Dispel/Remove Magic

[Demivrgvs]

I've noticed many players have some complain about these spells, and I always thought nothing could be done about it...until I realised that something like 3rd edition Dispel Magic can be achieved.

 

In 3rd edition Dispel Magic's "caster level" is capped at 10th level, which means even a 35th level demi-lich would dispel as a 10th level mage.

 

This would be a huge nerf, really too much imo (I never realised how weaker the spell is in 3rd edition!). In 3rd edition though there's also a 6th level version of Dispel, Greater Dispel Magic, which has a cap at 20th level.

 

What about capping caster's level at 20th level?

 

This means a 20th+ level caster has the following chances to dispel target's spells:

- 99% chance to dispel effects of a 10th level caster

- ...

- 75% chance to dispel effects of a 15th level caster

- ...

- 50% chance to dispel effects of a 20th level caster

- 40% chance to dispel effects of a 21th level caster

- 30% chance to dispel effects of a 22th level caster

- ...

- 1% chance to dispel effects of a 25th+ level caster

Which means SCS's uber-liches won't disintegrate your buffs so easily, but at the same time you won't be able to rely on a 3rd level spell to dispel an archmage defences.

 

Another solution would be to slow down the increase in "caster level" after a certain level. For example after 20th level the caster may gain a "caster level" every two levels, thus a 30th level archmage would cast Dispel with an equivalent 25th caster's level. This alternative solution would be quite difficult to explain in the spell's description though.

 

I'm assuming the main issue is uber-high level spellcasters dispelling too easily with a "mere 3rd level spell", and this tweak should prevent that.

 

However, I've also read many complains about how easy it is to dipel spells cast by a multiclassed spellcaster...but I really don't consider it an issue. Multiclass characters have tons of advantages in BG, and being "caster level" the only advantage a true class has over them I think it's perfectly fine as it is.

[Raj]

I think this is a good tweak.

 

It won't change much in the game from the prospective of the party casting this spell; after examining the levels of opponents there're not many enemies with level >20, even less with >24.

 

Some help in keeping their magic defence to level 21-24 casters is welcome ( some drows, gromnir mages, dragons etc ), and won't be a issue for many gamers because when you meet them your casters shoudn't be of top level anyway, if you are not soloing; level 25+ enemies are incredible rares, with the notable exception of liches, Irenicus and the Bhaalspawns so the almost complete immunity to dispel/remove magic doesn't worry me ( it's not like I would have been able to dispel their defences in a normal game too ).

 

It's more of a nerf to soloers or late tob pc controlled mages. nothing drastic because by that time you have access to spellstrike or pierce shield so you can invest some high level slot in order to dispel enemies valuabe protections.

 

From the point of view of the party being attacked by a dispel magic this is going to 'fix' the issue of liches annihilating yoir defence even in late ToB with a single low level spell, something that annoys most SCS2 users, so it's a welcome change. The percentages of success against a SoA party are still high but it's no longer a autosuccess and a nerf to a so cheap spell doesn't bother me.

 

I don't know how potions work btw: do they have a innate caster level or do they use the users level? The only thing I'm worried about ( well not much because I almost never buy potions but many might use the scs2 components that make enemies use and drop high level flasks ) is the cheap usage of potions of invulnerability/magic shielding that make the user almost immune to save or else spells.

[Ardanis]

I trust you know my opinion on this matter

[Demivrgvs]

Nice post Raj.

 

I don't know how potions work btw: do they have a innate caster level or do they use the users level? The only thing I'm worried about ( well not much because I almost never buy potions but many might use the scs2 components that make enemies use and drop high level flasks ) is the cheap usage of potions of invulnerability/magic shielding that make the user almost immune to save or else spells.

Potions currently are on top of my to-do list for IR, and we may try to rebalance them if needed. Their effects are considered as casted by a 1st level caster, which is partially correct imo as I can't see how a mage drinking a potion would make it more powerful than a warrior drinking it. I may be able to make them use the users level by replacing effect with innate spells, but I really don't see why we should want potion's effects to be hard to dispel.

 

I trust you know my opinion on this matter

Well, I know you consider this spell too effective, but I couldn't know if the proposed solution is something you were looking for. Anyway I take your reply as a "yes, I'm for it".

[Ardanis]

I can't see how a mage drinking a potion would make it more powerful than a warrior drinking it

Thing is, it's not who drinks it that matters but who brews it, I believe 3E even mention this fact somewhere. Warriors surely get more advantage of the Imp Haste than wizards, yet they aren't even casters.

Duh, that's what the original post was about...

 

Anyway I take your reply as a "yes, I'm for it".

Sort of. It proved over the time that my preferences diverge very little from those of you.

[Raj]

Potions currently are on top of my to-do list for IR, and we may try to rebalance them if needed. Their effects are considered as casted by a 1st level caster, which is partially correct imo as I can't see how a mage drinking a potion would make it more powerful than a warrior drinking it. I may be able to make them use the users level by replacing effect with innate spells, but I really don't see why we should want potion's effects to be hard to dispel.

 

Oh no making them character level would be very bad, because some effects like haste or magic shielding cannot be dispelled by a breach or a spell removal so you'd keep them forever during ToB. It's a good thing leaving some usefulness to the dispel/remove magic against weak buffs too.

Giving them a realistic casterlevel ( between 5-10 depending on the effect ) could be a better compromise.

[culmore]

To me remove magic is the killer spell that the liches cast. Dispel is not so bad as the human player can move in close the to lich and the lich has a 50/50 chance to dispel himself .

 

Do you intend to provide a Greater Remove Magic version of "Greater Dispel Magic" at level 6? My vote would be not to provide greater remove magic.

 

Btw Do the scs2 mages cast dispel magic or is it always remove magic?

[Raj]

always remove magic

[Demivrgvs]

To me remove magic is the killer spell that the liches cast. Dispel is not so bad as the human player can move in close the to lich and the lich has a 50/50 chance to dispel himself.

 

Btw Do the scs2 mages cast dispel magic or is it always remove magic?

always remove magic

I've slightly modified the first post to make it clear that the tweak we're discussing would be applied to Remove Magic too obviously.

 

Do you intend to provide a Greater Remove Magic version of "Greater Dispel Magic" at level 6? My vote would be not to provide greater remove magic.

Actually I don't think a 6th level version of Dispel/Remove Magic is needed, and high level casters can rely on spells like Spellstrike and Pierce Shield to tear down magical protections much more easily and in a more consistent way (no % chance).

 

If a higher version of dispel is really necessary one possible solution would be to add a dispel effect (perhaps with caster level capped at 30th level) to Spellstrike. The idea come from another 9th level Abjuration spell, Mordenkainen's Disjunction, which is the 3rd edition PnP version of this spell (I don't think Spellstrike exists in AD&D).

[Ardanis]

If a higher version of dispel is really necessary one possible solution would be to add a dispel effect (perhaps with caster level capped at 30th level) to Spellstrike. The idea come from another 9th level Abjuration spell, Mordenkainen's Disjunction, which is the 3rd edition PnP version of this spell (I don't think Spellstrike exists in AD&D).

Exactly what i've been thinking about.

[Salk]

I don't usually like cappings and this solution is no exception.

 

I don't mind changing the rate though (I would even welcome it actually, since Dispel Magic is too powerful as it is now).

[Raj]

I don't usually like cappings and this solution is no exception.

 

almost all spells are already capped at 20th level, live with it

[culmore]

If a higher version of dispel is really necessary one possible solution would be to add a dispel effect (perhaps with caster level capped at 30th level) to Spellstrike. The idea come from another 9th level Abjuration spell, Mordenkainen's Disjunction, which is the 3rd edition PnP version of this spell (I don't think Spellstrike exists in AD&D).

 

I'd be happy if there was some kind of a cap on dispel/remove magic (level 3 spell) and higher level mages used spell strike, breach, pierce shield etc. Just fine for me, no need of the higher level version of dispel/remove for this player.

[Salk]

I don't usually like cappings and this solution is no exception.

 

almost all spells are already capped at 20th level, live with it

 

Yes, I understand that the capping is diffuse but that can't mean I like to have more added, wouldn't you think?

 

As I mentioned, it's very fine for me to slow down the rate.

 

I am all for it. But please... no cappings...

 

Evey capping is a declaration of surrender...

 

We don't need a more powerful version of Dispel Magic (Remove Magic). We just need to make it less effective and this of course can be done via capping or else by slowing down its rate.

[culmore]

Kind of separate thread really but when I cast spell strike at some mages, ones using with SI:Div and improved invis, I cannot immediately cast breach or pierce shield? I get the message you cannot target invisible creatures. Do I need to wait for the next round for true seeing to kick in?