Ask the Staff!

[Eldwen/DM Kallisti]

Hey everyone, I'm putting this up for any random information people want to hear from the staff. What's going to change? Do we need to clarify a post? Do you think we're doing something wrong? Anything at all can and should be posted here so we can be as transparent as possible!

So, who has questions!

[shalvan]

Why is the possibility of playing psionic characters excluded? I remember having some great times playing a soulknife here years ago, as well ans hanging out with an electrokineticist. I also think psions, wilders and psychic warriors allow for creation of great, fun characters, while not being more powerful than respectively wizard, sorcerer and lets say a warblade. Soulknife is actually quite weak, so... What is the actual reason?

[neosporin]

Sept 28, 2014 5:39:06 GMT -6 shalvan said:

Why is the possibility of playing psionic characters excluded? I remember having some great times playing a soulknife here years ago, as well ans hanging out with an electrokineticist. I also think psions, wilders and psychic warriors allow for creation of great, fun characters, while not being more powerful than respectively wizard, sorcerer and lets say a warblade. Soulknife is actually quite weak, so... What is the actual reason?

The best answer I could give is that looking at INPUT - Outright banned PRC races/classes, psionics are not very popular in both the playerbase and staff. We could get into all the pros and cons (whether you feel they are overpowered or on point, if they fit into lore, if/how much extra work into incorporating them and their skills into the module, and public opinion), but there wasn't an overwhelming outburst into saving it (actually the opposite). Once again, the staff seemed to mimic how the playerbase feels on this.


I can answer Soulknife question personally though. When we were discussing the the class/race list, the idea was raised of leaving Soulknife in or out. The discussion more became about if we were going to keep psionic characters out of the module, then we'd take them all out. We understand that psionic characters can have creative backgrounds and be fun (as we hope every class played could be), but to let in certain psionic classes like Soulknife raises the question as to why don't we let in (insert another class) here because of (another reason).


The short answer is: the question was raised in a thread where everyone understood that putting their opinion in could and likely would affect the final product, and no one was shy about saying to keep it out.

[necrotopia]

Hi there, I was just wondering about the connection info of both the old and upcoming modules? 

[neosporin]

Give me two minutes, I noticed we have some old info up, I apologize. While I'm correcting it, the old module is:

nwn.stillevande.org:5121

The new one is still in late alpha so it's not open to be played yet (not to mention there will be some significant changes), but when we do bring it live, it will use that connection as well.

[AlphaDelphi]

So, I have a question for the staff. When the server was going before, a number of classes were banned due to being bugged. One of these classes was PNP Shifter. In PRC 3.5, this class is not as bugged as it was. There's is, on the PRC site, a suggestion on how to fix the last bug. Also, if you play as a human, the bug is not a problem.

My question is, is this class currently banned due to being bugged or due to the class itself? Similar question for the bowman class that was once allowed as a freely taken class without application. Was there a reason it was banned?

[Eldwen/DM Kallisti]

I'll Start first with bowmen, than move onto the PnP Shifter.

First, Bowmen has been banned due to the following reasons.

1.) They are a homebrew class, created by the PRC team and not from any book published by D&D.

2.) They gain special abilities, namely Archer's focus, which gives +4 Dex and an extra attack. It increases to +6, +8 and finally +10 Dex, with 2, 3, and ultimately 4 extra attacks per round. That means a bowman with JUST rapid strike, and this feat would achieve (with 10 Dex and Str) attacks that follow this line by level 20: 23/23/18/18/13/13/8/8/3/3 with a damage of 1d8+5x10. This is an average of 90 damage, without sneak attack, per round without buffs. This doesn't factor in arrow damage, which is where archers pick up most of their damage to begin with. A min-maxed elf with a starting dex of 20 would steamroll most things early on into their career.

3.) They gain full BAB, 6+int skill points, rogue skills, and are 1 of 2 classes that add Dex too damage. The other is the prestige class Champion of Corellon, which requires an application, and also has a race requirement and severe feat requirements.

4.) They gain speed increases that rival the monk, with no restriction to armor. The scout, whom also gains speed increases, would probably be as fast at level 20 as a bowman at level 1 (they don't mention what the actual progression is).

5.) They gain sneak attack progression, and bonus feats. This makes them into overall better fighters and rogues for DPS.


Overall, the bowman is frankly not a class we should allow, it's a gestalt Fighter//Rogue//Scout class with full BAB, 3/4ths sneak attack, and the speed of a monk. The only base class that can match this would be a Cleric with the Travel domain, hasted, with divine power. That's just the base bowmen.


Next, the PnP Shifter. The PnP Shifter is far easier to explain. Since there is already a class that performs it's lore-based function, there isn't a need for it as far as character development. The PnP version of the shifter works fine for PnP, but it doesn't translate well into NwN, while the standard shifter performs these actions just fine.

[AlphaDelphi]

Ahh, so this is set in stone, good to know. Thanks for the response!

[AlphaDelphi]

I was debating if I should say anything about this at all and decided I would. The first and second reasons for bowman banning was good enough. The rest is all debatable but I don't really see a reason to debate that.

To say that NWN Shifter fills the role of the shifter class better than the PNP one based on lore is, in my opinion, erroneous. NWN Shifter looks at the class from a purely combat perspective.

The PNP Shifter is more based on character development and gives you something more than the player saying, "Oh, look, my shifter has the exact same classes/shapes as the next shifter."

Let's take this RP scenario. An adventuring group needs to get into a town that has been beseiged by orcs that the DM is controlling in order to pull a lever to open a secret passage into the town's keep. There are too many orcs for a frontal assault and every time the rogue has tried to sneak into town, the guards have seen him. No invisibility is available. Enter the PNP Shifter.

The PNP Shifter turns into a bird and flies by the orcs, unnoticed. Once inside they take the form of just another orc grunt to go to the keep. Once near the keep they take the form of a rat and hope the guards aren't hungry. They sneak into the small crack of the wall of the keep within the city and from there, shift back into orc form to find the lever to open the hidden door of the secret passage that leads right into the keep.

Same situation with the NWN Shifter? They have nothing to contribute. All their forms are for combat and would get attacked by the orcs.

NWN Shifter might provide the lore-based function of the Shifter class on the surface but it's a poor replacement. It's like saying a fighter with improved unarmed attack is a good replacement for monk. In my opinion, if anything, NWN Shifter limits the character development of the original and reduces the class to nothing but another means of combat. And, even from a combat point of view, at a level 20 limit for the server, you'd be better off going 20 levels of druid, gaining Elder Elemental Shape, level 9 spells with a higher DC, one extra feat from not having to take alertness that wouldn't likely be taken otherwise, and a much stronger druid companion that makes taking feats like Exalted Companion in the place of Alertness worthwhile.

So, really, from a RP perspective NWN Shifter is subpar to the PNP Shifter. From a combat perspective it's subpar to a pure druid. It's supposed to be the class specializing in shifting forms but there are other classes with better, more powerful forms from a combat perspective. With a level limit of 20 it loses most of its uniqueness as well as functionality.

But, that's just my opinion on the matter.

[Eldwen/DM Kallisti]

You bring up some good points - but they are all things we have already considered when we banned the class. First, let me explain why the class was originally banned by the last team: the class was so bugged that it was unplayable. In the version of PrC that we're going to be using, they have supposedly fixed it - which is good, but the problems with the PnP Shifter still remain. I'll take you point by point here.

1. First of all, how can a class be based on character development? Any class, even classes without flavor, can generate character development. Moreso, a class isn't the only thing responsible for character development - DMs play a role, the player of the character plays a role, and other players play a role. It's up to the shifter to roleplay differences in their shapes. If two shifters both decide to shift into a drider, they need not act as if both their drider forms are exactly the same just because they look that way. As for there being a difference between "combat" classes and "character development" classes, I think the distinction is illusory - all classes, regardless of flavor, somehow play a role in combat - including the PnP Shifter.

2. In your example of an orc camp, you make too many exceptions for it to viable. It becomes an illusory collusion. It doesn't take a PnP shifter to wildshape. Also, the normal shifter has a multitude of flying options as well at their disposal. Moreso, why isn't there a wizard or a bard who can cast alter shape - or its lesser variants? To throw one more wrench into the cogs, there is no promise that a PnP Shifter would even be able to convince the orcs, as they merely take on the form of the orcs, not the language or culture. Were this a high level party with a Witch, at level 17, they have the ability to take on the shape of any humanoid, including orcs, so why wouldn't that be a viable option to overcome this situation?

3. Once again, you create a false collusion between classes that are "combat" classes and ones that are "character development" classes. All classes provide a means of combat, regardless. Some are more flavorful than others - this I grant you. But, you've failed to provide any evidence that PnP Shifter's flavor provides anything that NwN Shifter does not. Yes, NwN Shifter is combat oriented, but it has all the same flavor as the PnP Shifter, as they're the exact same class. One is merely made for the NwN Engine and optimized by the people who created that engine in the first place. As for whether it's combat viable, the PnP Shifter doesn't even gain the special abilities of any form it takes on until level 21, which makes your example of a level 20 druid still better, from a combat point of view, than either shifter variant.

Once again, you bring up good points, and they're all things we considered when we were coming up with the current list. Shifter has always been a niche PrC and I'm afraid it always will be. The current NwN version of the class does everything it needs to do - it's a simple case of "if it ain't broke".

[AlphaDelphi]

I'd dispute a lot of that, especially the addition of other classes in a comparison between the PNP Shifter and the NWN Shifter and the creation of a "false collusion" but at this point I think it would be a vain attempt given the responses to these as well as the previous responses to other class exclusions. As you say that the two classes are the same and have the same flavor, it's futile to continue as this seems truly set in stone.

This was a great server in its heyday and rose a bit of nostalgia in me when I got the email of its return. I'm sure you all will do great. Cheers.

[Corsair]

Your points ignore the third pillar of the game, Eldwen, the first two being Combat and Roleplay and the third being skill challenges, how to overcome an obstacle without the use of direct force. I haven't examined these classes, having never had any real interest in playing them, but if what Alpha is saying is correct the PNP shifter is better able to use his powers in that context. Further, if the class has been fixed and we're already using the PrC why not allow it?

You bring up possible alternate solutions to the orc camp problem. Of course there are other solutions, there are always solutions. Maybe some nutjob like one of my characters pulls a powder keg out of a bag of holding, maybe someone has Stone to Mud prepared and turns the walls into goo, maybe the infinite power of Christ descends upon the battlefield like a bad airport novel and immolates the wicked. There are always alternate solutions to a problem, that wasn't Alpha's point, that the Shifter was the only way in. It's that it was a mechanically viable and flavorful means of solving the problem.

[Eldwen/DM Kallisti]

We have no control over what classes PRC added and didn't add. That is the exact reason why we aren't allowing it - if we did have the ability to control that, we would have suggested that PRC not add the class, because Shifter exists and does its job just fine. That's the point I'm trying to make, 'if it ain't broke'. Shifter isn't broken, there's nothing wrong with it, and the fact that it's "combat oriented", in the words of Alpha Delphi, is not a downside. Why do we need a whole other class with the same name and flavor? What does this class add that the other class doesn't already address?

The fact that I could bring up multiple alternate solutions to the orc camp example was exactly why the orc camp example was not an effective argument. Yes, the PnP Shifter could do all those things that Alpha Delphi suggested (provided they actually fixed it), but so could multiple other classes. If Alpha Delphi was using that example as an attempt to make PnP Shifter seem required, in lieu of normal Shifter, then the argument failed. If his point was that the PnP Shifter was better able to handle that situation than a normal Shifter with just its class abilities - I fully agree, but the fact that the PnP Shifter is better equipped to handle skill challenges than a normal Shifter is not argument enough to have two different versions of the same class.

I'll provide you another example, to set precedent. Two different versions of Samurai exist - Samurai, and Samurai CW. Samurai is banned (for multiple reasons) - among them is the fact that another class exists with the same flavor and name. Shifters aren't getting picked on - we just need to consider if two versions of the class are necessary, and if the one that came with NwN works and is effective. If it is, then the PRC version is unnecessary.

[Corsair]

Supposing someone was willing to actually play the Samurai class, either of them, what exactly would be the harm in allowing both of them, assuming the class works properly and isn't overpowered?

[Corsair]

Supposing someone was willing to actually play the Samurai class, either of them, what exactly would be the harm in allowing both of them, assuming the class works properly and isn't overpowered?