just running over an over trying to find 'sneakers'. As you can imagine a sneaker getting caught is game over (which is usually dire consequences) we stake our whole RP and being on this fact.

People who really want to be part of the 'mouse/sneak' play style are generally willing to 'go all in' to make it happen to avoid the 'cats/spotters'.... but adding a skill cap makes it so we have 'cats(dedicated-spotters)' but now also 'kittens(added 33 points of spot on any class) who have way less dedicated/investment 'join the hunt' while only having to 'dabble' in their skills... Since all the mice can't sneak that good anyway and are fighting that +20d dice roll every 6 seconds....

Ugh sorry this is really becoming "Sneak vs spot" now.... If you want to put skills caps on all the other skills *shrugs* just please leave Hide/Move-Silent + Spot/listen alone so the 'cat/mouse' game isn't killed If the answer is -no- and this change must affect 'all skills' then this topic really feels like an attack on us "dedicated" RP sneak players.

[Deragnost]

I agree with Garnet about the sneakers.

And I am against it because Perform is basically the main offense for a bard.
I refuse to believe the only way to build a bard is to have CHA to only 12 or 13 (because +3/+4 items!) and all the rest on Strength... or going for the classic 21 STR / 21 CHA and going EDM.

Also about the TKL system, for a few songs I have, I gotta beat a Perform DC of 65 to make a single copy!

[zhazz]

It might be then that, given the mixed feedback so far, a first step could be to only apply the proposal to the following skills:

• Acrobatics
• Appraise
• Athletics
• Concentration
• Craft Skills
• Diplomacy
• Disable Device
• Escape Artist
• Gather Information
• Heal
• Intimidate
• Linguistics
• Lore Skills
• Open Lock
• Parry
• Perform
• Profession Skills
• Ride
• Survival
• Use Magic Device

While excluding the following skills interacting with each other in/out of combat:

• Bluff
• Disguise
• Hide
• Listen
• Move Silently
• Search
• Sense Motive
• Set Trap*
• Sleight of Hand
• Spot

*; Not sure how this one interacts with Search, so included it here.

All skills in the first list should not have any interaction with any other skills, making it possible to change their respective formulas as necessary.
The skills in the second list have some sort of interaction with each other, making them more complex to balance.

Of course a split like such does mean the code becomes more complex to maintain, and it may be difficult for the player(s), especially new ones, to properly gauge how the skill system works. That's a solvable issue, however.

[Ithilan]

I agree with Garnet about the sneakers.

And I am against it because Perform is basically the main offense for a bard.
I refuse to believe the only way to build a bard is to have CHA to only 12 or 13 (because +3/+4 items!) and all the rest on Strength... or going for the classic 21 STR / 21 CHA and going EDM.

Also about the TKL system, for a few songs I have, I gotta beat a Perform DC of 65 to make a single copy!

My build is neither of those. It is possible, but its tricky.

And I second this.. bards need a complete rework in order for this change to be viable with changing perform. And I do mean a complete rework. From the perform requirements to obtain X or Y song, to the damage and effects of said songs.

And after stacking incredible gear that's self found, a bunch of us need a new inventory too, which I do not see as part of the changes suggested here or even a means to mitigate 10 years of gear hunting being spat on, for someone's representation in an event being more digestible in number representations, whilst still being a level 30 demi god with an attack bonus that makes Helm jealous.

TL;DR whine: If we are trying to emulate level 10 characters, just level cap us at level 10 already or do a vault wipe, having gathered gear on 10+ level 30s for the life span of the server to now be told RP I'm not a part of is more important feels like a low blow.

[DaloLorn]

There is no relation between emulating level 10 characters and the removal of skill/save stacking: Stacking itself is an NWNism (not nearly the only one), and the amount of gameplay that has to actively bend to accommodate it is staggering. In many ways, level 30 PCs in PnP are a pale shadow of what we have on BG, and the only reason we don't effortlessly steamroll the server is that our monster stats are also cranked up to eleven to compensate.

However, yes, once you remove stacking, you need to undo all the other damage it's created across the history of the PW (and the game itself) or you've actively made it worse. That's no small task, and as much as I like to harp about its benefits, I don't see it happening without years of focused development.

[Steve]

, I don't see it happening without years of focused development.

Put AI to work adjusting all the blueprints, then upload after review. Godz, if only were possible….

[Ithilan]

There is no relation between emulating level 10 characters and the removal of skill/save stacking: Stacking itself is an NWNism (not nearly the only one), and the amount of gameplay that has to actively bend to accommodate it is staggering. In many ways, level 30 PCs in PnP are a pale shadow of what we have on BG, and the only reason we don't effortlessly steamroll the server is that our monster stats are also cranked up to eleven to compensate.

However, yes, once you remove stacking, you need to undo all the other damage it's created across the history of the PW (and the game itself) or you've actively made it worse. That's no small task, and as much as I like to harp about its benefits, I don't see it happening without years of focused development.

But wont the effect of this change just be more skill stacking? You can now dedicate less item slots to maximizing the skill cap for each skill, allowing a higher overall skill stacking than the few extremely dedicated ones?

In terms of bards this change would also change the dynamics of build viability and diversity. Basically the barrier to entry for a high performing song bard is lowered, making it easier for the strength and EDM bard to maximize their perform and namely requiem output, dedicating other item slots to concentration, saves, HP and stats directly benefitting their melee gameplay. Whilst the charisma bard who has their entire gameplay revolving around the song usage, find themselves in a less beneficial position from many of the item alternatives they now have freed up and can never get the combat prowess of the melee oriented bard that is nearly reaching their song performance levels. The difference would generally just be down to Charisma modifier, making the songbird builds a +4-5 higher perform build than your average non Cha build.

Maybe im misinterpreting the changes a bit in that regard. But it would by my logic make it more possible to cap out on item bonusses for more skills than previously and favors certain types of builds for bards in particular. That is assuming the lost perform skills from the change are integrated in to every bard song's base performance.

[DaloLorn]

But wont the effect of this change just be more skill stacking? You can now dedicate less item slots to maximizing the skill cap for each skill, allowing a higher overall skill stacking than the few extremely dedicated ones?

Per the SRD, bonuses of the same type (with items typically conferring enhancement bonuses) generally can't stack at all, and there are a lot of guidelines regarding what kind of stats land in which item slot. NWN, and BG doubly so, blatantly ignores all of that in favor of enabling and encouraging you to stack up +50 ranks' worth of skill buffs, +20 points' worth of save buffs, +20 points' worth of AB buffs, etc., with as many of those being functionally or actually permanent as you can manage. The result is a lot of runaway math, which then gets 'corrected' through the generous application of more runaway math.

In terms of bards this change would also change the dynamics of build viability and diversity. Basically the barrier to entry for a high performing song bard is lowered, making it easier for the strength and EDM bard to maximize their perform and namely requiem output, dedicating other item slots to concentration, saves, HP and stats directly benefitting their melee gameplay. Whilst the charisma bard who has their entire gameplay revolving around the song usage, find themselves in a less beneficial position from many of the item alternatives they now have freed up and can never get the combat prowess of the melee oriented bard that is nearly reaching their song performance levels. The difference would generally just be down to Charisma modifier, making the songbird builds a +4-5 higher perform build than your average non Cha build.

Maybe im misinterpreting the changes a bit in that regard. But it would by my logic make it more possible to cap out on item bonusses for more skills than previously and favors certain types of builds for bards in particular. That is assuming the lost perform skills from the change are integrated in to every bard song's base performance.

Per a naive interpretation assuming the least possible effort, yes: you are correct. A more reasonable approach would be to reevaluate how the mechanics of CHA bards compare to STR bards. For instance, a few years ago I suggested focusing the Requiem formula around CHA as a primary factor with Perform taking a lesser role, resulting in a long-overdue nerf to STR Requiem with little to no negative effect to CHA Requiem; perhaps even a buff, depending on whether there is any perceived need to improve CHA bard performance. The exact nature of the new formula will vary, of course, depending on whether it's designed for a post-stacking world, but you get the idea.

Designing these revamps is not the hard part. Getting consensus (e.g. we've seen in this thread that there are some people who will reject the change no matter how hard you try to address possible issues), and executing the bloody thing across a codebase as large and messy as BG's; that is the hard part. It's why Rhifox's dreams of a PvE revamp fell through, among other things.

TL;DR: You can have a tight, well-designed system, or you can have a happy playerbase. On a PW this old... well, this thread stands as proof that you can't do both.

[Steve]

You can have a tight, well-designed system, or you can have a happy playerbase. On a PW this old... well, this thread stands as proof that you can't do both.

I object to this comment!!!

[Deragnost]

For instance, a few years ago I suggested focusing the Requiem formula around CHA as a primary factor with Perform taking a lesser role, resulting in a long-overdue nerf to STR Requiem with little to no negative effect to CHA Requiem; perhaps even a buff, depending on whether there is any perceived need to improve CHA bard performance. The exact nature of the new formula will vary, of course, depending on whether it's designed for a post-stacking world, but you get the idea.

I mean, one could always say

Damage = CHA Mod * 10

and be done with it.

[Ithilan]

All im reading is "lets streamline the bard class in to 3 viable builds and nothing in between" which is really sad.

I think a lot of these suggested changes are more about "what other people have" than what is on the players own character sheet and it ends up streamlining everything in to a non-choice setting with less diversity and viability.

[zhazz]

Let's not get bogged down on specific classes please
All issues are solvable, though some are more of a hassle to solve than others.

There's a lot of worries being shared in this thread. All of them valid, but daresay a bit overly pessimistic.
A change such as what I propose isn't going to happen overnight. Nor is it going to happen in a vacuum. Most of the worries seem to boil down to:
"Today I need X in skill A to be able to counter Skill B, and stay relevant against content Y. Reducing skills makes that impossible!"
Which would of course be true if only the skill caps changed. But that's not the case. Formulas need to be updated. Monster stats need to be adjusted. DM guidelines for DCs need to be adjusted.

There's a lot that would need to happen in unison. The proposal is only valid if all the minutia change at the same time.

Therefore:
Assuming our very smart developers and staff can make the necessary change, without negatively impacting builds or build diversity, how do people feel about reducing skill bonus stacking?

[DaloLorn]

Assuming our very smart developers and staff can make the necessary change, without negatively impacting builds or build diversity, how do people feel about reducing skill bonus stacking?

Amazing. I've spent much of my dev era wishing to do it, ever since Rhi first raised the notion.

... Mind you, despite the time I spend trying to clear up various misconceptions throughout this thread, it bears remembering that I'm in the slow process of dragging myself out the door, so my opinion should naturally matter less than that of someone who hasn't set his mind on leaving yet.