Neverwinter Nights 2

[violent]

So. I bought this thing a few years ago, hell, I bought it the day it was released what with being such a fan of the first. Thing is this: I have never been able to get this thing to perform properly. Now I don't know if this game was coded by monkeys or if there are particular tweaks to the thing I need to know about but always hearing about expansions and whatnot, I cannot help but relive my disappointment at not being able to play.

The inevitable rig question is bound to be next but I'm currently running a CoreDuo 3.2, 4GB ram and a 1GB 4870HD. Hell, I ran Crysis on high at 40+FPS at 1680x1050. Anything you guys know that I don't?

[Ten19]

I had a ton of issues getting NWN2 to run properly when I first installed it, though I bought the version that included the Mask of the Betrayer expansion, so I may not have been starting off from the same place you are. I basically had to spend a good 30 minutes tweaking everything in the graphics settings to get it to a playable state, and even then I was plagued with glitchy shadows and spurts of poor frame rate.

What are your primary issues with performance? Strictly FPS or are you encountering glitches as well?

[Panthera]

Make sure it's up to the latest patch, which has massive performance improvements, and knock down shadows a few notches. I think reflections was another killer. My computer has a X1900 card, and handles it just fine with only a couple notches down from max settings.

Also, I highly, highly, highly (I can't emphasize this enough) recommend that you use the 'strategic' view to control the game, and not the default. This makes it play more like the classic Baldur's Gate titles, and improves performance by having the camera pointed downwards most of the time.

[Karak]

So. I bought this thing a few years ago, hell, I bought it the day it was released what with being such a fan of the first. Thing is this: I have never been able to get this thing to perform properly. Now I don't know if this game was coded by monkeys or if there are particular tweaks to the thing I need to know about but always hearing about expansions and whatnot, I cannot help but relive my disappointment at not being able to play.

The inevitable rig question is bound to be next but I'm currently running a CoreDuo 3.2, 4GB ram and a 1GB 4870HD. Hell, I ran Crysis on high at 40+FPS at 1680x1050. Anything you guys know that I don't?
I think we all know the same thing it was poorly optimized and has been somewhat repaired via patch. However, even with patches there is only so much you can do. I hate games where you look at them and can not figure out why they run poorly then you realize...ah released too early, or released with a patch already being prepared.

[violent]

Thanks for the feedback. I'll certainly be putting this thing on strategic view the next shot I give it.

My primary issue at this point is framerate. I average around 15. I can't comment on any graphical glitches as I find the game impossible to play in this manner and haven't gone far enough to really look.

Also, I use the auto-updater so my version should be completely up to date. Although the game may be poorly optimized, it still seems to get lots of love so that's why I'm calling out for this chance to be able to play the thing.

[RandoM51]

NWN2 runs pretty good now, after all the patches.

The NWN2 original campaign is ok. Mask of the Betrayer is excellent. The most recent expansion is kind of lame though, IMHO.

[ShivaX]

Turn off shadows. If I remember right there was something fubar about shadows that will bog down any system (plus theres the added bonus that they don't even look right). I think you can leave some of them on, but that was the fps-killer for me. If you have shadows of trees, background and whatnot, it bogs you down.

[tombofsoldier]

Your rig is better than mine, and I can play at near max settings (not max shadow resolution) with around 25fps average. Sometimes it inexplicably slows to a crawl though. It's just not a good engine.

[violent]

I'm gonna try it once more and tweak as much as humanly possible. It would be a shame letting go of shadows but hey, small sacrifices, right?

[ShivaX]

I'm gonna try it once more and tweak as much as humanly possible. It would be a shame letting go of shadows but hey, small sacrifices, right?

Well half the time the shadows went AWOL anyway. I'm pretty sure my character's shadow shouldn't be 100' tall, especially when the shadow of a tree beside me is only like 30' tall.

[violent]

Well half the time the shadows went AWOL anyway. I'm pretty sure my character's shadow shouldn't be 100' tall, especially when the shadow of a tree beside me is only like 30' tall.

To be fair, 100 foot shadows are awesome.

[Goronmon]

This thread reminds me of when we thought about starting a mod for either NWN or NWN2 with some EvAvers a while back. A bunch of people volunteered. Then, of course, as soon as any work had to be done, everyone disappeared for some reason, haha.

But yeah, I had technical issues with NWN2 as well when it first came out. Never ended up playing for more than a few hours.

[Smoof]

There's something fucked with the AA, I discovered. My PC is able to play the latest games just fine on all max settings, but NWN2 crippled it. I was getting around 15FPS or so when I discovered it was directly related to the AA setting. I had it set to something quite high, so when I dropped it down to 2x or 4x or something, everything normalized and I was able to play just fine.

Of course, being able to play it just fine didn't help the fact that it's a shit game and I ended-up quitting anyway.

[Lint of Death]

I got this game within the past month (Gold Edition) and I've been playing through the original campaign. I am enjoying it!! There are some extremely frustrating glitches, but for the most part they're either avoidable or at least not gamebreaking.

[Telefrog]

NWN2 really diappointed the hell out of me. I loved Bioware's NWN. I bought all the expansions, downloaded countless mods, and still fire it up every now and then to play an interesting scenario when I come across one. NWN2, unfortunately, never took off in the modding community like the first one due to the technical glitches in the beginning.

[Voodoo]

NWN2 really diappointed the hell out of me. I loved Bioware's NWN. I bought all the expansions, downloaded countless mods, and still fire it up every now and then to play an interesting scenario when I come across one. NWN2, unfortunately, never took off in the modding community like the first one due to the technical glitches in the beginning.
The editor is also quite a pain in the ass to work with. I developed near 30 modules for NWN 1. When I got my hands on NWN 2 I was very disappointed in the toolset. It went from being fairly easy to medium difficulty to create a mod to OMGWTFBBQ!!!

[jpublic]

Yeah, most of the guys I know who made some great NWN1 mods took one look at the NWN2 toolset, said 'fuck it' and went back to making NWN1 mods.

[Panthera]

I guess people just aren't interested in a robust toolset.

[Voodoo]

I guess people just aren't interested in a robust toolset.
Bringing it down to just that statement is simplistic. You are looking at a grand amount of NWN 1 module developers that were detested at the NWN 2 toolset. Have you attempted to build a persistent world much less a module in the NWN 1 and/or the NWN 2 toolset?

[Telefrog]

Bringing it down to just that statement is simplistic. You are looking at a grand amount of NWN 1 module developers that were detested at the NWN 2 toolset. Have you attempted to build a persistent world much less a module in the NWN 1 and/or the NWN 2 toolset?

I agree. Robust is fine. The problem is that the NWN2 editor is glitchy, unfriendly, and uses a fairly complicated system to do even simple things. Doing relatively easy things in the Aurora toolset (like building a dungeon and populating it with scaled encounters) was pretty quick. You could have a rough module up and running in a couple of hours. In contrast, the same scenario in NWN2 would take a lot longer to make because the robust editor lacked an easy way to do low-level things. It assumed all module makers wanted to create intricate stuff. In short, it lacked good wizards.

Also, the established module makers were understandably reluctant to "start over" on learning the idosyncracies of the new system when the older one was fairly well mapped out and easily used. It didn't help that the new editor was frankly broken for the first year and had numerous crash issues. Since the best and brightest refused to budge, the crowd followed suit.

[Panthera]

Bringing it down to just that statement is simplistic. You are looking at a grand amount of NWN 1 module developers that were detested at the NWN 2 toolset. Have you attempted to build a persistent world much less a module in the NWN 1 and/or the NWN 2 toolset?

I haven't - just played around with it a little - but I'm not even being facetious. At some point, there's a decision to be made between complexity and ease of use, and the NWN2 toolset is much closer to an actual developer's toolset, and it's pretty clear that people wanted something simpler, so I'm not necessarily saying it was the right decision. It didn't seem that difficult to me at all, but as a developer I'm used to working in those kinds of tools.

I think the problems with it are seriously exaggerated, and I'm getting this impression from modders on the forum who think otherwise. Besides, glancing at the NWN2 vault shows there are a ton of people who made modules for it, and judging from the forums there are active PWs. The mod scene is far from dead.

The established mod makers are used to NWN's simplicity. I can understand not wanting to dive into something much harder.

[Lint of Death]

I just beat the original NWN2 campaign for the first time. Wheee.

[Panthera]

It took me two years to finish the original NWN2 campaign, hah. It had its moments...

...just moments. I liked the keep stuff.

[Lint of Death]

Yeah I just started playing near the start of the month. It has some good characters -e.g. Khelgar Ironfist, but some of these good ones aren't as well developed (but come close), like Neeshka. Any writing/acting that makes me like a character such as Neeshka despite that voice should get an award. Grobnar and his Wendersnaven actually turned out to be pretty funny.

The Keep was cool. I liked the epilogue stuff, but I did find it lame that Your surviving party members just end up buried under a bunch of rock and then vanished. Sure, that's a pretty cool way to show the sacrifices everyone made (presuming a good guy ending), but I guess I just find that sort of ending for every single living PC rather dull. I do hope at least a couple of them reappear in MotB.

[JayK47]

I'm having fun with this. I just tossed some main character together and already want someone new. I went with a Ranger and really have not found any decent weapons or abilities that seem to really help the team. I wanted to go 100% bow and arrow with some animal helper side kick, but the bows so far are just too weak. Finally got an animal helper though. So since the bows so far blow, I have been using small melee with shield and some decent armor charging into battle. Still early in the game yet and have yet to get a decent mage. Perhaps I should have started as one myself. I wonder, if you start as a mage, do you get the same teammates in the first town? Seemed since I was a Ranger, I thought the game picked a fighter and mage to accompany me. Also wondering what the team size limit is, if there is one.

Yeah, not much of a D&D fan, so I am not familiar with what the best character build should be. I have been just using recommend for most teammates so far. I'm sure I am picking crappy abilities for my main.

[ClannerDelta]

The problem with the D&D system without a GM present, is you really need to min/max to get a character that doesn't feel like it's hitting enemies with a foam bat.

If you're not particularly interested in learning the system and just want the other RPG elements/story/gameplay, I'd suggest going to gamefaqs and looking at character builds.

[JayK47]

I could really use more money for my stronghold. I wish I could use my own gold. I have way more than I could possibly spend yet my stronghold treasury is broke. I suppose if I don't have a kick-ass stronghold come 100%, the game will come to a quick end.

[JayK47]

Turns out you can just use your gold if you do not have enough funds in the treasury.

Best I can tell, Dragon Age is a dumbed down, stripped down version of Neverwinter Nights 2. This game has so much content it is quite insane.

[JayK47]

I get the feeling this is turning into my personal game journal. Did anybody else hate the disease on the main character for Mask of Betrayer? It really ruined the game for me to have a time limit and a constant need to fill a "need". I really do not want to wrap this expansion up since I do not want to keep dealing with the hunger. And I am no doubt doing it wrong since I can never maintain it without draining my XP.

[ClannerDelta]

MotB punishes you for feeding. It's less like a disease and more like a drug addiction. I thought it was rather well done. Though it's been a while since I played. Was my favorite NWN storyline.

[AversionFX]

Yeah, not much of a D&D fan, so I am not familiar with what the best character build should be. I have been just using recommend for most teammates so far. I'm sure I am picking crappy abilities for my main.

If you want to play easy mode, roll a high-str fighter, give him a two-hander, take the feats that specialize and prefer said two-handed weapon. Jot down the requirements to Prestige into a Weapon Master (or whatever it's called). You will destroy everything with little effort.

When you're done, find an RPG in which the core mechanics don't include plate mail giving you avoidance, rather than mitigation. Armor Class is the dumbest goddamn thing ever.

[Panthera]

If you want to play easy mode, roll a high-str fighter, give him a two-hander, take the feats that specialize and prefer said two-handed weapon. Jot down the requirements to Prestige into a Weapon Master (or whatever it's called). You will destroy everything with little effort.

When you're done, find an RPG in which the core mechanics don't include plate mail giving you avoidance, rather than mitigation. Armor Class is the dumbest goddamn thing ever.

Yes, because swords are well known for cutting through steel armor.

[RandoM51]

There was an easy xhtml mod so that your feed bar or whatever it was in motb wouldn't constantly drain. I'll admit that I used it. :)

[Lithium Flower]

I have heard this complain a couple of times but I never had an impossible time managing it. Feeding in moderation and using the resist power when surrounded by telthors/shades was mighty helpful. As was the perk when you restore the Great Forest spirit thingy.

The only cheat I used for MoTB was the party hack. I felt really bad giving one person detention. Either have so many groupies that they can give each other company while you're out with a couple, or include everyone.

That said, MotB is one of my favourite games of all time because of the excellent story.

[AversionFX]

Yes, because swords are well known for cutting through steel armor.

Then let's try an experiment. You put on a suit of metal, and we'll have a neutral, third-party record the number of times I'm able to smack you with a baseball bat. It'll be super scientific.

Heavy armor would weigh you down, thus decreasing your ability to avoid enemy attacks. In D&D it increases your chance to avoid attacks, which makes zero sense whatsoever. Also, take your snark elsewhere.

[Panthera]

Then let's try an experiment. You put on a suit of metal, and we'll have a neutral, third-party record the number of times I'm able to smack you with a baseball bat. It'll be super scientific.

Heavy armor would weigh you down, thus decreasing your ability to avoid enemy attacks. In D&D it increases your chance to avoid attacks, which makes zero sense whatsoever. Also, take your snark elsewhere.

Alright, I'll lay off the snark a bit, but if you stop and think about this for a second you'll realize how little sense it makes. The attack roll tells you if you're doing damage or not, not if your weapon is contacting the enemy or not, which is why there's such a thing as Touch AC (ie, what your AC is without armor) that's used for attacks that negate armor like magic spells.

If you fight a man in good armour with a sword, you can hit him as hard as you want and it's not going to hurt him. A sword is not a baseball bat - a two-handed sword weighs just over two pounds and the balance is back towards the hilt, which means it's designed for not just cutting, but thrusting, and speed instead of for maximum impact velocity. The way you defeat him is by attacking the vulnerable places - eye slits, armpit, under the gorget to get him in the neck, or the palm of a gauntlet. No matter how hard you hit the armour, you're not going to hurt him. At best, it'll distract him, or lead into an attack that will work, usually involving grappling and bringing him to the ground. Damage mitigation makes no sense in this situation.

Finally, I don't believe that armour decreases your ability to avoid hits by any appreciable amount. It will tire you faster, but it does not really slow you down. This is from personal experience from using partial armour, and from discussions with people who do fight with historical armour (not SCA stick-fighting types.)

Damage mitigation is more appropriate for attacks that do have a chance of penetrating, where the damage caused by the penetration is reduced in a linear way by the thickness of the material. This makes most sense for ballistic projectiles versus vehicle armour.

So, if you really wanted to make a more accurate armour system in D&D, it would be almost entirely damage avoidance, plus the chance of penetrative damage in the case of spears (though a reduced effect, since if the spear gets all the way through your gut it doesn't matter how much it had to go through, the damage is the same) or arrows versus types of armour that can be damaged, plus the possibility of concussive damage from two-handed, war weapons like bec de corbins and poleaxes that not even a man in armour can spar with safely today.

All of which is far outside the scope of a simplied ruleset like D&D.

[AversionFX]

The attack roll tells you if you're doing damage or not, not if your weapon is contacting the enemy or not, which is why there's such a thing as Touch AC (ie, what your AC is without armor) that's used for attacks that negate armor like magic spells.

There are two rolls - the attack roll, and the damage roll. AC comes from a lot of sources, and in general reflects your ability to "not be hit" by attacks from a variety of sources. So, if you can't roll better than the value of your opponent's AC, you don't even get a damage roll. IE, a high AC prevents you from actually hitting them: avoidance.

If you fight a man in good armour with a sword, you can hit him as hard as you want and it's not going to hurt him.

This is my exact point. What you just described is mitigation. I can HIT you, but I won't do damage because you are wearing armor. In D&D, a high armor class (which can be attained by wearing heavy armor) prevents you from being hit not from taking damage. Mitigation is a separate stat entirely, and has nothing to do with your armor (unless your armor has an enchantment that adds mitigation)

In this sense, robes provide the same amount of protection as plate mail. However, wearing plate mail makes you less likely to be hit.

[Panthera]

There are two rolls - the attack roll, and the damage roll. AC comes from a lot of sources, and in general reflects your ability to "not be hit" by attacks from a variety of sources. So, if you can't roll better than the value of your opponent's AC, you don't even get a damage roll. IE, a high AC prevents you from actually hitting them: avoidance.



This is my exact point. What you just described is mitigation. I can HIT you, but I won't do damage because you are wearing armor. In D&D, a high armor class (which can be attained by wearing heavy armor) prevents you from being hit not from taking damage. Mitigation is a separate stat entirely, and has nothing to do with your armor (unless your armor has an enchantment that adds mitigation)

Really? You're arguing this?

Yes, your to-hit roll is a combination of all the things that stop the enemy from causing hitpoint damage, though some things like parrying are abstracted into hitpoints. Do you really think Gary Gygax, when designing D&D, thought armour makes you move faster or something? Do you really think that was the design intent?

If the sword hits my armour and not me, I have not been hit. My armour has been hit, and thus, no damage. A miss.

The question is if damage should be stopped or reduced. I argue that it's more accurate to consider it stopped.

[Panthera]

In this sense, robes provide the same amount of protection as plate mail. However, wearing plate mail makes you less likely to be hit.

Once again - touch AC is different from your actual AC.

[AversionFX]

If the sword hits my armour and not me, I have not been hit. My armour has been hit, and thus, no damage. A miss.

The question is if damage should be stopped or reduced. I argue that it's more accurate to consider it stopped.

I guess we differ on the semantics of it. I don't think hitting an armored person for 0 damage should be considered a "miss." I swung, I struck you, but because you are protected by a suit of armor, my attack was ineffective. That is not the same thing as a miss.

As far as NWN2 is concerned, heavy armor makes you harder to hit. You don't take 0 damage - you avoid the attack altogether. Within the NWN2 rules, having a high amount of AC (Dodge) and avoiding the attack is the same thing as avoiding an attack by having a high AC due to heavy armor.

Missing an attack is not the same thing as landing an attack for 0 damage.

[Panthera]

I guess we differ on the semantics of it. I don't think hitting an armored person for 0 damage should be considered a "miss." I swung, I struck you, but because you are protected by a suit of armor, my attack was ineffective. That is not the same thing as a miss.

As far as NWN2 is concerned, heavy armor makes you harder to hit. You don't take 0 damage - you avoid the attack altogether. Within the NWN2 rules, having a high amount of AC (Dodge) and avoiding the attack is the same thing as avoiding an attack by having a high AC due to heavy armor.

Missing an attack is not the same thing as landing an attack for 0 damage.

Why not? What's the difference? Is the wording so bothersome that you consider it D&D's fatal flaw? Would everything be fixed if it was a to-damage roll with no change in mechanics?

edit: I should point out above that you called it "the dumbest goddamn thing ever" and now you're saying it's just semantics.

[AversionFX]

Why not? What's the difference? Is the wording so bothersome that you consider it D&D's fatal flaw? Would everything be fixed if it was a to-damage roll with no change in mechanics?

edit: I should point out above that you called it "the dumbest goddamn thing ever" and now you're saying it's just semantics.

In NWN2, AC makes you harder to hit. AC gained from heavy armor makes you less likely to be hit, instead of making you take reduced damage. That is the dumbest goddamn thing ever. In literally every RPG out there, armor reduces the damage you take. The whole purpose of armor is the assumption that you are going to be hit, so minimizing the damage you receive is its entire function.

D&D's other fatal flaw is the "casts per day" system for magic, but that's an entirely different subject.

[Panthera]

In NWN2, AC makes you harder to hit. AC gained from heavy armor makes you less likely to be hit, instead of making you take reduced damage. That is the dumbest goddamn thing ever. In literally every RPG out there, armor reduces the damage you take. The whole purpose of armor is the assumption that you are going to be hit, so minimizing the damage you receive is its entire function.

D&D's other fatal flaw is the "casts per day" system for magic, but that's an entirely different subject.

I can't facepalm hard enough for this. It's like you're averse to reading.

Okay, I can't just leave it at that. Tell me, does armour in D&D somehow not reduce the amount of damage a character will take in a battle?

[AversionFX]

Okay, I can't just leave it at that. Tell me, does armour in D&D somehow not reduce the amount of damage a character will take in a battle?

Armor in NWN2 does not mitigate damage unless it has special properties that specifically reduce damage, IE Darksteel armor.

Darksteel Banded Mail: Damage Resistance: Acid [5/-]

That armor specifically reduces damage from a source of Acid.

Most armor does not provide damage resistance from other sources. It merely gives you AC which reduces your chance to be hit, which again is not the same thing as damage resistance. Why is this so hard to understand?

[Panthera]

Armor in NWN2 does not mitigate damage unless it has special properties that specifically reduce damage, IE Darksteel armor.

Darksteel Banded Mail: Damage Resistance: Acid [5/-]

That armor specifically reduces damage from a source of Acid.

Most armor does not provide damage resistance from other sources. It merely gives you AC which reduces your chance to be hit, which again is not the same thing as damage resistance. Why is this so hard to understand?

It's not. You're saying that damage resistance is the only legitimate way to do armor. And, as I outlined above, it's clearly not. D&D, as you can see, has mechanics for resistances, but it was decided not to use them for armour for a reason.

[ClannerDelta]

There's inane bullshit and then there's this.

[Panthera]

Thanks for contributing.

[ShivaX]

If you wear heavy armor and get hit, the armor completely stops the blow unless its good enough to hit someplace weak/get through/whatever.

For example, talking old 3E rules.

You have 18 Dex and a Chain shirt.
Both give +4 AC. So your AC is 18.

Enemy attacks you. Rolls a 12. You dodged it (since your AC without armor is 14).
Enemy attacks you. Rolls a 17. Your armor stopped the blow.

Its actually relevant since if hes using a touch attack (like an Inflict spell or whatever), then on the first roll you're fine. On the second roll you'll be hit since he connected with you and magic doesn't care what you're wearing.

Its actually a great system in a lot of ways. I mean Damage Reduction or whatever works fine as well, but what tends to happen in those systems is things start doing insane amounts of damage because anything else never hurts you. Or armor is just crap. Either you're immune to daggers/swords and everything hits for a jillion damage or you're vulnerable to everything and armor probably just slows you down.

[Deadend]

Armor Class is an abstract stat. It means "to actually cause damage to this dude you gotta swing this precisely" which again, can stand for a dude who is dodging like it's the Matrix or a guy wearing a Tank. Players are required to think about how that would look/fluff, but what it comes down to it, it works the same and requires less math than having to deal with damage reduction stuff in a way that doesn't fuck dodgy thieves who get a bad roll or sir-plates-alot.

It also is more fun, as when you roll that damage dice, it's NOT fun to go "well, the orc disregards 4 of those points of damage." It makes players frown.

I still wish there was a mod to make NWN2 turn based in combat and have visible grid lines so I can be a total asshole and attack of opportunity/flank the shit out of things.

[J Arcane]

Arguing about the simulatory merits of the D&D system is like arguing about the utility of salt for sweetening tea.

[Deadend]

Arguing about the simulatory merits of the D&D system is like arguing about the utility of salt for sweetening tea.

I only argue about it in terms of "what is more fun." as the more a system tries to "simulate" for RPGs the more I will give it shit for the things that aren't perfect.

D&D is nicely abstract and does mixed class team combat quite well. It's outside-of-combat stuff is really weak and the whole game is focused on gear and levels a bit too much. There are games that do conflict more abstract and also flesh out things outside of fighting for mechanics better, and there are games that do combat much better.

It's more about finding a system that fits the gamegroup, as nothing makes me sadder than seeing people try and force D20 to do things that just don't work well (grappling, strategy, ranged combat and cover, characters with personalities that dictate what they do in situations, detailed damage model, in-depth magic, so on and so forth) it's like the Law and Order of Tabletop gaming, everyone has seen it at least once, and can sort of respect it, but it's a bit broad in it's try to be everything for everyone.

[Panthera]

Arguing about the simulatory merits of the D&D system is like arguing about the utility of salt for sweetening tea.

You know, I've gone back and forth on this. I started with D&D, grew to dislike it for dumb and arbitrary reasons like Aversion above, and then came to appreciate the design behind it once I left my teenage years and now 1st edition has a place in my gaming right alongside more modern systems. And you know what? I think the 'simulatory merits' are underrated, especially after doing medieval martial arts for a few years. As long as you realize how abstract it is.

At least at low level.

[Saladin]

Give me the days of Rolemaster, where every weapon vs armor combination had a unique chart to roll against to determine effect. PITA for P&P gameplay, but reckon it'd work pretty well in a CRPG. The modelling all the various death effects would give the artists nightmares though, especially the crazier ones from rolling 66.