Restrictions on Multi-Classing?

Evelond Formos · Post by **Evelond Formos** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 4:26 am

broncoblitz wrote:
Zephis wrote:Then Frankly I'm more worried about the "Uber" Roleplayer who manages to make all the contacts, gets to damn near every event and then uses their new found IC abilities and alliances to totally destroy my enjoyment of the game.
You mean the nergalites?

(yes i know its a low blow but i thought it was funny hehe)

You mean the Culnulites?

broncoblitz · Post by **broncoblitz** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 4:30 am

Well you're right of course Eve, Thanks!

Zephis · Post by **Zephis** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 4:36 am

Actually i didn't get the joke >.>
But my point is valid i think, joking aside.

Still.. I'm not that worried the DM team are good at what they do.

Minuvas · Post by **Minuvas** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 8:51 am

Before we change the subject, I am not siding with anybody who feels they have the right (or ability) to ruin anyone elses game.

However, I won't discourage "Uuber?" Roleplaying, as somehow I feel that adds - not detracts - from the community.

I do believe the DM's will handle it appropriately, but I do think the people who are building their characters with no regards - only to make them more PVP playable and powerful - should be aware that , atleast in my opinion (not that my opinion is the ultimate opinion) I frown upon it.

I agree with the Emphasis that roleplay is not a long-winded conversation, at the same time - people get "Trigger" happy and change their roleplay when they know certain characters around them can get whomped, or will do the whomping to them.

(Regarldess of how that character TRUE position is, these are traits you find out by roleplaying and or character descriptions.
I.E: My Character understands there is a good chance a big *** orc with giant muscles could smash my face in , regardless if I had 19 levels on him. I would not engage this person in a brawl fight, even if I know OOC my character could smite him with a quick swing of the hammer).

It creates an unpleasant atmosphere, and I've been lucky enough to be involved a couple of very well roleplayed characters who would fit under this broad generalization. Lok'Tok , personally is a favorite character of mine - though I believe he is a Monk/Rogue.

However, then I'll bump into certain players who will OOC challenge eachother to duels outside the city, and try to compare builds and what feats they took to beat on eachother. Completely sucks me out of the moment.

UltimaBoB · Post by **UltimaBoB** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 10:15 am

Wyvern wrote: The "optimistic" attitude seemed to work fairly well for the four years that the last campaign run. And I still see NWN 1 servers chasing the illusion that is balance, and they are no better off for it.

But if you think this attitude is problematic, I would love to hear some concrete, specific suggestions as to what needs to be done to deal with the problem (which I am still not convinced exists).

I apologize if anything I said seems negative or condescending. I know that I did not necessarily come off well to begin here and I am really trying to measure my words and qualify my statements. I am by no means suggesting I know better how to run a server than the veteran admins here. But I do have a lot of NWN1 experience and some ideas that I think are worth considering. I always welcome a healthy exchange of ideas.

That being said, I am more than aware that NWN2 Dasaria is still in Beta. You don’t even have a DM client. Even if your inclination was to make balance changes, I doubt that extensive ones would be anywhere near the top of your priorities list right now. Therefore, in general it is probably best to look to the DMs to set the agenda as to when they are even entertaining significant game balance change ideas. Throwing a bunch of balancing ideas out now and getting the board whipped into a frenzy talking about them might just be pointless as, right or wrong, the DMs may not be in a place to even begin considering most of them. Even though you seem to be broaching this type of discussion, I doubt that you really want to get into extensive balancing discussions now. Correct me if I am wrong. But I this is the idea I got when my thread about haste was shut down pretty fast – and I am trying to learn from my mistakes.

This is why I only suggested a 3 or 4 level minimum for each class you take by the time you reach 20. A simple, objective and easy to implement rule IMO. By no means does it perfectly balance everything – but I do think it would do a lot more good than harm. For now, that was really going to be my only concrete suggestion. At this juncture, I thought a more general discussion about approaches to server balance and balancing philosophies might be more appropriate as a prelude to any serious nitty gritty discussions about specific changes. On that count, I personally find that perfect balance is impossible. But that you definitely can make a better server if you at least go after the easiest, “low hanging fruit” kind of balance changes. Things like nerfing a Bigby’s Forceful Hand that is an automatic multi-round KD against anything that isn’t an RDD. Or trying to fix IKD and Disarm as PvE they are okay but PvP they are really broken etc…

Wyvern · Post by **Wyvern** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 11:59 am

As we have done before, any spells that are considered extremely unsettling to gameplay within the campaign, are subject to extreme scrutiny before any changes are implemented. As has been stated before, in the past, we have made modifications for extreme cases that proved to be just this (Timestop freezing everyone on the server, IGMS & Firebrand having their damage output scaled back, Bigbies Forceful Hand being modified in a similar fashion to the one you stated). We are very open to this, however it is currently too early in the campaign to start doing it now. Rest assured we will be keeping an eye on precisely that sort of thing however.

UltimaBoB · Post by **UltimaBoB** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 12:11 pm

Thanks Wyvern. I hear you that now is not the time for too much balance talk. When you are ready to think about these things will you initioate a forum dialogue? Or, frankly, do you prefer if the players just focus on the RP and leave the mechanics and too much talk about mechanics and balance in the forums to you guys? Every one has their own style. Some like to work on balance with the playerbase and some feel that there is simply too much conflict of interest and evsted interest for public balancing discussions to be fruitfiul and it is best if the admins just handle it when they feel the need IOW "don't call us about balance, we'll call you if and when we want input".

In terms of the general philosophy, I think we are at least in a general agreement despite it seeming we might have been on different pages. My overly optimistic commentw as directed at some posters who seemed to be insinuating that mechanics did not matter at all. That we didn't need to balance anything - just play the game "out-of-the-box". To me that would be nice, but it doesn't fly in practice. I feel there is an unforrtunately complex middle-ground and you just have to get your hands dirty and do your best to get things as right as you feel is worth it when you also think of the costs.

I am curious about why you think the server would be worse with say a 3 class minimum than no minimum. Unless of course you are just saying that right now, the only balance changes you would make would have to be massive server-wide threats to gameplay and that while a multi-class restriction may well make the cut later on when you are doing balancing, it simply does not rise to the level of immediate need for it to be implemented now when you frankly, have way bigger fish to fry.

Wyvern · Post by **Wyvern** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 1:17 pm

From my experience, the more people you usually have involved in making the decision, the less chance you have of actually reaching one. Depending on the nature of the change, some may be thrown open to discussion (like the server password/application idea) from which the staff will make an informed decision on. Others may be decided in the background, and then announced. By and large, it will be managed on a case by case basis.

Post by **Peregrinus** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 2:58 pm

My only issue with forcing people to take more than one level of a class stems from the fact certain PrCs are designed to need: 5x/1x to enter the PrC (Eldridge Knight comes to mind, the classic build for it being Wizard 5/Fighter 1/EK*) Certain classes make sense to have people take one level of, most significantly fighter and rogue. (In RP, think of it as taking time off from your normal training in X class to work on combat or work useful skills).

In some cases I agree with the general feel of this thread, that taking one level of certain classes is a bit ridiculous, and that combining certain classes is a little strange (Monk/Druid comes to mind). I also dislike "dipping" for a single class ability (Rogue 19/ Shadowdancer 1 comes to mind), but there is no good solution to this, and frankly, I believe that if people honestly want to try different builds, no matter how powergamer it was, they should be allowed.

Still, the ultimate powerbuild is simple: Sorcerer/Wizard 20.

* I am aware that under the flawed NWN2 system of weapon proficiencies that you are not required to take that one level of fighter/ranger/paladin/barbarian to gain all martial weapons, however, it is still the classic build for an EK, and makes the most sense for them.

BeyondRedemption · Post by **BeyondRedemption** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 4:56 pm

PrCs that continue your training I would count as levels in its respect sublcass. So Tricksters wouldn't lose their rogue and wizard abilities. Knights wouldn't lose their fighter abilities. Et Cetera.

A Wandering Monk · Post by **A Wandering Monk** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 5:04 pm

How would you handle characters that take 1 level of bard or sorc just to meet the prereqs for rdd? This combination seems as powergamerish as any of the other frequenlty mentioned ones. Is requiring 3 lvls of bard or sorc before allowing rdd more reasonable?

BeyondRedemption · Post by **BeyondRedemption** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 5:06 pm

A Wandering Monk wrote:How would you handle characters that take 1 level of bard or sorc just to meet the prereqs for rdd? This combination seems as powergamerish as any of the other frequenlty mentioned ones. Is requiring 3 lvls of bard or sorc before allowing rdd more reasonable?

RDD is stupid in my opinion and I hope it gets banned like it was in Das1.

UltimaBoB · Post by **UltimaBoB** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 5:07 pm

RDD is not overpowered IMO

BeyondRedemption · Post by **BeyondRedemption** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 5:08 pm

I think you're in the minority on that one...but storywise...I mean come on, how many folks really have red dragon blood coursing through their veins?

Grayle · Post by **Grayle** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 5:16 pm

I know this isn't really adding anything to the mechanics discussion, but...

I don't even understand the existence of Red Dragon Disciple as a player class. It not only turns something that should be very rare into something that would be very common, it also screams NPC.

Forgive this brief side-rail and retreat. I'll withdraw from this conversation as Wyvern sated my curiousity on the subject.