Changes for future versions? Options

[rbeverjr]

I really like Improved Anvil (IA), and am very appreciative to Sikret and also the play testers for this mod. I dabbled in it as of IA3. I played apx. 1.5 games in IA4-IA4.2, and have started a game of IA5. I have killed the shadow dragon, red dragon, Conster, Samia, and even the first drow ambush (geesh) among other things. So, while I am not nearly as accomplished as some players, I’m not exactly a novice either. I hope that Sikret will consider the following changes for future versions of IA. These changes would make IA more enjoyable to me, and I am confident that there are many people who will agree (to one degree or another) with one or more points that I make below.

(1) I have noticed that each version of Improved Anvil becomes more difficult than the next. However, I truly hope that a route remains open to allow me (and particularly newcomers to IA) to level-up without facing too much frustration. This is allowed in IA5, as long as you follow Raven’s advice on quest order (or a very similar quest order). I hope that this avenue remains open in future versions (i.e. no or no further improvements on the first few initial quests/battles).

(2) I still think that there should be mook battles. These battles don’t necessarily have to be unimproved, just improved only slightly. For instance, I have always thought that the sewer toll keepers should not be that difficult. Why would such skillful and rich folk seek employment as toll keepers in a sewer?! I think this group should be easily handled in Chapter 3. More groups that are only slightly improved (great for Chapter 3 or before) would seem to be part of a more realistic world and grant a more immersive role playing experience. (After all, not everyone you meet should be 20+ level, particularly in SoA.) I would expect dragon, demon, and quest battles to be tough, but does every group you meet have to be tough? The people who only want a tactical battle game would definitely say “yes.” However, some people may agree with me that this is not the best answer for an immersive role playing experience.

For another example, I faced the first drow party in the underdark. Even after taking care of one group of nasties (divide and conquer), the other group spanked me. I managed after a few reloads. I’m glad this battle will be weakened in the future. This is a “random” encounter of a group of drow right? It seems like it was the cream of the crop, elite assassination party – just waiting for the off-chance that gnomes may wander past? LOL. They didn’t even drop any chain armor.

Of course, once on Pirate Isle and for the remainder of the game, I don’t mind if all encounters are improved to one degree or another over the unmodded game. “To one degree or another” means that there should be clear differences in difficulty that remain when comparing mook battles with the plot’s major battles.

(3) The ability of the player to use backstab effectively has largely been done away with. I suppose that is reasonable to enhance difficulty, even though it pretty much crushes the class. (Personally, I favor allowing backstab, but allow backstab to do progressive additional damage rather than multiplicative damage.)

Well, ambushes are like backstab. When two parties are played intelligently, but one of them is buffed (the ambushers) and the other is not (the ambushed), who will win? When you greatly increase the difficultly of those type encounters, I think most players must rely on metagaming (knowledge of the upcoming ambush and knowledge of the scripted attacks) to succeed. At least, I would find it extremely hard or impossible to beat Samia’s group without pre-battle buffing. The duration of some spell buffs have been shortened to make it even more important to be able to put up buffs just prior to battle.

I personally *hate* relying on metagaming as my only recourse to win. Once again, it ruins the roleplaying experience to me. I would suggest that hints be provided that we need to prepare for a dangerous battle – or that the ambushers not be so dangerous. After all, there are numerous battles in IA which are not ambushes, but are very difficult. You don’t need to be ambushed to find yourself in a very dangerous battle.

(4) Added content is what really adds to the role playing value. I look forward to the fighter stronghold. Relatively few people play druids; so, I hope the fighter stronghold is next. Additionally, quests that are open to all parties regardless of protagonist class would be awesome!

(5) A double length time stop and improved alacrity on an enemy who intends to unload their spell book on the hero is *not fun* in my book. Depending on how many ruby rays the mage has and the memorized spells, she should be able to kill anyone. I think it will be a huge effort to learn the mage’s spellbook and determine what *equipment* is needed to keep you alive during this period – much metagaming. Everyone knows that equipment is expensive and hard to get (ingredients). You certainly don’t want to buy equipment for a single encounter. I know that this encounter is optional, but I have *always* done this encounter. I don’t want to stop now. I also expect that I will be able to complete this fight, but won’t be surprised if I require tactical advice. My point is that there are some tactics that make the enemy dangerous, but don’t make the game fun. I don’t like to kill monsters in time stop, and I don’t like to be killed by them in time stop.

(6) I was surprised at the price of the freedom scrolls in the underdark. In IA 4.2, I noticed that money limited forging early in the game. Matters may be worse in IA5 in this regard. However, before the final conflict in ToB in IA4.2, I had money to forge whatever item for which I had the ingredients. I think this is appropriate. Components, rather than money, should be the limiting factor in what you can forge. After all, characters are practically demigods before they even face the epic divine encounter. I think they should be filthy rich. This may also be true in IA5, but I don’t know as I have just made it to the underdark.

In future versions in regards to the money issue, I would like to see more extra-healing potions dropped, and perhaps their price decreased. I would also like to see the price for upgrading (by Cromwell) to +3 weapons decreased. After all, +3 weapons are needed to hit many monsters, and a +3 weapon without any special ability is not an overpowered weapon.

(7) I would like each of the traditional DnD classes (including bard and thief) to be able to make a significant contribution to the team in IA. A pure class thief (other than a swashbuckler) would be chosen for a team in order to enhance difficulty more than anything else. *I love choices and avenues for differing play styles.* I hope that some accommodations can be made for each class. For example, magical and elemental resistances have primarily nerfed the ability of mages as an offensive power compared to the unmodded game. (By the way, I agree that some nerfing was appropriate for a challenging game.) Now, Sikret is introducing some spells which allow the mages to contribute more to the team’s offense. Similarly, I think changes could be made to bring the thief up to par and to make the bard a viable option in IA6 (when the bard will be nerfed in some other ways).

[Zarathustra]

I actually found Haer'Dalis very useful from the start, though his power increased vastly once Eternal Melody was forged. You are correct that PfMW is not useful for tanking duty, I use it only to get him (or Imoen) out of tight spots safely. His remove magic started to become useful around level 20, I think, so hang in there: at level 27, he makes most mage battles a walk in the park. I never used Defensive Spin, the power of Offensive Spin is too tempting.

I do think that taking away level 6 (and higher) spells is a serious nerf; I would have much preferred tuning down the armor or maybe the improved bard song. As it stands, Blades (perhaps not even Bards in general) are just about right early on and somewhat overpowered in mid-game (end stages of SoA). I agree that a plain Bard or Jester would seem to be relatively useless in v.6. But then, who plays straight clerics in IA? Some classes just are less powerful in a combat-oriented, melee-dominated mod. I would say that as long as at least one kit or multi-class or dual-class combination is viable for any given class (as Swashbuckler for Thief or Blade for Bard or Berserker -> Cleric for Cleric), diversity is sufficiently secured.

I support your points about the general level of difficulty and occasional lapses in immersiveness. Tactical combat is the main focus of IA, and that is a good thing, but certain trappings of RP and coherence should be preserved. A golem or wyrm in WK that could take on every single vanilla game enemy at once and barely suffer a scratch? Acceptable, given the mod's purpose. A party of sewer-crawling thugs that could take down a bunch of unmodded dragons in no time? Somewhat over the top. I can only speak for myself, but even a tactically fun battle can leave a bad taste if it sits badly with the environment and spoils immersion. I wouldn't know exactly where to draw the line in every case, but it's worth pointing out that there has to be such a line, somewhere. This isn't even criticism: it's just that Sikret's experience and skill as a player might sometimes cloud his generally good judgment as a modder. It can be hard for an expert to imagine what things look like to a novice, and that's basically why I'm chiming in: heed the voice of inexperience!

This post has been edited by Zarathustra: Feb 28 2008, 02:24 AM