I'm just curious, what do people think of the Creature Correction mods for ye olde BG1 (either from G3's Fixpack or Unfinished Business)? I'm thinking of installing one of them myself, I just wonder how far into "fixing what ain't broke" territory they go?

Specifically, I'd like to know...

A) has anyone had problems or issues with either version of the mod, and

B) do they fix the broken kobolds? Maybe it's just me, but I feel that a monster with 0.5 Hit Dice, worth 7 XP apiece, should *not* be allowed to Specialize in a weapon. How else can this little fart-bubble of a monster be consistently dealing 7-8 damage (non-crit) with a shortbow?

It's not a *big* deal, I guess, it's just kinda disheartening when I toss Protection From Evil on my paladin, who's already AC -1 in plate mail and carrying a tower shield, and have him lead the charge only to watch these little terrors roll Natural 20s anyway and consistently deal 6-8 damage. (That's just for smaller skirmishes; for larger ones you better believe I bust out the Wand of Sleep! :)

A) None.
B) They weren't broken.

Creature corrections was about fixing or restoring errors in creature files, ids files and so on, not about re-balancing anything.

Common kobolds weren't broken? I hate to be that guy, but my 2nd Edition Monstrous Manual disagrees.

The only way they could be dealing 7 or 8 non-crit damage with a shortbow (1d6 damage) is if they were given Weapon Specialization (granting +2 damage). These creatures are 1/2 a Hit Die each, meaning they aren't even equivalent to a 1st-Level player character; no way should they be allowed the warriors' Weapon Specialization ability, unless you want to bump up their XP value. Even without playing "rules lawyer", when a monster is dealing non-crit damage greater than its XP value, you can tell something's wrong.

The Monstrous Manual confirms, damage dealt by common kobolds is strictly by weapon type (1-4 or 1-6, depending on the weapon); no mention of Specialization or any other bonuses to damage. (And if you're going to grant them any such advanced training or abilities, call them "Kobold Elites" or something and increase their XP value to reflect the added challenge.)

The good news is, I've just played through the Nashkel Mines twice with "Creature Corrections" installed, and it seems the minds behind the mod feel the same way I do; the common kobolds are now dealing damage *within* the bounds of a 1d6 weapon, as well they should be! =)

(Of course, I'm guessing most people just installed the mod without really paying attention to any differences, but I *really* hate kobolds, and I'm thoroughly pleased to see this creature get corrected! Huzzah, and onward!)

Another person who doesn't understand that Baldur's Gate is not P&P.

Kobolds might feel strong in the early stages of BG1 compared to the exp that you get for defeating them, whether it's breaking the rules of P&P or not. Though I haven't checked thier .cre if they have weapon specialization, but I think it's a similar case as with the bandits (and the infamous random encounter - there's a separate thread about it as well here) - ranged weapons, especially bows are rally strong in BG1, both in the hands of party and the enemies. Add to it that both the bandits and the kobolds usually attack in large groups and they can give a lot of troubles.

I might check later if kobolds have weapon specialization, I wouldn't like to "correct" it though.

No, but it's *based* on P&P. Gee whiz, if you're just going to be mean and nasty...

I guess, pardon me for posting something on a public message board? I'm terribly sorry if doing so offends you for some reason...

Seems to me that it's *you* who's been offended. "Mean and nasty"? Grow up.

I think the reason some folks compare the BG games to P&P is because of how close BG comes to P&P. Because of this the rules that didn't make it kind of stand out. Some that stand out for me are no massive damage, no rations or spell componants, fighters with a strength score of 16+ don't get an XP boost, and paladins don't get a war horse.

There's countless games that drew inspiration from P&P D&D but most of them look nothing like it. Many of these games aren't even from the D&D license. Take a look at...

- Heroes of the Lance (NES)
- Advanced Dungeons and Dragons (Intellivision)
- Pretty much any Square Enix RPG
- The Warcraft Series
- Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance 1+2 (PS2, XBox, Gamecube, Gameboy Advance)

The Intellivision one was a teensy bit before my time... gonna have to look that one up! Dark Alliance 1 and 2 are excellent (might be nice to see them on GOG someday) and Final Fantasy 1 totally had D&D monsters in it.

And yeah, whether due to hardware/programming limitations, or just the *type* of game in question, changes are gonna happen. The various D&D games on the PC, and especially Infinity Engine through NWN 1 and 2, all very much try to be as faithful to the tabletop rules as possible on a PC game. That's why it always seemed "off" when these little 7-XP critters were dealing more damage per hit than 15-XP xvarts (even though both carry weapons that do 1d6 dmg) and matching the per-hit damage of 35-XP enemies like hobgoblins and gibberlings (maxing at 8 dmg), or even 65-XP wolves (also maxing at 8 dmg).

Bah, much ado about nothing, I guess. Anyway, since installing UB: Creature Corrections, that little damage bonus *seems* to have been removed (if so, huzzah!). Either that, or I just had *three* back-to-back weird runs of dice (the first *without* CC resulting in kobolds dealing damage no less than 6-8 per hit, the other two *with* CC reporting damage no more than 1-6 per hit - and each time, I took a fair number of hits; the little turds roll Natural 20s like gangbusters). Having luck *that* weird is certainly possible, but not bloody likely.

Is your party fatigued? Being fatigued will result in poor luck, which will shift dice rolls against you.\

(Yes, there actually is such a mechanic in the IE games. In Icewind Dale, play Tymora's Melody (with a Bard) and your party, if not fatigued, will not roll any natural 1s when attacking.)

Nope, my party was rested to full each time before hitting the Mines, so that wasn't a factor in this very strange case. Only in our race against time to rescue Dynaheir from the gnolls did I push them to fight prolonged battles while fatigued. And when they *do* get fatigued, they don't let me hear the end of it (for example, Jaheira: "I have JUST about seen ENOUGH waking hours, slave driver!").

I'm fairly sure the kobolds roll 20s so often just because, between their own sheer numbers and attacking twice a round with the bow, they just end up having so many rolls *period* (more rolls means more 20s). That's also why I don't mind seeing their damage scaled back to just the shortbow's 1d6.

Neat tip about bards in Icewind Dale, though; might have to roll a bard in my party next time I play. I'm guessing you mean IWD 1; how are they when it comes to casting, in that game?

Yeah, I agree that 7exp felt too little for kobolds and for low level party they are more dangerous that xvarts. But that never really bothered me. Probably 15 exp would be more fair.

That tip actually applies to both games.

In IWD1, Bards level up faster than Mages, and can therefore cast spells at higher casting levels then Mages at equal experience. In the classic edition (in other words, not the EE), the inability to use higher level spells isn't much of a handicap; there are only 2 9th level spells (both Conjuration, incidentally), neither of which seems to be particularly useful, and Bards eventually get the ability to memorize one 8th level spell. Note that you can't cast and sing at the same time, however.

Of note, scrolls are scarce, and a Mage will often get access to a new spell level before you find any spells of that level; therefore, the delayed acquisition of higher level spells really isn't an issue.

Note that the spellcasting situation is completely different in IWD2. (Scrolls are still scarce, but bards don't learn spells from them anymore.)
Personally, I think that, given that the first level up requires over 1,000 XP for even the fastest leveling classes, that those figures are an order of magnitude too low; how about 70 or 150 XP for killing them so that you don't feel like you're stuck at level 1 for so long?

As long as they're dealing up to 8 damage, 15 is pretty fair. Don't know if I'd go as far as 70-150, though! =)

BG1 is very much a "stop and smell the roses" game before Chapter 5; by that point, I usually only have maybe 2-3 world map areas unexplored. Before Nashkel, I do all the quests for the Friendly Arm and most (not all) for Beregost; then when I get to Nashkel, meet Minsc and dump Xzar and Monty, I charge off to rescue Dynaheir (resulting in three more zones explored, and one just chipped into). My party's Level 3 by the time I do the Mines.

The flow of BG 1 and 2 is *quite* different from IWD 1 and 2. The IWDs flow in basically a beeline (which I don't mind), while the BGs are a bit more open-world (BG1 especially so). Granted, some may feel BG1 to be "grindy" that way, but at least I can find excuses to be exploring those wilderness zones (such as searching for Captain Brage).