NPCs experiment. Do you like it?

S.Ted, as I told, this don't mean to be a standard. It was an experient leaded by logic and by my experience (and I master from 1st D&D) to see if it was possible to revitalize some unused NPCs and to seek Co8 approval or not. Actually, Oldbook agrees, idem for Cujo and of course me. I'm waiting for detailed feedback to see if this experiment may find people's tastes or not.

About your considerations, I understand them very well but I may argue that, since the first D&D module was in 1st edition and it was not possible to add character classes to monsters nor to select feats like in 3.5 and it was missing of many modern classes like the barbarian or the ranger, this ToEE from Troika is made following their personal choiches and (in)experience with 3.5 rules (by mr Moret admission, they quickly had to change from 3.0 to 3.5, and I still ask myself how much they really are knowlegable about 3.0/3.5).
I only tried to re-visit classess to have them to better fit their background, choosing feats accordingly with their class and intelligence, fixing errors here and there. Of course I didn't had the time to play with all parties and all NPCs, but I never applied any power playing concept or tried to make changes that are out of the role. I gave a motivation for every change and I think that you're just in love of the old NPCs because you are used to them and, like me in many circumstances, you are reluctant to accept changes. Probably if ToEE had my same NPCs, now you would complain if I changed them like they currently are.
Since you mention it,
Bertram the Ranger: ranger still a warrior class. Rangers are better healers than warrios, it goes closed to his dentist profession. Warriors use heavy armors, rangers light ones that are more useful when swimming. pirates knows better their area and environment and hunt people, often have birds or monkeys as animal companions, like rangers do, and do not have fighter's discipline for weapons.
Otis the theif/paladin: since he is a spy, I think that this better fits his role.
Raimos was the lawful nuetral Temple goon, he was and still is an idiot. I just "pumped" STR, DEX and CON to 13 and changed his allignment because, as a goon, he does not have the intelligence to understand what he is doing. He is a mercenary, all duty and orders, and he just does what the temple priest tell him. it is in line with role playing and making him lawful neutral does not prevent him to follow their evil roders.
Spugnoir "who has those unuseful point blank shot feats" (I forgot he was a melee character): c'mon, he is a wizard with intellingece heavily higher than mine, yours and almost everybody here (remember that the average is 10). Do you think that he would be so idiot to focus his arcanes studies on those spell categories?
Murfles the spiked-chain weilder: she is already a rogue/warrior and I spent her feats in the most suitable way, to make her different from Rianna, Serena, Furnok, the bandit prisoner and Wonilon (so many rogues!)
Elmo the fighter/ranger: what's wrong with it? Following troika's, Elmo already leveled up as a ranger and I only tried, since he is a very smart and wise person, to give him a better selection of feats accordingly with that.

 

I love Darly, she's my little darling, and I like her just the way she is.

I don't like to use Bertram so it won't effect me but I feel a little weird about him being a ranger but I can see your point on why you changed him, not sure what I think of Elmo but I never use him either, Raimol and Spugnoir I totally agree with, In fact I think that the rest is pretty F*ing good.

btw ted once I'm done with my mod do you want to chuck it in there as well? its just visual stuff, like hair, armour, new look of some weapon types and if you want I could throw in the gun as an easter egg or something

 

I'm arguing as long as this discussion is bringing to a greater point of view and as long your critics are leaded only by an emotional viewpoint, not by logic and Role playing.

OK, I was wrong about it since I belived that it was a 1st D&D set, but still the actual skills and feats part of the game is 3.5 only. More consider that many classes like the ranger were not able to dualclass or multiclass with the others and you'll see how much ToEE was limited.

Maybe because I wasn't able to? Honestly, since NPCs allignment is unknow, how does this may alter your gameplay, except for minor spells and effects that you probably won't waste on Raimol? It is just the knowledge about it that hurts you, not the change by itself.

Are u sure about this? Raimol does not have such a big influence in the game and I changed his allignment only to have him more in line for dialogues and scripts designed from Troika, bad or good that they are.

Great, then I hope that you'll fix it for when I'm back.

Oh, c'mon... this is the stronger emotional sentence ever. 3.0 ranger is much more different than AD&D ranger. Think about Minsk from Baldur's Gate: he was a tank and he wasn't, after all, so different from a fighter because rules allowed it. Now the ranger is much more different and a NPC would really be an idiot using a large shield instead than a secondary weapon when he got the ranger class, but really a lot. Feats are rare and wasting them is something that really reduce a NPC effectiveness in battle. Not to talk about a medium armor: c'mon, he looses bonus feats, he looses evasion, he has greater penalities to skills and has a reduced dexterity bonus. It is not in line with the character! More, answer this: if Elmo and otis are originally two rangers, why don't you complain about the fact that they both start the game with several fighter levels?

Oh, yeah... but you just wrote above that Otis should be a ranger, this goes in conflict with what you just wrote, since he has completely been changed to a fighter, and it is the proof that you are talking only for the affect that you feel for NPCs, not because of the use that they could have. When I applied changes, I tried to re-choose classes thinking to the NPC background and role described by this game, so I already placed the character first and the rules after it. About OB opinion, that one was one of the best gave here, and I think that I'll do how suggested by him. After talking with him, I understood how paladin levels were a wrong addition. I still prefer some rogue level to simulate his spy-side but still a lot may be done spending some feat and skill point into the appropriate skills, just to reinforce his background.

I prefectly understand your point of view, but I don't share it because it is not logic but completely emotional and far away from role playing, since I always belived, and nobody ever argued with this, that smarter a NPC is, more he will be aware of his skills and will try to use it at the best. But I still respect it, so I'll fix NPCs without changes, together with the last check on monsters when your mod, cujo's and, hopefully, morpheus are ready, without altering even one dot of what we discussed. Then, I'll do another more logical and "RPGish" version mainly for myself and the others that will like it.

 

I got my gun to work sweet, its great for testing other stuff, but it doesn't have to be in there, its the only thing thats in my mod that doesn't add to the visual experience of the game, imho. I don't know what people think of the hair, and the rest is just expanding on thing that are allready there like armour, robes, hats, weapons maybe the normal flail insted of heavy but I having even tryed to make it yet.

 

Hehe, 0rion79, you sound like a very upset Mr. Spock. Logic? Emotions? :icon_chuc

As the champion of strict adherence to D&D rules, you should understand that there are those who want to stick to the descriptions in the original ToEE module as closely as possible. And for someone who scolds others for being overly emotional, you sure become very passionate about this whole stuff. Relax!

 

Well, I'm not Spock fom Star Trek and I live passionally all life, including ToEE modding. More, surprice, I'm a psycologist and I know very well how much mind may be tricked by some uncanalized emotions, like Shinigted's love for original NPCs.
Morpheus, I perfectly understand what he means but I appreciate much more opinions like Oldbook's when he say that my "first" Otis was too much out of his role with paladin and, mainly, rogue levels, since it is a valid argumentation about role playing.
Instead I absolutely can't agree with answers like Shiningted's (nothing personal, no hate at all, really, it is just that I'm using you to describe a cathegory of persons) since the meaning is "you should not change them because I like them as they are, even if changes improves them and makes even the most useless a bit more interesting to use" including what are silly caprices about Elmo's starting equipment, and is not "the changes don't fit the NPC's role" or "X NPC is too powerful/weak" or "new class levels goes against NPCs description".
In short, there is no real argumentation except his personal taste and love for NPC and such kind of things is the last thing that a community of modders needs. If we start to botch other's propostals "just because", we won't develop this game further more or we'll do it at 1/10 of the potential speed.

 

and after all the effort I went to making an inventory icon, I never thought that it would be in the main stream play but maybe hidden deep within the protos or some other dark unknown place whos secrets are understood by a small but powerful few.

 

Shin, I may even restore them as rangers, but I will do it in my way, so forget elmo using large shield and chainmail and give me a bit of freedom.
Rangers or fighters, it is not so important for me, but I'll avoid nonsense like the one of Elmo's equipment. More, since Otis holds a bow all the time in his hands, I would like to give him the proper feats to become a bow-oriented ranger, even if this would go a bit in conflict with Taki, but I miss the right feat for the feat column to point to the AI that he choosed that combat style.
for 2-w fighting it is "feat two weapons fighting ranger" but I don't know what is the mirror command for bows.

 

0rion79, you started a thread asking for other people's opinions - "Do you like it?". Shiningted gave you his opinion, and he happens not to like certain of your changes. I understand that you're quite temperamental, but if you cannot deal with negative opinions, maybe you should not ask for them?

It's not like you need Shiningted's or anyone else's approval, anyway. Just do whatever you think is best, but don't expect that everyone shares your point of view.

And the bit about Elmo's starting equipment is not a "silly caprice" (by the way, using offensive language is not the best way to bolster your arguments). Elmo even has dialog that says "I can work fer you, but I need to get some chain mail and a BIG axe!".

To conclude, this kind of quabbling is "the last thing that a community of modders needs".