Balance??

[matelener]

Few points on hide/ms and rogues:

- grandfather items and the difference they create... While having a sword with 1d8 more damage is already judged by many unfair, ms/hide is much more broken in this regard - we're talking about a disparity of +20 hide/ms between the new and old sneaks.

- Availability of weapons with hide/ms - there are daggers with +3 EB and +3 hide/ms in a BG vendor, shortswords with that bonuses are quite common too. What about the rest of weapons? Kamas / clubs / kukris etc. ? +6 hide/ms is a massive difference - it takes 3 feats for already a feat starved class that is rogue to get +5 hide/ms ( 2 x skill focuses + stealthy)

- Druids / Rangers / Arcanists / Warlocks all get bonuses to hide/ms through spells but... none of roguish PRCs do. (neither does rogue as a base class)

//edit: forgot about the divine seeker but i think this PRC should be forgotten

[mrieder79]

There are +2 H/ms kamas and kukris in the loot table. Not sure about clubs. don't know if any +2 H/ms kukris are in stores. I know sneak kamas are not.

[Blackman D]

well as far as the gear goes, many have wanted to have some of the old things (+3s) restored to lessen the gap between older and newer players (mostly the older players asking for it for the newer guys) but again as soon as you bring up stealth improvement give it about two days or so and its gonna get locked

the last convo did go to QC and was going favorably but then went to a stand still because of other issues

[thids]

That would probably help. Again, I'm not on staff so I'm just guessing.

There's no difference whether you're on staff or not, if your idea is good it is gonna be taken into account

In general, people, please, stop belittiling yourself, if your name is not coloured differently, it doesn't mean you don't have something worthy to contribute.

That's not true. I only take people with rainbow colored names seriously.

[The Whistler]

The reason why I would not implement this class, is that basically, whoever doesn't take it is inferior. "Must have" classes are usually a bad idea.

You mean like Assassin/SD for rogues ?

Or perhaps ASoCK for sorcerers ?

There are already plenty of examples of must-have classes on the server. Chad expressed some concern regarding DC's combination of High BAB and full SA progression. Kinda funny considering the server used to have Charnag Maelthra as a playable class. It was never removed for balance reasons AFAIK.

If you give the class a clear-cut purpose as a brute force sneak attacker and make it less desirable to take as a sneak rogue by shaving the sneak bonuses and imposing steeper prereqs (something that only a combat rogue would take, for example Weapon Spec) I think the class could be made kosher.

[Blackman D]

charnag maelthra was removed because flaming fist was removed, FF was removed because of abuse

CM was basically victim of being a sister PrC to FF, couldnt remove one without the other

[Aelcar]

The reason why I would not implement this class, is that basically, whoever doesn't take it is inferior. "Must have" classes are usually a bad idea.

You mean like Assassin/SD for rogues ?

Or perhaps ASoCK for sorcerers ?

I don't know...Assassin/SD are the only way to open up HiPS (Ranger isn't a choice, obviously), which is the best way to go for SA Rogues. This kind of character holds a special place, though, because it really depends on a feat. And this is two classes already, which come with the original game (one has even been shaven with 19 DEX as a requirement).

ASoC is a great PrC for Sorcerer. Probably the best one. But again, it comes with the original game, nobody here introduced it. Alternatives were actually given to Arcane Casters that are fully practiceable: you can pick 3x metamagic feats instead of the pre-requs of ASoC, and invest in other classes (like Archmage, Shadow Adept, Pale Master, Blood Magus...). It's a tradeoff with DC for flexibility and blasting power.

I wouldn't want to introduce a "must have" class 6 years into the game, though. Like I said before, it's my opinion, and my suggestion. Nothing more.

[mrm3ntalist]

Chad expressed some concern regarding DC's combination of High BAB and full SA progression. Kinda funny considering...

Its not funny until you see an archer build with a High BAB SA PRC in combination with Assassin's Death Attack and manyshot/Rapidshot, doing 100sx3 (7attacks, 3 on the first flurry) damage out of stealth, because they reach 26BAB.

100 extra damage is something to think about, isnt it?

[The Whistler]

Its not funny until you see an archer build with a High BAB SA PRC in combination with Assassin's Death Attack and manyshot/Rapidshot, doing 100sx3 (7attacks, 3 on the first flurry) damage out of stealth, because they reach 26BAB.

100 extra damage is something to think about, isnt it?

Well, here's an idea. Fix the manyshot+DA bug by replacing that extra 4d6 DA with SA.

Also, every self-respecting archer runs a combination of fighter(or bard)/assassin/AA/x. It's debatable whether EA or CM would be the better 4th class. Are there really archer builds that don't hit 26 BAB ?

It really is not as broken as you are making out it to be.

[Blackman D]

mine doesnt, shes old school AA, only hits 24 bab with bard assassin AA GT

[mrm3ntalist]

Its not funny until you see an archer build with a High BAB SA PRC in combination with Assassin's Death Attack and manyshot/Rapidshot, doing 100sx3 (7attacks, 3 on the first flurry) damage out of stealth, because they reach 26BAB.

100 extra damage is something to think about, isnt it?

Well, here's an idea. Fix the manyshot+DA bug by replacing that extra 4d6 DA with SA.

That is the thing Whistler. You have a gaming environment, that even with its current bugs and problems, it works the way the admins, devs and DMs want Any additions should be made by taking those issues into consideration. Now for example, a high BAB SA PRC will cause some issues with some type of builds. In order to fix that, more work is needed eg fix manyshot. I wish I had the knowledge to fix it. I don't. Those who do might not have the time, or prefer to invest their time on other things they like more.

Also, every self-respecting archer runs a combination of fighter(or bard)/assassin/AA/x. It's debatable whether EA or CM would be the better 4th class. Are there really archer builds that don't hit 26 BAB ?

It really is not as broken as you are making out it to be.

A rogue10/Assassin9/AA7/F4 for example, does more damage in the first flurry - damage around 100 each manyshot hit from stealth - than the class you mentioned, while it does less in the 2nd and 3rd flurry. The "problem" with the rogue is that because of the heavy rogue investment and Assassin it cant reach 26BAB to get the 3rd attack in the first flurry. If you change that rogue10 to a 10lvl HignBAB PRC then the 26BAB can be reached therefore giving this type of class a 50% damage boost ( from 200 to 300 ).

[Thorsson]

X5/Asn8/AA9/F8, where X is a high BAB sneak class...

Is everyone aware of the CM bug, if that class were still available?

[mrm3ntalist]

X5/Asn8/AA9/F8, where X is a high BAB sneak class...

isn't the average damage for that class around 70, for this server?

If you stop to Fighter4 and take a High BAB PRC with 5d6 damage in place of the X5 that's a 5d6 -2 more damage. ( in case the X5 is Elemental Archer ). Consider Rogue10/Assassin9/AA7/F4 for this example.

But to get that extra damage, you lose one attack in the first flurry

[thids]

From the QC thread, as that wasn't an appropriate place to continue the discussion:

There are several ridiculous factors in the BG mechanical system when it comes to raw mechanical power and balance, ranging from classes to feats. They are not likely to change or get hit by a nerfbat, ever. We can pretend that they will one day, but we all know they won't. I mean there are people ragequitting over bugs being fixed, I can't imagine what would happen if a class got significantly nerfed and brought in line with the wanted balance of the server. You need to figure out how to deal with those ridiculous factors, because treating them as outliers and ignoring them is not the correct solution.

That's a problem we always have and we will keep on having. To fix a bug that exists and that will affect many players is very difficult. It is difficult because no one want to waste other people's time. If you make one of the many Archer/assassin builds, and spend X amount of months to get it t level30, then a decision that will drop the effectiveness of your build will at the very least annoy you. I know there are some that wont mind, but the majority will be pissed.

So you need to offer rebuilds. To even consider that, a DM ( or many DMs ) need to offer their time. They need to sit on the nexus, helping players with items, wait for them to make their builds give them their items back... then go to the next player and repeat. How many fixes can you implement this way? How much those fixes worth in comparison to the players, DMs and devs time? Is for example the death attack/manyshot bug, worth that much for you?

Sure, if everything comes into place it will be fixed. If this was a paying job, it would have been fixed again.

Now I'm a bit confused. I understand that rebuilds would have to be offered if classes got changed significantly, but why would fixing obvious bugs (bugs that are obvious to anyone who can read) result in rebuilds? Shouldn't the policy be that there are no rebuilds for fixing obvious bugs? Including the now already notorious "coming soon" CL bug? If someone builds a character around a bug, they do so with the knowledge that the bug might get fixed at one point. If someone builds an archer which depends on that extra 5d6 damage, well, though break.


As for is it important? Yes, as evident from recent discussions about sneaks. Expose Weakness is another one. Do you know how many times I've seen someone say "oh well your AB is low, but who cares, you will get EW anyway lol"? It's a crutch feat for some, and needless icing on top of an already existing icing on the cake for others.


But what I meant in the above quote in particular is, some things won't be nerfed or brought in line ever. And that's fine, BG is an old server and rocking its foundation might not be smart. But that doesn't mean that the things which step waaaaaaay out of BG balance line should be ignored, because if they are, how can we seriously talk about any kind of balance?


When was the last time you guys had to beef up a PrC before introducing it to the server? My perspective is that majority of classes that get introduced get stomped down in power, leaving them barely recognizable husks of what they are and basically nothing more than flavor option for characters. Stomping mechanical power out of new things doesn't make up for the already existing "broken" stuff. My perception might be skewed on that, but that's how things seem to me.

[PaulImposteur]

From the QC thread, as that wasn't an appropriate place to continue the discussion:

There are several ridiculous factors in the BG mechanical system when it comes to raw mechanical power and balance, ranging from classes to feats. They are not likely to change or get hit by a nerfbat, ever. We can pretend that they will one day, but we all know they won't. I mean there are people ragequitting over bugs being fixed, I can't imagine what would happen if a class got significantly nerfed and brought in line with the wanted balance of the server. You need to figure out how to deal with those ridiculous factors, because treating them as outliers and ignoring them is not the correct solution.

That's a problem we always have and we will keep on having. To fix a bug that exists and that will affect many players is very difficult. It is difficult because no one want to waste other people's time. If you make one of the many Archer/assassin builds, and spend X amount of months to get it t level30, then a decision that will drop the effectiveness of your build will at the very least annoy you. I know there are some that wont mind, but the majority will be pissed.

So you need to offer rebuilds. To even consider that, a DM ( or many DMs ) need to offer their time. They need to sit on the nexus, helping players with items, wait for them to make their builds give them their items back... then go to the next player and repeat. How many fixes can you implement this way? How much those fixes worth in comparison to the players, DMs and devs time? Is for example the death attack/manyshot bug, worth that much for you?

Sure, if everything comes into place it will be fixed. If this was a paying job, it would have been fixed again.

Now I'm a bit confused. I understand that rebuilds would have to be offered if classes got changed significantly, but why would fixing obvious bugs (bugs that are obvious to anyone who can read) result in rebuilds? Shouldn't the policy be that there are no rebuilds for fixing obvious bugs? Including the now already notorious "coming soon" CL bug? If someone builds a character around a bug, they do so with the knowledge that the bug might get fixed at one point. If someone builds an archer which depends on that extra 5d6 damage, well, though break.


As for is it important? Yes, as evident from recent discussions about sneaks. Expose Weakness is another one. Do you know how many times I've seen someone say "oh well your AB is low, but who cares, you will get EW anyway lol"? It's a crutch feat for some, and needless icing on top of an already existing icing on the cake for others.


But what I meant in the above quote in particular is, some things won't be nerfed or brought in line ever. And that's fine, BG is an old server and rocking its foundation might not be smart. But that doesn't mean that the things which step waaaaaaay out of BG balance line should be ignored, because if they are, how can we seriously talk about any kind of balance?


When was the last time you guys had to beef up a PrC before introducing it to the server? My perspective is that majority of classes that get introduced get stomped down in power, leaving them barely recognizable husks of what they are and basically nothing more than flavor option for characters. Stomping mechanical power out of new things doesn't make up for the already existing "broken" stuff. My perception might be skewed on that, but that's how things seem to me.

Well in someone's case like myself, I never realised my Archer/Assassin's damage was the result of a bug. I always thought my decent damage was just because it was an optimized build I found online.

So in a case like mine, I'd be shocked to log on and find myself dealing less damage if I was not informed. Obviously now is a different case, since I now know I've been cheating. (Sorry)