KickStarter Knights of the Chalice 2 Thread - Augury of Chaos

[Darth Canoli]

Give his name to the kids? Err wat I just recruited him to my party I dunno what you mean. His aberration summon dominated quite a few fights tbh.

Btw what weapon proficiencies does Jorad have?

My bad, I was talking about the gambler from the main module's tavern (upstairs).

Did someone found something else about him, after finishing the vanishing sword quest and asking for more, you get to investigate the order of the black rose and can give his name to the kids whom will help you to get his chest key.
Then, you can talk about the order with him (you can do it before as well) but it seems to end here.

And his inventory is full of goodies, at least, it is after you pick-pocket him with the rogue but you can't do anything about it. Or can you?

 

[Nortar]

Give his name to the kids? Err wat I just recruited him to my party I dunno what you mean. His aberration summon dominated quite a few fights tbh.

Btw what weapon proficiencies does Jorad have?

My bad, I was talking about the gambler from the main module's tavern (upstairs).

Did someone found something else about him, after finishing the vanishing sword quest and asking for more, you get to investigate the order of the black rose and can give his name to the kids whom will help you to get his chest key.
Then, you can talk about the order with him (you can do it before as well) but it seems to end here.

And his inventory is full of goodies, at least, it is after you pick-pocket him with the rogue but you can't do anything about it. Or can you?

I've found the Black Rose token in his cloak before I got the quest to investigate the cult, but I had no new interactions with the guy after that.
I decided it's either bugged or there will be a follow up after I leave the sewers.

 

[holla_cabezas_de_mierda]

beat the module was okay. Monk had a bug toward end game where his damage dice broke dealing only his strength modifier in damage was not fun. High level combat is dumb. Skewer rapes prismatic spray destroys.

What is new, DnD + high levels = silliness. This is why Pierre's plans to make high level modules suck. F*** high level modules. Well, better something than nothing but it's still a shame.

hate high level, every high level game is inferior to low and mid level, not sure why some many game makers seem obsessed with it

 

[holla_cabezas_de_mierda]

Yeah I restarted with a dwarf fighter instead of the monk, and a psionics chick instead of the bard. Wiped through the first village like butter so far, now I'll follow that deranged sword into the hag lair and then it's goblin attack + sewers time.

*I took a rogue again, a halfling one this time, for a two hander finesse sneak attack build. We'll see how it plays but I cannot not take a rogue in my party in an RPG.
(Also, party building is a mini-game in itself).

I always considered bards in rpg as sort of thieves but with pretense to artistic talent.
Some crpgs even give them thieves abilities, for example Wizardry 7.

I think I recall early D&D giving them thief abilities too

 

[holla_cabezas_de_mierda]

underground nymph has a point

The game may feel tactical when it is played but it doesn't look that tactical in videos because the person tends to rely on spamming RNG based disables

tactics: the science and art of disposing and maneuvering forces in combat

From youtube it doesn't look like there is that much of this involved, compared to games where spells are more limited in what they can do.

3 pure casters being mandatory is also a troubling sign.

How having 3 casters mandatory troubling in high level classic D&D ? Been like that since it exists,in 1E 2E 3.5 , mages start weak and are godly in the end, since KOTC2 is some 3.5 hybrid leaning toward very difficult to impossible encounters it make sense in the end you will need those godly characters.
I read pathfinder 2nd edition is better for higher level play but yet to test it.

I usually build parties around 2 1/2 casters, one reason being I don't like having to manage so many spells and buffs all the time, and melee combat is faster and easier and requires less resting...so usually I would have pure MU, pure Cleric and a Bard (the half caster), sometimes also a paladin or ranger which might be considered another .25 of a caster and free up the Cleric for more offensive spells....

 

[Serus]

I have a question about mechanics. Wizards with an evocation focus feat have access to a group of feats called Fire Magic, Cold Magic, etc... The issue is that, they only work with spells that have a "descriptor". From what i understand those are found after the name of the school, say "Evocation [fire]". However few spells have it and many that logically should have it - don't. Example, Fireball or Electricity Sphere don't have [fire] or [electricity].
Does it mean that Fireball doesn't work with Fire Magic feat or Electric Sphere with Electricity Magic feat or i misunderstand something?

I looked and in 3.5 core rules all similar spells have the "logical" descriptor.

Could someone test if those feats work with spells ,without descriptors being written, like Fireball with [Fire], please? I don't have a wizard with evocation.

It is either an oversight when writing the descriptions by Pierre and it works, or it is an oversight in how they work mechanically. Either way it would be nice to know and maybe tell Pierre to correct it. The third option is that it is a Pierre's own modification of rules but i doubt it. Fireball not being a [fire] spell is silly and balance wise those feats aren't OP.

 

[Yosharian]

It's almost certainly a bug, just report it and I'm sure Pierre will fix it

 

[Fireblade]

I have a question about mechanics. Wizards with an evocation focus feat have access to a group of feats called Fire Magic, Cold Magic, etc... The issue is that, they only work with spells that have a "descriptor". From what i understand those are found after the name of the school, say "Evocation [fire]". However few spells have it and many that logically should have it - don't. Example, Fireball or Electricity Sphere don't have [fire] or [electricity].
Does it mean that Fireball doesn't work with Fire Magic feat or Electric Sphere with Electricity Magic feat or i misunderstand something?

I looked and in 3.5 core rules all similar spells have the "logical" descriptor.

Could someone test if those feats work with spells ,without descriptors being written, like Fireball with [Fire], please? I don't have a wizard with evocation.

It is either an oversight when writing the descriptions by Pierre and it works, or it is an oversight in how they work mechanically. Either way it would be nice to know and maybe tell Pierre to correct it. The third option is that it is a Pierre's own modification of rules but i doubt it. Fireball not being a [fire] spell is silly and balance wise those feats aren't OP.

I've got a save with an Evocation Focus Wizard with the Fire Magic feat. What's the best way to confirm? Just check the DC of my cast?

edit: nevermind, I'm being stupid, I see it's the damage dice that are the thing to look at. I'm getting 11 rolls of 1d6 from my Fireball cast.

 

[Serus]

I have a question about mechanics. Wizards with an evocation focus feat have access to a group of feats called Fire Magic, Cold Magic, etc... The issue is that, they only work with spells that have a "descriptor". From what i understand those are found after the name of the school, say "Evocation [fire]". However few spells have it and many that logically should have it - don't. Example, Fireball or Electricity Sphere don't have [fire] or [electricity].
Does it mean that Fireball doesn't work with Fire Magic feat or Electric Sphere with Electricity Magic feat or i misunderstand something?

I looked and in 3.5 core rules all similar spells have the "logical" descriptor.

Could someone test if those feats work with spells ,without descriptors being written, like Fireball with [Fire], please? I don't have a wizard with evocation.

It is either an oversight when writing the descriptions by Pierre and it works, or it is an oversight in how they work mechanically. Either way it would be nice to know and maybe tell Pierre to correct it. The third option is that it is a Pierre's own modification of rules but i doubt it. Fireball not being a [fire] spell is silly and balance wise those feats aren't OP.

I've got a save with an Evocation Focus Wizard with the Fire Magic feat. What's the best way to confirm? Just check the DC of my cast?

edit: nevermind, I'm being stupid, I see it's the damage dice that are the thing to look at. I'm getting 11 rolls of 1d6 from my Fireball cast.

And 10d6 is the normal maximum normally, right? It works, it just lacks the [fire] part after "Evocation" in the spell description.
I can't really blame Pierre he mostly made the game by himself and there is a lot of of stuff to write that aren't from any books because he modified the rules.

Good to know and thank you for a service to the KotC2 Community(tm). You ahould get the Initiative Roll Medal. 2nd class.

 

[Fireblade]

And 10d6 is the normal maximum normally, right? It works, it just lacks the [fire] part after "Evocation" in the spell description.

Yep. Seems it works unless I'm missing something.

 

[Yosharian]

So it's working? Hm. Is that feat actually worth taking though?

 

[Fireblade]

So it's working? Hm. Is that feat actually worth taking though?

Probably not? But if you're playing on normal mode, you get so many feats, by the end of the game there isn't much left worth taking. That's how I ended up with it...

 

[JarlFrank]

Has anyone beat the game? Looking at the global steam achievements is a rather depressing affair.

https://steamcommunity.com/stats/1233530/achievements

We did years ago with the hardcore backer version, not point hunting achievement in a game you already finished.

I played through three of the backer versions, and now through the Steam version for the achievements, because the game is just that much fun.

It's way more replayable than most roguelikes with their boring procedural shit. I can replay it at least one or two more times before I get bored with it.

 

[Serus]

So it's working? Hm. Is that feat actually worth taking though?

Lets's see. In the case of maxed fireball it's a 10% increase in damage output from additional die. Then comes the + to DC = less chance for halving the damage through saves. However it might be relatively much more with spells that aren't maxed yet and less with some maxed high level spells. Also the DC increase can allow to land some status, fire evocation spells are mostly pure damage but some cold ones might have them.
Overall i think it is worth if you really want to be a dps wizard but on 1 feat/3 levels there are simply no way you can squeeze it without sacrificing something more important (initiativ, focus, etc...).

 

[Fireblade]

Lets's see. In the case of maxed fireball it's a 10% increase in damage output from additional die. Then comes the + to DC = less chance for halving the damage through saves. However it might be relatively much more with spells that aren't maxed yet and less with some maxed high level spells. Also the DC increase can allow to land some status, fire evocation spells are mostly pure damage but some cold ones might have them.
Overall i think it is worth if you really want to be a dps wizard but on 1 feat/3 levels there are simply no way you can squeeze it without sacrificing something more important (initiativ, focus, etc...).

There was no + to DC from that feat (I checked earlier). Caster level doesn't figure directly into the DC calculation, it's different from spell level.

 

[Serus]

Has anyone beat the game? Looking at the global steam achievements is a rather depressing affair.

https://steamcommunity.com/stats/1233530/achievements

We did years ago with the hardcore backer version, not point hunting achievement in a game you already finished.

I played through three of the backer versions, and now through the Steam version for the achievements, because the game is just that much fun.

It's way more replayable than most roguelikes with their boring procedural shit. I can replay it at least one or two more times before I get bored with it.

Comparing this game to a RL is a bit unreasonable. Most RLs are single character where combat tactics are much simpler but on the other hand character building the interactions outside

Lets's see. In the case of maxed fireball it's a 10% increase in damage output from additional die. Then comes the + to DC = less chance for halving the damage through saves. However it might be relatively much more with spells that aren't maxed yet and less with some maxed high level spells. Also the DC increase can allow to land some status, fire evocation spells are mostly pure damage but some cold ones might have them.
Overall i think it is worth if you really want to be a dps wizard but on 1 feat/3 levels there are simply no way you can squeeze it without sacrificing something more important (initiativ, focus, etc...).

There was no + to DC from that feat (I checked earlier). Caster level doesn't figure directly into the DC calculation, it's different from spell level.

You are right of curse. Still, i think that it is worth taking as one of the first non-crucial feat if you really want to destroy things with spell damage. If you want a well rounded up caster you'd probably want a second spell school focus or extended spell range or something similar. It all really depends on number of feats at your disposal, so difficulty level + if human or not.

 

[Fireblade]

Yeah it's worth taking if you've got enough feats to take it, but for me it was one of the last ones I took towards the end of my game, and that was normal mode + human. So I can't see ever taking it in the harder difficulties.

 

[JarlFrank]

Comparing this game to a RL is a bit unreasonable.

I'm not comparing it to RLs I'm just saying challenging hand-made encounters are infinitely more replayable than procedural crap

 

[Serus]

Comparing this game to a RL is a bit unreasonable.

I'm not comparing it to RLs I'm just saying challenging hand-made encounters are infinitely more replayable than procedural crap

And we already had this discussion. There is a point somewhere between the two even for you. I hope. I really can' believe that you'd dismiss the improvement if KotC2 had some HAND-MADE (by the Man himself, with equal care) variations of certain encounters. But my beliefs have have been shattered many times on the Codex.

 

[Darth Canoli]

And we already had this discussion. There is a point somewhere between the two even for you. I hope. I really can' believe that you'd dismiss the improvement if KotC2 had some HAND-MADE (by the Man himself, with equal care) variations of certain encounters. But my beliefs have have been shattered many times on the Codex.

So, you're basically saying a game with 200% handcrafted content is better than one with 100% hand-crafted content?
Sure, hand-crafted combat made by competent/good/great/godly game designers is great.

Add 10% of procedural shit and the quality drops by 10% (at least).

 

[rojay]

Comparing this game to a RL is a bit unreasonable.

I'm not comparing it to RLs I'm just saying challenging hand-made encounters are infinitely more replayable than procedural crap

And we already had this discussion. There is a point somewhere between the two even for you. I hope. I really can' believe that you'd dismiss the improvement if KotC2 had some HAND-MADE (by the Man himself, with equal care) variations of certain encounters. But my beliefs have have been shattered many times on the Codex.

The DM tools let anyone modify encounters, right? If you're saying you're not interested unless Pierre does it, then ok. I'm sure there are people who could come up with interesting variations on the best combat encounters, but I can replay the current version quite happily, and who knows how long the game would still be in early access/beta if Pierre went back and fiddled?

 

[Darth Canoli]

The DM tools let anyone modify encounters, right? If you're saying you're not interested unless Pierre does it, then ok. I'm sure there are people who could come up with interesting variations on the best combat encounters, but I can replay the current version quite happily, and who knows how long the game would still be in early access/beta if Pierre went back and fiddled?

I was actually thinking about this.

With the new village content, you could just nerf combat xp by 60% (so you just get 40% xp) or even more and keep chapters 1 and two as they are or add some side content and then the pizarra fight from chapter 3 and a brand new chapter 3 and even expand afterward on a new adventure.

That's for someone wanting to build mostly a dungeon crawler adventure.

 

[Serus]

Comparing this game to a RL is a bit unreasonable.

I'm not comparing it to RLs I'm just saying challenging hand-made encounters are infinitely more replayable than procedural crap

And we already had this discussion. There is a point somewhere between the two even for you. I hope. I really can' believe that you'd dismiss the improvement if KotC2 had some HAND-MADE (by the Man himself, with equal care) variations of certain encounters. But my beliefs have have been shattered many times on the Codex.

The DM tools let anyone modify encounters, right? If you're saying you're not interested unless Pierre does it, then ok. I'm sure there are people who could come up with interesting variations on the best combat encounters, but I can replay the current version quite happily, and who knows how long the game would still be in early access/beta if Pierre went back and fiddled?

I wasn't saying anything about myself. The idea was that, hypothetically, variations would be in-game chosen randomly. I wasn't talking about alternative version of the whole module, Jarl should understand. But if someone made a revamp of the module in the future, that could be nice too, a mod of sorts. Why not.
Sure you can replay happily. I'm enjoying it too. The question however was, would you be even more happy replaying with alternative versions of encounters. There is already replay value in KotC2 thanks to many builds for individual characters and for the party, some c&c, even the difficulty options. But more would be even better.

As to the last question, no idea. And what if Pierre won 10 millions, bought a luxury yacht and took his wife on a 2 years cruise of the World? Or spend it all on luxury whores instead? Or even on luxury, imported roots?

 

[JarlFrank]

Someone needs to make a "Quest for Roots" module.

 

[Serus]

Comparing this game to a RL is a bit unreasonable.

I'm not comparing it to RLs I'm just saying challenging hand-made encounters are infinitely more replayable than procedural crap

I forgot to counter you with Battle Brothers' "procedural crap" which can produces better combat than the vast majority of hand-made crap. And it still has a couple of hand-made ones as well.
I'm not saying that many of KotC2 encounters aren't very well done and the best ones are great. It is a very good game after all.