NWN2: Storm of Zehir expansion (now confirmed)

[Maia]

@Shannow:

probably one thing that will balance this somewhat is giving secondary party members penalties in dialogues to their dialogue skills. like NPCs won't treat them all too seriously because none of them is a leader of the party (for example)

Please, no. Something like that would be appropriate for companions provided by the game, who join on short notice and have their own "personalities". There the leadership issues would be on the forefront. But a player-created party could be assumed to have been together for a long time and being more egalitarian and used to working in concert.

as SC pointed it out - I will be able to create 4 characters which if treated like 1 will have ideal dialogue skills.

Not unless you pump all their Cha to the skies. Don't forget that the skill checks are significantly modified by the attributes, so to have an "ideal" score one needs not only to pump the skill to the max, but also the attribute and to equip respective enhancing items. So, if they set the check thresholds high enough, then creating a party that succeeds at all checks should be a challenge / impossible.

Also, I very much hope that what skill one uses to "win" the dialog would also affect the outcome, at least sometimes. Or maybe even have long-ranging consequences? So that choice of a skill to use would be more important than the simple pass/fail.

I really like the dialog system as described by Davis. It would provide a rough characterization through gameplay of every member of a player-created party. No longer will they be simple meat-shields, but would, according to one's gamestyle surreptitiously evolve into something.

The only thing that worries me is that this expansion is very much a hack-and-slash one, but no official module so far had really engrossing, entertaining combat. Will there be formations? Will they fix "Quicken"? Will they implement the more tactical spells, such as "Contingency", etc? Will the enemies finally have a decent AI? Etc.

 

[Warden]

Fixed.

It's different Shannow.. winning battles is esential to complete the game. Having the right conversation skills is not. You see what I'm getting at? They could make very difficult skill checks which are not essential to finish the game - but to put an impossible battle which would make you unable to complete the game would be a bit weird.
And there's also one more element - battles at least involve a bit of thinking; spell and ability usage etc. Clicking on a dialogue option doesn't require any brain skill.

..
Oh, and there's another problem. You and Obsidian are all in the world dialogues and party conversations - and the game needs serious balancing of spells and abilities.

Aside from the problem with uber AC from spells and abilities which I mentioned before, there's another big imbalance.

Has anyone tried playing with a HIPS (hide in plain sight) character? I've tested it in MotB - created a hipser (rogue/shadowdancer) and tested if there's any remote chance a monster can spot/hear me while I'm hidden. No. With its 5 seconds cooldown you can beat ANYTHING; you attack, run away, hide, attack, run, hide - to infinity. And the monsters are UNABLE to spot you.
Seriously, Obisidian.. leave the party banter alone; fix such issues first. Remove hips or make it a number/day ability.

 

[Warden]

Not unless you pump all their Cha to the skies. Don't forget that the skill checks are significantly modified by the attributes, so to have an "ideal" score one needs not only to pump the skill to the max, but also the attribute and to equip respective enhancing items. So, if they set the check thresholds high enough, then creating a party that succeeds at all checks should be a challenge / impossible.

All their cha to the skies? You need to pump the charisma of only 1 character (out of 4 mind you..). Another can have max intel., the 3rd wisdom.. And they can all have perfect skills. Oh, and don't forget about the low level spells which increase stats by 4 (and therefore the appropriate skill).. another mega imbalance.

 

[Jasede]

That's actually how HIPS works in D&D, with the single limitation it only works while being near shadows.

And I don't think the spells or abilities needs balancing- the encounters do. If spells give a lot of AC, make enemies have a high AB - punish people who don't use their buff magic and potions. When I played stuff like this the DM would always punish you harshly if you tried to pick a fight without having potions of Barkskin, Protection from Evil, Shield, and so on ready.

Edit: Warden, seriously - there's no need to completely change the rule system just because you think it's overpowered. Yes, Bull's Strength, Endurance, etc, are -really- amazing level 2 spells. In fact they're so good they're better than some level 3 spells. But I'd really recommend not changing it; it's worked fine for everyone as long as encounters are balanced with this in mind.

 

[thesheeep]

Because you could still make a party that isn't perfect.
Which would be ineffective, but most probably more fun, since more RPG-like

You mean like.. we should make stupid and bad tactical decisions on purpose to correct the faulty design decisions?
I don't think so.

So not maxing the conversation values and not doing powergaming is stupid and a bad tactical decision?
That's some weird opinion of roleplaying.... Most DM's would hate you.

Anyway, skill points are so abundant that you simply cannot fail at distributing them, even if you want to. Especially if you have 4 custom characters available.

That may be a true problem...

 

[Jasede]

I don't really agree with this; skill points aren't that plentiful. However, having a high INT human Rogue does screw it up because he -will- have enough to max all dialogue skills and all the trap/lockpick skills you'll ever want.

 

[Warden]

That's actually how HIPS works in D&D, with the single limitation it only works while being near shadows.

Ah, yes.. then it's all ok. If D&D envisioned it to be broken (starting from PC lvl 7) then it's all perfectly right.
Jesus, you're a cow.

And I don't think the spells or abilities needs balancing- the encounters do. If spells give a lot of AC, make enemies have a high AB - punish people who don't use their buff magic and potions. When I played stuff like this the DM would always punish you harshly if you tried to pick a fight without having potions of Barkskin, Protection from Evil, Shield, and so on ready.

I totally disagree with this. This causes so much less variety in a game.
The end result is - if someone has a druid or a wizard in the party (+4 ac at least) battles become a walk in the park (that's how it works in pc games anyway..) and if you don't have them it becomes practically impossible. It should be challenging (but not impossible) for those who decide to travel without casters and also challenging for those who do have casters. And you can definitely achieve that by reducing the AC from various spells.

Not to mention the ridiculous +6 AC from improved combat expertise while a rogue is sneak attacking for 50 damage per round with a bow.


OH, AND PLEASE - NO MAXIMUM HP AT LEVEL UP. Half of max hp +1 would be fine I guess. Except on lvl 1 when you get full hp.

 

[Trash]

The dnd system is open to all sorts of abuse. It usually is up to the DM to prevent this, something a computer game is obviously not capable of.

 

[thesheeep]

Not to mention the ridiculous +6 AC from improved combat expertise while a rogue is sneak attacking for 50 damage per round with a bow.

Nonsense! Ever watched a Rambo movie?! That is perfectly valid!

 

[Warden]

So not maxing the conversation values and not doing powergaming is stupid and a bad tactical decision?
That's some weird opinion of roleplaying.... Most DM's would hate you.

Oh, so if you decide to max conversation skills you're suddenly powergaming? Please, leave that shitty word out if you want to discuss with arguments.

No, it would be totally weird if you decided to make all 4 of your custom characters stupid cretins who can barely talk. At least 1 should be able to have good conversation skills, no?

DMs? They can kiss my boots. While I projectile-vomit on them.

 

[Warden]

Edit: Warden, seriously - there's no need to completely change the rule system just because you think it's overpowered. Yes, Bull's Strength, Endurance, etc, are -really- amazing level 2 spells. In fact they're so good they're better than some level 3 spells. But I'd really recommend not changing it; it's worked fine for everyone as long as encounters are balanced with this in mind.

No, it has not worked fine, especially not in a PC game. Maybe such mega imbalances are acceptable for some nostalgic cretins who play tabletop d&d with dms, but for computer games it's not thus it has to be changed. Not because I dislike it but because it's objectively totally imbalanced.

 

[Maia]

Clicking on a dialogue option doesn't require any brain skill.

In a well-designed game it does. Equally, using different options should lead to different outcomes in such a game, at least part of the time. Whether SoZ will be so designed only future can tell.

I do agree with you about fixing of abilities and feats (Quicken and shape-shifting weirdness are my pet peeves), but a good dialog system is more important to me.

All their cha to the skies? You need to pump the charisma of only 1 character (out of 4 mind you..). Another can have max intel., the 3rd wisdom.. And they can all have perfect skills.

It is not that simple to ensure that the character that has the highest attribute also has access to all the skills that rely on it _and_ enough skill points to max them out. Then there are other variables like racial skill-boosting feats, etc. There are also dice rolls. And again, I really hope that chosing a certain skill check over all the others would have repercussions beyond pass/fail. IIRC, there are racial/class-specific dialog options as well.

High-Int human rogue would still be left in the dust by a half-elf sorceror where Bluff check is concerned. Etc. It all depends on the difficulty of the checks. If it is high enough, then a party with ideal dialog skill ratings would have to sacrifice other things - combat stats, feats, etc.

 

[Warden]

But then the skill checks should be really high - with a static take 20. So only someone with, lets say, bluff 12 can pass the check.

 

[Shannow]

Oh, and there's another problem. You and Obsidian are all in the world dialogues and party conversations - and the game needs serious balancing of spells and abilities.

You can talk about your concerns with "ability abuse" as much as you want. But using that as a strawman in the dialogue discussion is weak, even for you.

I'm replaying NWN2 OC right now. And guess what. My char has all dialogue skills apart from intimidate maxed. And he doesn't even have rogue levels...But: he can hardly do anything else, he can't craft, parry, hide, move silently, spot, etc. The non-interactive skills are all dumped on the companions.
The new dialogue system gives me the most options while making it possible to make a party I really want, distributing stats without wondering if I'll have enough skill points (do you guys seriously never play fighters?) and feeling more natural.
And for me roleplaying isn't gimping my char (party) in a way that only allows for few ways of playing and then being happy that I can replay it again with different stats/skills only to see what other strategies on can use, what more content there is.
I rather make a balanced char/party that can deal with or adapt to most challenges and gives me the most dialogue options so that I can chose the one most fitting and ideally have different consequences for those choices.

 

[Warden]

You can talk about your concerns with "ability abuse" as much as you want. But using that as a strawman in the dialogue discussion is weak, even for you.

How is that a strawman argument? Is this topic specifically about SoZ dialogues? *looks at the topic title* No dear, it is not.

I don't know how you manage not to maximize your skills even if you try to fail the hardest you can - do you distribute your skill points to nonexistent skills? Buggy copy?

Hey, it would be best for you to just disappear from this topic and stop with the nonsense.

 

[Anthony Davis]

I'm not sure what the heck you guys are arguing about right now.

I'll try to answer what I can.

No, you are not required to take ANYONE extra with you. I do think that trying to survive with a solo low level character will be an exercise in frustration, but go crazy.

As for the other stuff, am I to understand that people are now complaining about being able to make a balanced party with balanced strengths and weaknesses?

srsly?



If you don't want to make a balanced party...then don't. Even if you had a party that was able to unlock every dialog choice in the game, however unlikely that is, you still can't choose them all because you can only make ONE choice per dialog node.

 

[Kingston]

you still can't choose them all because you can only make ONE choice per dialog node.

Am I to assume that most dialogues will have many options, then?

 

[Lumpy]

As long as it's not possible to take every skill without gimping your combat ability, it should be fine.
How do cohorts work? Are they in addition to the 4 party members or do they replace one of them? Can you peruse the dialogue skills of cohorts, or will they only act on their own accord?

 

[Lurkar]

As for the other stuff, am I to understand that people are now complaining about being able to make a balanced party with balanced strengths and weaknesses?

srsly?

WELCOME TO THE CODEX!

 

[CrimsonAngel]

I think the prospect of actually having the options that they would like is making them fell something they don't understand.

They don't know how to react to any thing "Good" any more.
Now i like the Idea for the conversation system.

Now i have a Question Anthony.
How many Join able NPC's are we looking at in all.

Can i have a FULL evil party with only join able NPC's and a full good and so on

 

[Anthony Davis]

I don't know how many total NPCs there are that can join your party. I believe you can only have 2 at any given time.

So I believe it looks like this:

One player created character
Up to Three party members
Up to Two NPC cohorts

Total of 6 in the party.

 

[Anthony Davis]

you still can't choose them all because you can only make ONE choice per dialog node.

Am I to assume that most dialogues will have many options, then?

I'm not a designer so I can't give you any metrics.



Remember, we are not making a sequel to Mask of the Betrayer.

Our goal is to capture the essence or spirit of "fortune and glory" adventuring. Of course there is a main storyline with nefarious bad guys, but there are also lots of other adventure areas that have no bearing on the main story.

 

[easychord]

The dialog system sounds something like what I would have wanted. Not sure about dialog options not showing up unless you have a minimum skill as I liked the way it worked in NWN2 with a DC roll, but I guess that is still there and the filter is used for usability.

I'm looking forward to naming my party. I hope that it's used in game by newspapers or the like. I would also find it amusing to print fliers advertising my party/company.

 

[themadhatter114]

Oh no, you could have a gimped bard/rogue single character with every single dialogue skill maxed.

Or, even more powergamey, non-gimped bard AND rogue with stealth and every dialogue skill maxed between them. Or wait, that might be a fun party that's not powergamey.

Maybe throw in a ranger and a monk and you can have a complete stealth-based party with spells, songs, curses, backstab, every dialogue option, and pretty good combat ability, but no high level spells and no cleric. Perhaps a fun party that's not so powergamey, and reasonably vulnerable to undead since they have no good spells, no sneak attacks, no critical hits, with only your stealth to save you.

But, oh, to be able to make every single choice in every dialogue and see every consequence in a single playthrough!

 

[Murk]

I think he just said you can't since often enough each dialog choice type (bluff/diplomacy/intimidate/etc.) would lead you down a different possible path and you can only choose one ...