Q: What's this about nerfed stoneskin and ironskin!? I don't want that!
A: Don't worry. Everything is divided into distinct and separate components.
Q: So my mighty cleric can now use a sword? That sounds great! So now that my cleric has chucked the mace and can use swords and axes I have to ask.. are all the magical weapons set to allow my priest to use them? What about the holy avenger? What about that reaver sword thingy? Iím not sure how appropriate it would be for my priest to be using either of those.
A: I have chucked the generic restrictions, but the alignment and specific class restrictions remain.
i.e. Soul Reaver +4 is still only usable by evil folks, and Carsomyr is still Paladins only. This is in fact one of the areas where I foresee potential bugs, so when AoE is released keep an eye out for restrictions that don't seem to make sense.
Q: As far as the stone skin thing goes Iíve found that it truly unbalances the game in the players favor. I have but one question concerning it.. my stone skin will be 6 rounds. Will the enemies stone skin also be thus?
A: Yes it will, since they use the same spell file. With some files (i.e. Cleric Blade Barrier) they use a different spell file.
Q: So I assume that this mod will be compatible with all other mods out there?
A: Yep, it's both WeiDU and specific attention has been put into making it make its changes while still not overwriting other changes.
What it will overwrite:
Basic armour (+1, +2, and non-magical)
+1, +2, and non-magical spears
Stoneskin and Ironskin (optional, as previously mentioned)
What it modifies (which may mean it conflicts with other mods, but it's unlikely):
Weapon proficiency descriptions (set StrRefs)
Damage range of some weapons (mod-added weapons are unaffected)
Str/Dex Requirements for weapons (see above)
Class/Alignment/Kit restrictions for weapons (again, see above)
Q: I always thought the mage restrictions just refered to the fact you shouldn't be able to cast while holding anything large. Strength would be irrelevant. The ability to use all kinds of weapons has always been an advantage of the fighter. If nothing else, the other classes just might not have had the training. I suppose it is fair as long you keep the other classes from picking up any proficiencies in non-class weapons.
A: Proficiencies is the thing though. A fighter can get 5 *s, and their THAC0 progresses a lot more rapidly. A mage can use a staff while casting spells, so why not a two-handed sword?
Of course, when it all comes down to it, you can just pretend that your mages can't use 2-h sword proficiency or whatever. Honour system and all that.
Q: Generally, removing weapons restrictions is a great idea--but clerics shouldn't get to use sharp weapons. The reason that priests are stuck with maces is that historically, priests are not allowed to spill another being's blood. Hence the use of clubs, maces and other blunt weapons (ok the flail is pushing it).
A: Would a cleric of Talos be restricted from hacking his opponent's skull open with an axe? Would a priest of Mask be unable to use a dagger?
The only restrictions are specialised ones (i.e. non-paladins can't use Carsomyr).
Do remember that we are talking about D&D here, not world history. There are TONS of gods available in the FR setting, of good, neutral and evil. Servants of gods like Malar and Talos would like nothing better then to ravage the lands and slaughter their inhabitants if they please. In the 3rd Edition, Clerics are no longer blindly restricted from using sharp weapons. And no, there's no real reasons here for D&D.
Q: Will Throne of Bhaal be required to use Ashes of Embers?
A: Nope, there are two components for SoA and ToB for each feature, if required (i.e. universal weapon proficiencies).