Guest Guest Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 Okay. I really like the whole Mummy Lord idea! It'd be great to summon one and be all, like, "Suck on that, enemies!". Link to comment
DavidW Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 Okay. I really like the whole Mummy Lord idea! It'd be great to summon one and be all, like, "Suck on that, enemies!". Except, of course, that the enemy clerics also have the spell... Link to comment
Guest Guest Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 Argh! I too may have to suck it down! Link to comment
Demivrgvs Posted January 30, 2009 Author Share Posted January 30, 2009 Okay. I really like the whole Mummy Lord idea! It'd be great to summon one and be all, like, "Suck on that, enemies!".Except, of course, that the enemy clerics also have the spell... Indeed...and it can potentially make fighting necromancers a lot more fun imo. Not to mention one of their most dreaded abilities is more effective against the party rather than the AI. Their melee touch spreads a mummy rot disease, which is permanent and makes the affected creature immune to curative spells! In PnP said disease would require a Remove Curse followed by a Remove Disease to be dispelled, but if we want to implement it I would do it via "use EFF as a curse" opcode. Anyway, I think vanilla's AI almost never use this spell (like most summons, as their were quite useless), and thus to fight against them we'd probably need to wait a version of SCSII which takes SR into account. Link to comment
Raj Posted January 31, 2009 Share Posted January 31, 2009 Spell Shield Done "This spell grants extraordinary protection from spells and spell-like effects for a limited amount of time. Every time a saving throw is required to reduce or negate an effect the caster will automatically succeed the save, and whether or not a save is allowed, every source of magical damage inflicts only half damage to the caster. Due to the nature of this spell and its short duration it is mainly used to buy the wizard a few rounds in the thick of a magical duel. This effect lasts for the duration of the spell (5 rounds) or until dispelled." Is there a typo about the duration? Link to comment
Demivrgvs Posted January 31, 2009 Author Share Posted January 31, 2009 Spell Shield Done "This spell grants extraordinary protection from spells and spell-like effects for a limited amount of time. Every time a saving throw is required to reduce or negate an effect the caster will automatically succeed the save, and whether or not a save is allowed, every source of magical damage inflicts only half damage to the caster. Due to the nature of this spell and its short duration it is mainly used to buy the wizard a few rounds in the thick of a magical duel. This effect lasts for the duration of the spell (5 rounds) or until dispelled." Is there a typo about the duration?No. This spell is a sort of anti-spell version of PfMW. Link to comment
yarpen Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 Clairvoyance Change of this spell goes into good way - like this Premonition spell. But at higher levels this +2 to AC and save throw vs. breaths is very, very weak. What do you think about these options of making it more interesting: * add immunity to backstab or * making AC/save bonus dependable on caster's level (instead of +2, +1 per 3 levels?) Armor and Shield Both of these spells are in Conjuration school. That's weird. Conjuration summon things. And in both of these spells caster isn't protected by real thing, but magical force. So maybe one of these spells can go to Invocation and other one to Abjuration? Link to comment
Ardanis Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 Clairvoyance But at higher levels this +2 to AC and save throw vs. breaths is very, very weak.It already grants BS immunity. Also, when combined with Shield, Blur and something else AC does go really low. Link to comment
yarpen Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 Ow, you're right. Cool. But still I'd like to see true Premonition spell. You know where exactly Fireball lands, so you can avoid half of damage. You had a vision of someone backstabing you - then there's no surprise. So maybe at higher levels, very short duration and: * grand AC bonus * every saving throw is done (as in Spell Shield) * immunity to backstab ? Link to comment
Guest guest Posted February 3, 2009 Share Posted February 3, 2009 Demivrgvs, I notice you say in the first post that harper's call has been 'Fixed and added to SR spells for consistency', do you mean all priests get this now? Now, I'm no PnP veteran or anything, but i imagine this or some other good reason is why you would do such a thing, to me, just based on the bg2 'universe' it seems a spell for Harpers only, i.e. Jaheira... I won't say anymore in case i'm wrong and you've still only got Jaheira with it, i really think she and other Harpers should get it only, unless that name is a misnomer and the spell is somehow meant for all, as i say, per PnP or something... Link to comment
Demivrgvs Posted February 3, 2009 Author Share Posted February 3, 2009 Demivrgvs, I notice you say in the first post that harper's call has been 'Fixed and added to SR spells for consistency', do you mean all priests get this now?No, it just means that it had a few issues with how stats were drained, and I fixed it. Plus I've added it to SR spell list in case we'll ever want to do something about this spell, and to allow it to use SR's standard template for spell's description which is slightly different from vanilla's one. Link to comment
Ardanis Posted February 3, 2009 Share Posted February 3, 2009 Cure/Cause Mortal Wounds I'm a bit curious, why are they disabled? Link to comment
Demivrgvs Posted February 3, 2009 Author Share Posted February 3, 2009 Cure/Cause Mortal Wounds I'm a bit curious, why are they disabled?Because they shouldn't exist in theory. They were the old Cure/Cause Critical Wounds, and I've made them slightly more unique only because there's a remote possibility some script may want to use the old 5th level version of these spells. Cause Mortal Wounds would be less effective than Slay Living anyway. Link to comment
Jarno Mikkola Posted February 3, 2009 Share Posted February 3, 2009 Cause Mortal Wounds... Cause Mortal Wounds would be less effective than Slay Living anyway. Well, unless the targeted dragon doesn't bleed to death from the mortal wound caused by the spell, you are correct, but what if we don't suppose it doesn't... So just my suggestion: Make the spell cause huge bleeding damage. Ok, so it doesn't need to kill a dragon, but cause about 100 damage, eventually(10 hit points per round). That's with no saving throw, cause of the melee component, that the caster needs to touch the target. Link to comment
Guest guest Posted February 3, 2009 Share Posted February 3, 2009 Cause Mortal Wounds... Cause Mortal Wounds would be less effective than Slay Living anyway. Well, unless the targeted dragon doesn't bleed to death from the mortal wound caused by the spell, you are correct, but what if we don't suppose it doesn't... So just my suggestion: Make the spell cause huge bleeding damage. Ok, so it doesn't need to kill a dragon, but cause about 100 damage, eventually(10 hit points per round). That's with no saving throw, cause of the melee component, that the caster needs to touch the target. I think that's too close to harm, and takes the appeal away from that. So cure/cause crit wounds are not in SR?... Those should be in, and this mortal wound business out, if i get a vote. Mortal is mortal, means death...not much of a mortal wound if the enemy survives. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.