Game News NWN2: DnD redefined - I live ... again!

[spacemoose]

And, no, TOEE is nowhere near the 'bets pure D&D game'

name a better one

 

[DemonKing]

Thats a flaw in how you're running the campaign and giving out XP, not the system.

No - it's a flaw with the system. Since I'm just following the guidelines in the DMG.

In 2nd ed. I used to give out bonus XP every session based on roleplaying and adherence to alignment indexed to the average character level and I was planning to do it now I've started a 3rd ed. game but it seems pointless so far given the amount of XP following "the official guidelines" results in.

Saying that, I do believe the 1st level 3rd ed. characters are probably a bit weaker than 1st level 2nd ed. characters (eg no-weapon specialisation for fighters, generic monsters are tougher in 3rd ed. etc) so them leveling up quicker is not necessarilly a bad thing.

What is the benefit of a wizard over a sorcerer? As far as I can tell sorcerers are like Wizards +1, is there something I'm missing? It just looks to me like wizards are kinda superfluous.
'

I believe it is justified on the basis that Wizards will have a larger amount of spells to chosoe from than a sorcerer, whereas sorcerers will have a more limited range of spells that they can cast more often. Also I believe sorcerers gain access to higher level spells at a slower rate than wizards.

 

[sheek]

Who is JE Sawyer? Please remember that not everybody who reads this board is a four-eyes D&D geek..

 

[TalesfromtheCrypt]

Who is JE Sawyer? Please remember that not everybody who reads this board is a four-eyes D&D geek..

No, but usually people who read this side have some knowledge of cRPGs and the cRPG industry and besides that aren't complete morons.

 

[Spazmo]

J.E. Sawyer is a guy who should have made a few really great RPGs in his career but has been reduced to making apologies for probable paragons of mediocrity like this. That's the real sad thing about NWN2. It probably won't be outright bad. It'll probably just be completely average.

Anyways, Voss, lots of great points and I agree completely. There's some seriously half assed thinking going on at Obsidian, but then that's really who they are as a company. They know they can't make the real RPGs they'd love to make, so they'll just take whatever half-assed sequel leftover shit they can get and make it as mediocre as they can.

As for sorcerers vs. wizards, it's a question of versatility. Sorcerers tend to be better in combat because they get more spells to cast per day and you don't need quite as large a variety of spells for combat, but wizards are better for a wider variety of situations since they can learn as many spells as they like (and can find/research) and still cast quite a few. Of course, CRPGs are bad at showing this, especially since the D&D ones are obsessed with combat. Personally, I like wizards better since it's generally not hard to anticipate what you'll need in a given day (especially in combat heavy campaigns) and getting spells a level ahead of sorcerers is nice, not to mention bonus feats. Of course, there's very little reason to play a pure wizard or sorcerer when many prestige classes will give you full spellcasting and a pile of class features, but that may or may not be present in NWN2.

 

[kingcomrade]

I like wizards better, too, mostly because I can obviously see that sorcerers = artillery. I just thought it was kinda gay that it seemed like wizards were underpowered. I've never played D&D, how often do non-combat spells actually get used? In games, of course, never, because almost all of the D&D games are nonstop combat simulations (even in PS:T the non-combat spells weren't useful).

 

[Claw]

Who is JE Sawyer? Please remember that not everybody who reads this board is a four-eyes D&D geek..

Maybe you aren't ware that the Codex has a thing called "People Database" - there should be a link at the top of this page.

 

[Spazmo]

The usefulness of non-combat spells depends on how what kind of content the DM designs. In a campaign focused more on talking, manipulation of people and events and wheeling and dealing (which is doable by skilled DMs), spellcasters might focus more on spells to help them in social situations or spells that aid their mobility. There's also spells that are handy for stealth or getting through puzzles. Ultimately it depends on what kind of game the DM and players want to have.

 

[Volourn]

"name a better one"

Don't be a moron. I already have. Millions of times.


"Sorcerers tend to be better in combat because they get more spells to cast per day"

Number of spells a wizard/sorc can cast is irrelevant in your typical battle. It's what, nad how you cast your spells that matter for the most part.

ie. Being able to cast 6 finger of deaths as opposed to 4 per day doesn't really impress me much.

 

[vazquez595654]

Publishers sometimes demand things that the developer just knows are going to suck, but they have to do it anyway, and they have to defend it to the public if they ever have a hope of developing another game.

Since most games made today have extensive game design documents, wouldn't it be cool if the developers made available every feature changed by a publisher? That way, if the game was a flop, you could judge for yourself whether the publishers changes were a likely cause, or whether it was mediocre game design to begin with.

 

[Gambler]

wouldn't it be cool

It would, but not for publishers. Therefore nobody will do it. Release of game-related information is usualy controlled by publisher in one way or another.

 

[Surgey]

Play ToEE, Surgey. 10 levels cap, no prestige classes, best pure DnD game.

I did; great game, indeed. I'm not a fan of Greyhawk at all, but I still found it pretty great. I suppose you do have a point there, though. I'm being a little picky; it's been a while since I've played a good RPG. I will agree, though, a great DnD experience (the combat was sooooooo close to PnP). Plus, spiked chain FTW. Only thing that could've made it better would be, obviously, more levels... and thus, a longer game to accompany those levels. :D Oh, and some of the bad-ass starting classes and prestige classes.

Sorcerors are good for multiclassing and munchkining, basically, and that's it.

If you want to blow things up and Warmages aren't allowed, then Sorcerers are the guys that blow the hell out of everything (say hi to 6+ fireballs per day). Metamagic feats without having to prepare? I think I'll take that. Obviously they lack the utility and bonus feats of a Wizard, but if all you want to do is blow everything up with Maximize, why would you play a Wizard?

 

[Voss]

ie. Being able to cast 6 finger of deaths as opposed to 4 per day doesn't really impress me much.

5 (bonus speciality). And thats part of the issue. Sorcerers are gimping along compared to wizards. 'I can cast a handful of extra spells per day' doesn't compared to 5 extra feats (and the ability to make scrolls of all the useful but non-essential spells that you may need over the course of the day). Plus the munchkin ability to qualify for Prestige Classes. (since most of the really good ones require skill selections Sorcerers don't have).

 

[Surgey]

I dunno, though. Sorcerers may not get the feats a wizard does, but the metamagic feats he DOES get he doesn't have to prepare a higher level slot for; it just takes longer to cast. Which means he can maximize 6 fireballs a day once he gets 6 level 3 spells per day. That's... what, Xd6 fire damage maxed 6 times? Let's be nice and say he's level 8. That's 48 damage 6 times in a row, area effect, right? I like that.

Wait, are we talking pen and paper here, or NWN? Because if we're talking NWN, then yes, Sorcerers are lackluster. In pen and paper without Warmages, Sorcerers are better at just raw blowing stuff up. Wizard is generally better for Prestige classes, though, unless it's a dragon heritage-related class.

 

[Jim Kata]

I dunno, though. Sorcerers may not get the feats a wizard does, but the metamagic feats he DOES get he doesn't have to prepare a higher level slot for; it just takes longer to cast. Which means he can maximize 6 fireballs a day once he gets 6 level 3 spells per day. That's... what, Xd6 fire damage maxed 6 times? Let's be nice and say he's level 8. That's 48 damage 6 times in a row, area effect, right? I like that.

Maybe in some universe where maximizing doesn't count as two levels higher.

 

[Volourn]

"dunno, though. Sorcerers may not get the feats a wizard does, but the metamagic feats he DOES get he doesn't have to prepare a higher level slot for; it just takes longer to cast. Which means he can maximize 6 fireballs a day once he gets 6 level 3 spells per day. That's... what, Xd6 fire damage maxed 6 times? Let's be nice and say he's level 8. That's 48 damage 6 times in a row, area effect, right? I like that."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!


P.S. The only worthwhile advantage a sorc has over a wiz is that they don't have to memorize spells. Other than that, wizards CRUSH sorcerors.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Volourn's right, which is a sign of apocalypse. Watch out for the horsemen.

 

[suibhne]

Sorcerors have the innate advantage of minimizing player choice. This translates directly into mountains of GP (tho generally for the publisher rather than the player...).

 

[Gambler]

Sorcerors have the innate advantage of minimizing player choice.

You mean, there is no need to select handful of spells before you even see the enemy only to find that you guessed wrong? That's horrible! I want choice! I also want my fighter to be forced to memorize one weapon and stick with it untill 8-hour sleep.

 

[Binary]

"dunno, though. Sorcerers may not get the feats a wizard does, but the metamagic feats he DOES get he doesn't have to prepare a higher level slot for; it just takes longer to cast. Which means he can maximize 6 fireballs a day once he gets 6 level 3 spells per day. That's... what, Xd6 fire damage maxed 6 times? Let's be nice and say he's level 8. That's 48 damage 6 times in a row, area effect, right? I like that."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!


P.S. The only worthwhile advantage a sorc has over a wiz is that they don't have to memorize spells. Other than that, wizards CRUSH sorcerors.

...except on DA and UA3

 

[Binary]

And, no, TOEE is nowhere near the 'bets pure D&D game'

name a better one

You gotta be kidding surely. Or maybe you started playing RPGs 2 years ago.

Let's start with any of the original Goldbox games for example...

 

[suibhne]

You mean, there is no need to select handful of spells before you even see the enemy only to find that you guessed wrong? That's horrible! I want choice! I also want my fighter to be forced to memorize one weapon and stick with it untill 8-hour sleep.

I'm sure it wasn't your intention to offer a reasonable point, but your post underlines what several others already noted: D&D CRPGs are almost entirely about combat rather than diplomacy, trickery, etc....so yeah, the relatively unsophisticated sorceror will often seem like the perfect tool for the job when all you want is one more fireball in a gaming context where you might face a few dozen encounters each day.

 

[obediah]

And, no, TOEE is nowhere near the 'bets pure D&D game'

name a better one

You gotta be kidding surely. Or maybe you started playing RPGs 2 years ago.

Let's start with any of the original Goldbox games for example...

Except maybe pools of darkness. "Oh another group of 18 Great Wyrm Red Dragons?"

 

[Binary]

Do you have anything against dragons, or is 18 your unlucky number, or... ?!

 

[Jim Kata]

And, no, TOEE is nowhere near the 'bets pure D&D game'

name a better one

You gotta be kidding surely. Or maybe you started playing RPGs 2 years ago.

Let's start with any of the original Goldbox games for example...

Except maybe pools of darkness. "Oh another group of 18 Great Wyrm Red Dragons?"

that was before dragons were somehow made ten times tougher than gods