Official Release v1.5

[DavidW]

It's pretty much undeniable that raising the level of the NPCs is making them tougher and not smarter. A level 25 lich is not less smart than a level 36 lich when using SCS. It's just harder to take down because it's been given an "unfair" (for me, at least) level up. Mind you, SCS is still to be commended greatly for "cheating" so little and believe me, I think your job has been nothing less than fantastic. But this "glitch" is not so minor.

 

The algorithm automatically works (I'd assume) when installing core components of SCS (smarter mages and smarter priests) which any "serious" SCS player can't be without, for it makes the enemy smarter and the challenge more interesting. So it's not that we can "skip" the beefing up.

 

Okay, so I've followed this up: and I was wrong, the algorithm isn't glitchy, it's working fine. I was just looking at the wrong spell list.

 

Here's the description of what the algorithm does (from the comments in scsII.tph):

 

/////	Looks at the spells a creature has and estimates its correct level, on 
/////	  the following principles:
////	i) a creature's estimated level is the lowest level at which, for each spell 
////	   level, it can memorise
////	at least as many spells as it actually has memorised; except that
////	ii) no creature is given a level which permits it to cast spells of a higher 
////	   spell level than it actually has memorised; and
////	iii) memorised spells in excess of 5 are ignored (otherwise various people 
////	   are slammed straight to L40)

 

Liches have five ninth level spells memorised. In the unmodded game, the first level at which a mage can cast five ninth level spells is level 35: so, the algorithm adjusts liches to be thirty-fifth level.

 

Is that making it smarter, or tougher, or what? The abilities that vanilla-game liches have require them to be at least level 35, so I make them level 35.

 

Of course, I could strip away some of their spells. I may even do that in a future version (at some point I need to write a more systematic spell-allocation block for SCS2 rather than just making do with a few tweaks to the existing spells), but notice that that's actually tweaking the game to make it easier.

[Salk]

DavidW,

 

nice to see that the algorithm works as intended. This is a relief for me.

 

But now I am really thinking that the SCS approach relying completely on the Bioware's spell selection for NPCs isn't really optimal.

 

Since you said you will revamp the spellbooks, I'd guess this is what you also think.

 

I fear that the job above (new spellbook system) is going to be a huge work though. Hopefully I am wrong (as usual... )

 

Demivrgvs,

 

what about my proposal (Spellstrike tearing down protections like you envisioned but restricting its radius to 5 feet like SCS)?

[DavidW]

- Spellstrike: 10 feet radius area of effect (twice as much as SCS's one), I've made it dispel combat and specific protections too (being it a 9th level spell it deserves to be the ultimate antimagic attack imo, while vanilla's one not much an improvement over Pierce Shield which also lowers target's magic resistance)

I tentatively suggest that this is overpowered - my experience on my (one) playthrough with SCS installed is that there's already a sea change in the effectiveness of antimagic once you get access to Spell Strike. It probably doesn't matter so much in the vanilla game, but SCS (or Tactics, come to that) uses 4-5 magic protections, so sweeping them all away in one blow is already hugely effective. If you can kill pro/magic weapons, stoneskin and pro/magic energy in the same casting, you've got a pretty much instant mage-killer.

Wel...it was intended to be a mage killer. If you think it's overpowered even with SCS I have to find a way to town it down, but surely it deserves to be more powerful than its vanilla version. I bet no one considered it nearly as useful as the good 9th level choices (Time Stop, Chain Contingency, Spell Trap, ...) and I'd like to allow players the widest selection of spells. Without some beefing most of them will just skip Spellstrike in favor of the usual Time Stop (which at the moment allows to tear down a mage's defences much better than Spellstrike imo).

 

Let me try to persuade you of the virtues of Spellstrike:

 

Suppose you're up against an SCS2 lich who had a chance to prebuff. He's prebuffed with Spell Trap, Protection from the Elements, Shadow Door, Mirror Image, Stoneskin, and Protection from Magic Energy. His chain contingency contains SI: Divination and SI:Abjuration.

 

So, sure, you could use Timestop, and follow it with a Pierce Shield or Ruby Ray, and then either a Warding Whip or two single-strike spells. Either way, it'll take you three rounds, so you won't be able to breach him before the timestop comes down. Or you could use Spellstrike and get rid of it all at once. There's not a huge amount in it. The Spellstrike takes less time to cast (Timestop can be fiddly to get off), doesn't leave time for your party's buffs to run down, and doesn't use up several lower-level spell slots; on the other hand, the Timestop is more flexible and lets the enemy's buffs run down. I guess it's a judgment call which is a better choice; personally, on my last playthrough I was usually carrying two spellstrikes in the later part of the game.

 

If you add other stuff to Spellstrike, I think it will be quite difficult for the AI to keep enemy spellcasters alive at high levels. In the scenario above, the lich will probably try to fire off a sequencer or trigger to give him spell deflection. If he lost his combat protection spells too, he'll probably be chewed up before he has a chance to do that. That's not necessarily a problem but it will have significant tactical effects.

 

 

All these antimagic attacks are giving me a headache! I really don't see why they put so many of them in the game, is it really necessary to have one spell of this type for each spell level (at 7th there're even two of them!)? Anyway, I'm surely not proposing to remove them, but making all of them scaling and somewhat different from one another isn't going to be easy.

 

I think it's probably so parties can get access to them at all levels. Personally I usually end up carrying a mixture of most of them.

 

- Spellstrike I've already argued for, above.

- Pierce Shield I actually don't use much: the antimagic isn't really worth it, and eighth level spell slots are in high demand for Horrid Wilting.

- Ruby Ray will take down a Spell Trap

- Warding Whip is nice for getting on top of enemies who renew their magic defences

- Pierce Magic is available at relatively low level and is the first spell that works through Globe of Invulnerability

- Secret Word is quite low-powered but it's useful in the early game, and in the late game it's often not too hard to find a couple of spare L4 slots

- Spell Thrust isn't much good in practice since it doesn't even go through Minor Globe.

 

As for that "Improved Breach" or whatever: the simplest thing might be to replace Pierce Shield with a spell that combines Breach with a MR reduction. That gives it some reason to be 8th level, but more crucially, it can take down lich and rakshasa protections (for people not using the SCS component that makes Breach work on them anyway). That will confuse SCS AI a bit, though (I don't hugely use Pierce Shield, but some wizards already have it memorised; plus, Melissan casts it). From a compatibility point of view, it might be simpler to make it a new spell (or else remove Pierce Magic from player access but keep it around).

 

The other thing to watch for if you change antimagic is Detectable Spells, but possibly you're already on top of that one.

[DavidW]

DavidW,

 

nice to see that the algorithm works as intended. This is a relief for me.

 

But now I am really thinking that the SCS approach relying completely on the Bioware's spell selection for NPCs isn't really optimal.

 

Why do you think that? I'd have thought that if your priority is making things smarter without changing their abilities, that means you'd want to stay as close to the original versions as possible?

 

Since you said you will revamp the spellbooks, I'd guess this is what you also think.

 

Yes, but I'm more concerned about them having stupid spell choices than them having too many spells!

 

 

I fear that the job above (new spellbook system) is going to be a huge work though. Hopefully I am wrong (as usual... )

 

It can be automated to a large degree. I'm trialling this for the next release of SCS 1.

[Demivrgvs]

Liches have five ninth level spells memorised. In the unmodded game, the first level at which a mage can cast five ninth level spells is level 35: so, the algorithm adjusts liches to be thirty-fifth level.

 

Is that making it smarter, or tougher, or what? The abilities that vanilla-game liches have require them to be at least level 35, so I make them level 35.

 

Of course, I could strip away some of their spells. I may even do that in a future version (at some point I need to write a more systematic spell-allocation block for SCS2 rather than just making do with a few tweaks to the existing spells), but notice that that's actually tweaking the game to make it easier.

I think both sides have a point, let's see what it means reducing their level:

 

a) By reducing unique liches to 30th level they'll only lose one 9th level spell

 

b) By reducing common liches to 25th level they'll lose one 7th, one 8th and two 9th level spells

 

Thus implementing a) would be a roleplaying feature welcomed by most players which doesn't nerf their spellcasting abilities at all, but make them more "consistent". It may give a slight hope of succesfully dispel/turn, though I doubt it. Implementing b) would instead have a more evident impact on their spellcasting capabilities, but it would make them much more "beliveable", and allows an epic archmage to have at least a chance of dispelling, an epic priest to succesfully turn (not destroy anyway).

DavidW is obviously the one who better knows how much b) would make them easier, but I would still vote for it considering unique liches remain pratically as powerful as ever.

As a side note, if common liches are made of 27th level they gain a 9th level spell. It may be the "halfway solution".

[Salk]

DavidW,

 

nice to see that the algorithm works as intended. This is a relief for me.

 

But now I am really thinking that the SCS approach relying completely on the Bioware's spell selection for NPCs isn't really optimal.

 

Why do you think that? I'd have thought that if your priority is making things smarter without changing their abilities, that means you'd want to stay as close to the original versions as possible?

 

Yes, you have understood perfectly where my priorities lay.

 

What I meant to say is that Bioware's choice for NPCs spellbook seems often more than questionable. Sometimes specialists have spells of opposing schools memorized. Sometimes the number of spells are not legal for the level of the caster (and this was the point we were discussing and that SCS solved by raising the level), sometimes the choice of the spells is pretty much dumb, sometimes Druid have clerical spells available and viceversa.

 

I think we have material enough to conclude that the original spell disposition set by Bioware is far from being satisfactory. SCS does an enormous work at making it so much better (thanks for ever) but what I think is that relying so much on the vanilla spellbook to give an NPC a new, higher level is not without drawbacks: I know that SCS's goal is to give a challenge and I know that for the most it does it in the way I like (although I can never truly like the extended use of Detectable Spells/Effects and the beefing up of any stats thus including level), but perhaps it could be possible to refer to P&P sources and see if some specific changes do not go against the consolidated FR database. In the specific case of the lich, it'd be good to take him back to a more "reasonable" level. Between level 25th and 35th there is an enormous amount of experience points to be gained which should be attained by a demilich, perhaps, not "common" liches.

 

That was my two cents...

[Demivrgvs]

Let me try to persuade you of the virtues of Spellstrike:

 

Suppose you're up against an SCS2 lich who had a chance to prebuff. He's prebuffed with Spell Trap, Protection from the Elements, Shadow Door, Mirror Image, Stoneskin, and Protection from Magic Energy. His chain contingency contains SI: Divination and SI:Abjuration.

Well...if that lich casts a simple Spell Shield within all those buffs Spellstrike can do nothing. Am I wrong?

 

While comparing Spellstrike with Time Stop it must be taken into account that while the former does only one thing the latter allows the widest selection of possibilities. Let's just mention that a mage with the right equipment and Improved Alacrity can litteraly devastate multiple enemies during those three rounds, and a mage with thief/fighter/cleric levels can take advantage of the "always hit during Time Stop" effect to inflict infinite amount of damage to unprotected creatures. With all these possibilities I don't see why I should ever prefer to memorize Spellstrike instead of Time Stop.

 

Anyway, making a compromise between your point of view and mine I think adding only a "lower magic resistance" effect is the best solution between the ones I've suggested. It's the one that improves Spellstrike the less, and it doesn't affect target's defences so drammatically as a Breach-like add-on.

 

- Pierce Shield I actually don't use much: the antimagic isn't really worth it, and eighth level spell slots are in high demand for Horrid Wilting

Exactly why improving it as I've done seemed logical, I don't like the idea that filling 8th level's slots with Horrid Wilting is the only smart solution.

 

As for that "Improved Breach" or whatever: the simplest thing might be to replace Pierce Shield with a spell that combines Breach with a MR reduction. That gives it some reason to be 8th level, but more crucially, it can take down lich and rakshasa protections (for people not using the SCS component that makes Breach work on them anyway).

The solution you're suggesting is exactly the one I've implemented.

That will confuse SCS AI a bit, though (I don't hugely use Pierce Shield, but some wizards already have it memorised; plus, Melissan casts it).

Not necessarly, they do more than they expected yes, but because of Detectable Spells they'll just notice that even the target's combat protections are down.

 

 

Regarding all the others antimagic attack I can agree with you that they're fine as they are (with our respective changes to area of effect though). Life would have be so much easier if only was possible to get rid of the annoying "can't cast spell at partially invisible characters"!

[DavidW]

What I meant to say is that Bioware's choice for NPCs spellbook seems often more than questionable. Sometimes specialists have spells of opposing schools memorized. Sometimes the number of spells are not legal for the level of the caster (and this was the point we were discussing and that SCS solved by raising the level), sometimes the choice of the spells is pretty much dumb, sometimes Druid have clerical spells available and viceversa.

 

I think we have material enough to conclude that the original spell disposition set by Bioware is far from being satisfactory.

Agreed.

SCS does an enormous work at making it so much better (thanks for ever) but what I think is that relying so much on the vanilla spellbook to give an NPC a new, higher level is not without drawbacks: I know that SCS's goal is to give a challenge and I know that for the most it does it in the way I like (although I can never truly like the extended use of Detectable Spells/Effects

Old argument...

 

and the beefing up of any stats thus including level)

Seriously? You'd rather leave liches at 11th level (and presumably reduce their spells to fit that)?

 

Put it this way: it's as valid to say that the creature's level is illegal given its spells, as vice versa. It's a judgment call which should be modified and I'm very open to suggestions here (I quite like Demi's, for instance, though I'd need to think about it more) but it's a mistake to assume that there's a "right" answer.

 

but perhaps it could be possible to refer to P&P sources and see if some specific changes do not go against the consolidated FR database.

 

Philosophy disagreement: I don't regard PnP sources as having any special validity here (especially when it comes to game mechanics; I'm more sympathetic to objections like "he can't be with the Zhentarim because XYZ). In particular, BG2 is adapted to handle much higher-level play than PnP and that shows through consistently in its higher-end creatures, which are often significantly above the PnP norm.

[Salk]

DavidW,

 

I didn't think vanilla liches had such a low level in the game. My bad. I would certainly not leave them at level 11 at all! On the other hand, I would not boost them to demi-god levels (because I'd think that level 35 is such).

 

I perfetcly understand your philosophy approach towards the game. And I have understood that our tastes different somehow here and there.

 

But what really makes me glad is (1) your arrival to the BG modding community for your contribution is for me invaluable - thanks (2) your open-mindness and kind ways - thanks for that too.

 

Keep it up, David!

 

Demivrgvs,

 

I am not so sure I like your toned down (compared to your original) version of Spellstrike. The nerfing that you suggest would definitely put back Time Stop on the throne.

[J Beau]

What about the earlier suggestion about removing Lich's spells to make them 25th level but then give them undropable scrolls to bring the number of spells they can cast to what they were originally.

[Salk]

J.Beau,

 

I don't know how you'd feel about it but can you imagine a lich casting spells via scrolls?

[DavidW]

Let me try to persuade you of the virtues of Spellstrike:

 

Suppose you're up against an SCS2 lich who had a chance to prebuff. He's prebuffed with Spell Trap, Protection from the Elements, Shadow Door, Mirror Image, Stoneskin, and Protection from Magic Energy. His chain contingency contains SI: Divination and SI:Abjuration.

Well...if that lich casts a simple Spell Shield within all those buffs Spellstrike can do nothing. Am I wrong?

Yeah, but SCS2 doesn't use Spell Shield. Playtesting shows that it's glitchy: sometimes it'll just absorb dozens of Ruby Rays and the like without being taken down.

 

You're right that if SS was widely used, that'd be another point in favour of Timestop.

 

That will confuse SCS AI a bit, though (I don't hugely use Pierce Shield, but some wizards already have it memorised; plus, Melissan casts it).

Not necessarly, they do more than they expected yes, but because of Detectable Spells they'll just notice that even the target's combat protections are down.

Point taken.

 

Life would have be so much easier if only was possible to get rid of the annoying "can't cast spell at partially invisible characters"!

 

Dear God, yes.

[Salk]

Dear God, yes.

 

Thirded.

[J Beau]

J.Beau,

 

I don't know how you'd feel about it but can you imagine a lich casting spells via scrolls?

 

If its only 1 or 2 and it means the difference between facing a 25th level Lich vs a 35th level Lich, I'm all for it.

[Demivrgvs]

DaivdW,

 

I think your last post needs some editing...maybe it misses some of your answers too.

Yeah, but SCS2 doesn't use Spell Shield. Playtesting shows that it's glitchy: sometimes it'll just absorb dozens of Ruby Rays and the like without being taken down.

 

You're right that if SS was widely used, that'd be another point in favour of Timestop.

Regarding Spell Shield, I think I've found what was causing 90% of its glitches. Vanilla's Spell Shield is flagged as 'Spell Protection', which technically is correct, but because of it sometimes it is considered as "two spell protections at once": one is the spell itself, the other is its own effect that blocks the first antimagic attack. Changing its Secondary Type the spell does work much better. If I'm not wrong Sikret claimed to have fixed this spell for Improved Anvil, I'll go investigate.

 

 

I don't know how you'd feel about it but can you imagine a lich casting spells via scrolls?

If its only 1 or 2 and it means the difference between facing a 25th level Lich vs a 35th level Lich, I'm all for it.

I think Salk was saying that liches reading scrolls during a fight seems odd from a roleplaying perspective.