Reduce Weight

[Louvaine]

Antras says he needs room for RP items, I point out that all items are RP items. There is nothing snarky about it, I don't claim to be better than anyone else. I'm sorry you felt otherwise, RoseMiriel.

I see your responses and still don't understand the reasoning behind this suggestion. It seems to me like it's a way of skipping a game mechanic that you don't enjoy. An example of the same principle would be to ask for more skill points in order to role-play a more capable character.

I get that other servers, games, or systems have bags. Do you understand how adding bags (or reducing item weight as an alternate solution) would change more than your character?

If it is DM quest items, an item that you think should not weigh as much, please form a list. Wands, elixirs, scrolls, and other consumables have a limit for a reason. Your Dolly might not.

[RoseMiriel]

-That was something that didn’t need stated, as the example I gave before anyone understands.This comes off as snarky/condescending.

-You say your not but again your assuming I don’t like the weight mechanics? Which is false I take extra strength and drop hp all the time so I can carry stuff. ((My problem is inventory space))

-Feels like a bit of projection. Do you not like the game mechanics of consumables? Why do you feel they should way more then rl/pnp, to balance the game? Last I checked the game isn’t rp.

-The reason I support this suggestion is even my heaviest wand is not 1lb and it seems silly that our in game wands are over 100% heavier when we preach Roleplay is number one yet this fictional thing called balance is…effectively changing things to suit it.

-I am happy for a UMD balance to be traded in, depending on the wand level you need more UMD. Perhaps even if your worried mages would have unfair advantage make them need UMD for wands too?

-I still want bags for ease of life cause I hate pulling from storage it’s a slow process when you have lots of stuff, I wanna spend more time role playing not moving items.

[Ghost]

Turn down the heat here before I'm forced to put a lid on it.

Treat people's words as genuine and stop reading between the lines, looking for hostility to react to.

[Louvaine]

Okay, so it's about inventory slots and not the actual carrying capacity. Do you realise how big of an impact allowing more inventory space will have on the economy just so you don't have to play within the current bounds of inventory management?

How do you propose to combat this?

[RoseMiriel]

*doesn't have a amulet of ghost speak*

Okay, so it's about inventory slots and not the actual carrying capacity. Do you realise how big of an impact allowing more inventory space will have on the economy just so you don't have to play within the current bounds of inventory management?

How do you propose to combat this?

-That's me and a different topic I already suggested about, but the one bag I am most hoping for shouldn't impact it as much as the others would that being a bag to hold props, for ease of life and nothing more, Considering I use them in rp a lot, but even more so the fact that when I set up for events I sometimes need large numbers of props and withdrawing from horse/storage takes a lot of time, so when a reset happens it's a nightmare of time to put props back up.

-"Just so you don't have to play within the current bounds of inventory management?" Why do you putting things on me like that. It's not that big of a deal to me but I would like more space. I don't have all the answers I have a suggestion there is a difference, looking to others is what I would hope for suggestions ect. Not to be put down for having Suggestions.

((if you want a example of how to talk nicer))
-I know it's hard to manage your inventory sometimes but a increased inventory could effect the economy in a negative way.

-Ghost-
-also projecting much? I'm not hostile I'm addressing being talked down to with sarcasm. If you don't like it do what you did when you ruined my event disappear and don't apologize for your mistake, just put the blame on me again. Why am I expected to stay quite and let you or them push me around cause I don't like the way you are treating me.

-With a sorry you can't take a strike at me again saying I'm trying to be nice "It seems to me like it's a way of skipping a game mechanic that you don't enjoy" this statement didn't help the conversation at all other then to say they think i'm trying to skip the weight mechanics, when I have already mentioned the only reason I supported this suggestion was cause wands don't weigh 1 lb

-No need to ban me I won't make suggestions anymore or support them. Every step I take to get closer in this community, the further away I move.

[selhan]

Since we cannot have bags for wands, staffs and other, My suggestion is to reduce weight alot from wands, scrolls and other magical items.

Curently one wand have weight of 1.0 pound, even boots are more lighter (0.5 punds), So yea, Idea is to reduce weight of wands, to 0.1 pounds. Since weight its issue for alot spellcasters (who do not invest alot strg.)

This is the initial post from the Arthur so Im going to keep my response to this and not all that other stuff.
Scoll's are 0.1 pounds. Makes sense
Clothing/Armor ranges from 2 -50 Pounds - Makes sense
Accessories / rings/ amulets etc. 0.1 to 2 pounds - Makes sense
Additional clothing / Boots / cloaks etc 0.5-2 pounds - Makes sense
Shield 5-7 pounds depending on size - Makes sense
Weapons Smallest is dagger 1 pound , Biggest is Warmace 9 pounds- Makes sense

Prayer Book - 6 pounds? WTF!
Brooch of Shield 0.5 Pounds Makes sense
Scabbard 0.5 pounds Makes sense
Jewelry Cast 0 pounds. ((Assuming its Rp where all our amulets, rings etc are stored in))
Appearance changer kit pounds. ((Assuming Make up / Disguise stuff, hair ties or wtf have you))

Wands 1 Pound?!

Now last I check...we all want to lean more towards "Pnp". But we dont want to reduce wand weights because it gives some players advantage? Im sorry but this the part I will call out "Selective Balancing and Selective Immersion".

According to www.d20srd.org "A typical wand is 6 inches to 12 inches long and about ¼ inch thick, and often weighs no more than 1 ounce!"

According to https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Wands it reads the same.

According to FR Wiki it gives 5e stats where the wand weighs 1 pound.

What I'm pointing out is, if we are claiming to make this game lean towards "Pnp" , we should do that across the board, and stop worrying about certain class advantages. Lou did pointed out something..

The characters with low STR are already equipped with more other stats to compensate. An example would be high INT, resulting in more skill points, and high CON, resulting in hit points....

And this I can fully agree. However Wands being 1 pound for the sake of complaints that a person carrying too much wands give too much of an advantage dont holds merit in my POV. Because the "Con" to that is more bag space gets used up, resulting in less things to carry For some classes , to put points in UMD is something they rather not do, but for other classes, its a damn must. Because not every build can shrug off an incoming Death Spell or shake off some Mind Controlling one. Nerfing the ones with 10 Fort/10 Will of their UMD capacity and letting the other guy walk around with base 30 is balance? I think not.

I'm already at a point I have to determine what I'm going to do for the day, because I have to go to my pack horse and offload or withdraw items as a hard necessary for what I'm going to do because of bag space. Sounds immersive right? Yes I agree. Do I like it ? Nope. Does it effect my mood to play? Yes.

Reducing wand weight is doing what this server is claiming to be doing. "Leaning towards pnp". But keeping Bone Wands weighing the same as a Metal weapon in this version of a FR game is not leaning to pnp. Its "Selective Content". More Wands = More bag space used. That is already a counter.

Now if we DID have a magic bag of holding, that would fix ALL this mess of disagreements and complaints from both points of view and every damn person would be quiet and have a cheezing smile . and if someone says otherwise they full of BS. However the sad truth is, as much as it would like to be done, from what I know, theres a big complication in doing it. Until someone is able to figure out how to go around that with no hiccups or breaking peoples hearts, we have to manage without.

[Ewe]

Selhan, there's other things about wands we are not doing from PNP.

For instance:

1. We offer spells that simply don't exist on wands in pnp. We don't follow the wands table.

2. Wand costs are much higher in PNP and not as easy to make. The cost to create a wand of stoneskin is 10,500 gp, 840 XP, plus 12,500 gp for the material components.

3. In order to activate a wand you have to actually equip it in your and to use it. In NWN2 you can spam them while still holding a sword and shield without needing to swap weapons out to hold the wand.

4. Wand crafting would involve more time and rolling for special qualities. In short, we can obtain wands much more easily and quickly with more powerful options than in PNP.


So fundamentally, wands are a lot more powerful in NWN2 than PNP. So I don't think the argument of "make them closer to PNP" is genuine here.

This isn't even where it stops, as we're not following UMD rules for wands and many other things about wands from PNP.

[DaloLorn]

1. We offer spells that simply don't exist on wands in pnp. We don't follow the wands table.

This is not a thing. Any spell of level 4 or less can be put on a wand, unless explicitly stated otherwise. (Which, AFAIK, it never is in PnP, so we're actually more restrictive than PnP on this front!) The "wands table" in the SRD is just a guideline for generating loot drops.

2. Wand costs are much higher in PNP and not as easy to make. The cost to create a wand of stoneskin is 10,500 gp, 840 XP, plus 12,500 gp for the material components.

Actually, until the next patch, most wands are still twice as expensive as PnP. NWN2 charges full market value to craft a wand, and we've only now brought that down to the PnP values. Additionally, wand CLs are static in NWN2 crafting, so you may still need to pay considerably more than you might want for a given spell. (For instance, I'm pretty sure GMW wands are CL15 or something, but the cheapest way to get a +3 GMW would be to make a CL12 wand.)

You're right about stoneskin, specifically, being cheaper than PnP! But we have no wandable spells on BG with material components, so the deviation is not in that we're ignoring the 50x material component surcharge, but that some of our spells don't have expensive material components in the first place.

3. In order to activate a wand you have to actually equip it in your and to use it. In NWN2 you can spam them while still holding a sword and shield without needing to swap weapons out to hold the wand.

... We could probably change this if we wanted to. I don't really care one way or the other.

4. Wand crafting would involve more time and rolling for special qualities. In short, we can obtain wands much more easily and quickly with more powerful options than in PNP.

Well, you're half right here. Per PnP rules, you would only be able to craft one magical item (whether a wand or a scroll) per day, but this is really not appropriate to a PW environment. But wands don't have special qualities in 3.5e, and even if they did, I don't see how not rolling for special qualities lets us obtain more powerful wands than PnP.

You might've gotten your wires crossed with rods, which are more powerful than wands in a lot of ways... but even then there's no rolling for special qualities. Are you thinking about another edition, maybe?

This isn't even where it stops, as we're not following UMD rules for wands and many other things about wands from PNP.

For reference, the full set of rules that we're not following:

• Casting a spell from a wand or staff requires you to either have the spell on your class list (sort-of emulated by Only Usable By properties on the wand/staff), or pass a DC20 UMD check every time you use it. We just fudge it with OUBs, which prevent you from using the wand until you have 11 modified UMD, at which point you will always succeed. (People paying attention to the public Discord will know that I proposed changing to the PnP behavior internally, but it wasn't a very popular notion.)
• You cannot imbue metamagics into a wand. (Fixed; coming soon! This will of course increase the effective spell level of the wand, possibly preventing you from crafting a wand with that spell, and definitely increasing the cost of the wand... but it's an option now!)
• Wands weigh around 1 ounce. (If I tried to implement this, I might just set them to weigh nothing at all... but I'm not sure it's wise while the UMD rules remain as they are.)
• All the necessary materials for wandcrafting are counted as part of the gold cost, and you are simply assumed to have acquired them before starting to craft the wand. (... Though I don't think we'll be ditching bone wands anytime soon! Just saying they shouldn't technically exist per RAW.)

The net effect is that wands are markedly more expensive and less versatile, but easier to (reliably) use and considerably harder to carry around. But more powerful, they are not. Only more abundant.

[Louvaine]

Bag for props sounds harmless, if it's possible to contain the stuff like tents and signs in there.

[DaloLorn]

Bag for props sounds harmless, if it's possible to contain the stuff like tents and signs in there.

They'd be bare props, without any special names or descriptions. Probably not satisfactory for most people, assuming the bags were even greenlit for creation.

[selhan]

Bag for props sounds harmless, if it's possible to contain the stuff like tents and signs in there.

That helps with bag space only really. Props hardly weigh anything most dont even weigh anything at all. You can carry 20 Prop Tables and dont even feel 0.1 pound. If it was okay, Dalo could come up with something like we did with the Gem Bags. (Immersion breaking for some) But like he said they'd be bare props, without any special names or descriptions, some people really care for their custom descriptions. Part of why we dont have Magic Bags already.

But still doesn't fix the authors weight issue. Dont get me wrong, Im not saying someone with 10 str should be able to carry 300 pounds worth of items. Reducing wand weigh even by half or less something like from 1 pound to 0.7 even is a little bit of that quality of life and makes a whole lot more sense. Less work, makes sense, less immersive breaking, less weight = more ppl happy.

And because Im still tripping off of it..Prayer book 6 pounds? WTF!

[Ewe]

Dalo in your “complete list” you didn’t add that the wand must be equipped/held.

[renshouj]

3. In order to activate a wand you have to actually equip it in your and to use it. In NWN2 you can spam them while still holding a sword and shield without needing to swap weapons out to hold the wand.

... We could probably change this if we wanted to. I don't really care one way or the other.

This sounds interesting, I like it

[matelener]

3. In order to activate a wand you have to actually equip it in your and to use it. In NWN2 you can spam them while still holding a sword and shield without needing to swap weapons out to hold the wand.

... We could probably change this if we wanted to. I don't really care one way or the other.

Fantastic idea for Hogwarts RP. But with how buggy weapon swapping is, it's going to be horrible for gameplay.

[Ewe]

To clarify, I’m not suggesting that we need to do this mechanically in nwn2. Just that it’s a difference from pnp and logically your character would need to do this in rp and so on if using a wand.