Spell Thrust & Minor Globe of Inv.

[Guest Rychurd]

Hi,

 

I'm playing BGT with you mod installed (very good - you have done so much work on this).

 

Spell Thrust (level 3) isn't removing Minor Globe of Invunerabilty (which protects against 3rd level).

I've had a look at the effects of the original vs. yours with NI.

The original effects has unknowns (what are they??) as: 00 00 00 00 2c 15 40 00

The your new version is listed as zeroes.

I updated these on your version and it still didn't work. So I looked for other differences. The old version has a power of 0; yours has 4. I changed this and it now works.

 

Well, all this applied to my install. Maybe others weren't having this issue.

 

Thanks for your work

R

[Icendoan]

If it lists unknown, it is generally thought that they are unknown.

 

Icen

[Ardanis]

Personally, I think that immunity to 3rd spell levels does suggest immunity to 3rd spell levels, including ST. Heck, I've even patched my Globes to specifically protect against low antimagic spells.

[Raj]

Personally, I think that immunity to 3rd spell levels does suggest immunity to 3rd spell levels, including ST. Heck, I've even patched my Globes to specifically protect against low antimagic spells.

 

It shoudn't imo, because the description of ST specifically says it dispels MGI, and because the globe itself isn't supposed to protect against another level 3, dispel/remove magic.

 

Generally speaking all spell protections protect the caster from magic but not themselves.

[Demivrgvs]

This is a very controversial issue...even more than Dispel Magic being able to bypass an kind of immunity to spell level (which is necessary though). In theory it's pretty lame imo having GoI not protect from a 3rd level spell, I didn't remembered having changed this aspect, but I'll do what I must about it if the AI needs it in a certain way.

 

I suppose I only need to know one thing...DavidW, how does SCS handle Spell Thrust?

 

Edit: on a side note...is it just me or this antimagic attack is really too powerful?

 

P.S And this reminds me I still have to rever Spell Immunity to its old vanilla version (with multiple SI being stackable, and SI:Abj being pretty sad ).

[Raj]

(with multiple SI being stackable, and SI:Abj being pretty sad ).

 

It is still going to protect against remove magic, imprisonment, and breach too, don't tell that to Spell Immunity: Illusion that is still crying useless as it is

 

Edit: on a side note...is it just me or this antimagic attack is really too powerful?

 

Its usefulness is related to the power of Spell Immunity, being a nice way to get rid of them without having to dispel other defences first; the thing that makes it overpowered compared to secret word is being able to dispel all low level protections in one go: change it to remove just one should be ok, keeping its usefulness at high levels while rebalancing it for low-mid level mages ( who under scs2 make use of sequencers with MGoI+SI and sometime a minor deflection/turning too so that spell thrust effectively destroys them in one hit )

 

It's not a game braking for bg2 btw, no clue about bg1.

[Demivrgvs]

I have to revive this old topic because I fear restoring vanilla's behaviour of Spell Thrust (no spell level to bypass MGoI) actually created a few inconsistencies.

 

Does it mean that this spell not only bypass MGoI but also liches immunities? This would make the spell incredibly overpowered compared to its higher level cousins, and it's quite inconsistent because Secret Word and all other spell removals do keep their "spell level" (except Breach in SCS).

[Jarno Mikkola]

Does it mean that this spell not only bypass MGoI but also liches immunities?

Well, if I remember it correctly, a modified Spell Thrust just removes 1 spell, so it's same like spell as Dispel/Remove Magic only with no level check for each spell, so that was originally balanced...

 

The Liches immunity should reach to 5th level...

 

But as I suggested to reconfigure the other spells(Dispel/Remove Magic) to spell level to 3, so should Spell Trust be have spell level 5(as it can remove spell up to that level) and be castable at level 3, while the level 4 Secret Word should have spell level of 8. But that's just mee...

 

This would make the Minor Globe of Inv. protect from Dispel Magic, as it can't be removed with that's spell, but it doesn't protect any other spell under it.

[Demivrgvs]

Does it mean that this spell not only bypass MGoI but also liches immunities?

Well, if I remember it correctly, a modified Spell Thrust just removes 1 spell, so it's same like spell as Dispel/Remove Magic only with no level check for each spell, so that was originally balanced...

Spell Thrust removes all spell protections of 5th level or lower, it was never changed to remove just one spell within SR, and I'm quite sure there's not a single mod which changed it.

 

This would make the Minor Globe of Inv. protect from Dispel Magic, as it can't be removed with that's spell, but it doesn't protect any other spell under it.

Actually if there's one thing which should bring down MGoI and GoI is Dispel Magic: as per vanilla's description, PnP, IWD, NWN and aTweaks!

 

Not to mention protection from Dispel Magic is pratically the only thing SI:Abj can do.

[Ardanis]

The problem is that SCS's guys areway too high in level, so their Dispel/Remove Magic almost always succeeds...

 

...so should Spell Trust be have spell level 5(as it can remove spell up to that level) and be castable at level 3, while the level 4 Secret Word should have spell level of 8. But that's just mee...

Effect's power level (which is a pure IE's technical detail and in no way deals with the spell being level 1 or level 6) and parameters aren't connected to each other. There's imo nothing wrong about Secret Word capable of stripping up to level 8 spell protection yet unable to affect a lich.

 

Liches can simply receive immunity to Spell Thrust, though it would take SR to be installed closer to the end of installation.

[Demivrgvs]

The problem is that SCS's guys areway too high in level, so their Dispel/Remove Magic almost always succeeds...

I can do nothing about it, and you know how I feel about this (especially about liches).

 

...so should Spell Trust be have spell level 5(as it can remove spell up to that level) and be castable at level 3, while the level 4 Secret Word should have spell level of 8. But that's just mee...

Effect's power level (which is a pure IE's technical detail and in no way deals with the spell being level 1 or level 6) and parameters aren't connected to each other. There's imo nothing wrong about Secret Word capable of stripping up to level 8 spell protection yet unable to affect a lich.

I agree with Ardanis.

 

Liches can simply receive immunity to Spell Thrust, though it would take SR to be installed closer to the end of installation.

It's easier than you think to do such a thing, and I already do it a lot of times within SR. An EFF file is used to make the target immune before the other spell effects take place. Anyway, setting Spell Thrust power level to 4 should work just as well.

 

Thus you think that I shouldn't "fix" Spell Thrust to not take town MGoI, whereas I should change Secret Word in order to let it take down GoI (for consistency)?

 

My doubt is that imo a player controlled mage would have to put too much effort to protect himself if a 3rd level spell can wipe out a combination like Minor Spell Turning + MGoI + SI:Abj in a second. AI mages have to sustain a single fight and can memorize many protection spells but why should a player waste half his spellbook with tons of protections that are easily disintegrated with one or two spell removals?

 

Note: as of V3 Secret Word will have a 5' radius AoE, just like Spell Thrust.

[Ardanis]

An EFF file is used to make the target immune before the other spell effects take place.

Is lich a race in BG2? There're other undead casters, like Bodhi's Tanova, who has no such immunity. Probably not a very big issue, though, as I see it.

 

Anyway, setting Spell Thrust power level to 4 should work just as well.

5 then, as otherwise it'll be stopped by GoI, saving the other lower spell protections that would otherwise be dispelled. Nothing wrong imo about GoI protecting against that, but since it's very similar in concept to MGoI (which is gonna to be dispelled) there'd be an inconsistency of sorts when one globe blocks the ST and the other doesn't.

 

Thus you think that I shouldn't "fix" Spell Thrust to not take town MGoI, whereas I should change Secret Word in order to let it take down GoI (for consistency)?

Eh, actually not. Myself, I rather to have (M)GoI in fact to protect against anything of 1-4 level, be it a fireball or an antimagic.

 

AI mages have to sustain a single fight and can memorize many protection spells but why should a player waste half his spellbook with tons of protections that are easily disintegrated with one or two spell removals?

That's THE issue I always have with enemy wizards

 

Note: as of V3 Secret Word will have a 5' radius AoE, just like Spell Thrust.

It likely was discussed back then, but why does ST have AoE? If anything, it should have been SW to be able to 'bypass' the invisibility state, as does RRoR - another one that removes a single protection only.

[Demivrgvs]

An EFF file is used to make the target immune before the other spell effects take place.

Is lich a race in BG2? There're other undead casters, like Bodhi's Tanova, who has no such immunity. Probably not a very big issue, though, as I see it.

Yeah, liches and demiliches are treated as two different races.

 

Anyway, setting Spell Thrust power level to 4 should work just as well.

5 then, as otherwise it'll be stopped by GoI, saving the other lower spell protections that would otherwise be dispelled. Nothing wrong imo about GoI protecting against that, but since it's very similar in concept to MGoI (which is gonna to be dispelled) there'd be an inconsistency of sorts when one globe blocks the ST and the other doesn't.

Oh my, having this spell bypass MGoI already makes me sad, but having it bypass a spell protection of 6th level (GoI) which it shouldn't even be able to remove is even worse. Anyway...if we go on this way you're right.

 

Thus you think that I shouldn't "fix" Spell Thrust to not take town MGoI, whereas I should change Secret Word in order to let it take down GoI (for consistency)?

Eh, actually not. Myself, I rather to have (M)GoI in fact to protect against anything of 1-4 level, be it a fireball or an antimagic.

And why shouldn't we work on this way?

 

Note: as of V3 Secret Word will have a 5' radius AoE, just like Spell Thrust.

It likely was discussed back then, but why does ST have AoE? If anything, it should have been SW to be able to 'bypass' the invisibility state, as does RRoR - another one that removes a single protection only.

Actually if it wasn't for SCS I think I wouldn't give this feature to these spells at all.

[Ardanis]

And why shouldn't we work on this way?

I'm at lost, are you saying you want (M)GoI to repel low-level antimagic, but since it kinda goes against the rules you need a justification to do so?

 

Well, people (ok, me) usually use globes to defend against hostile Skull Traps, Slow, Confusion, Malison and friendly Web, Fireballs, Skull Traps. Anything else either is used far less often (I think) or isn't that hindering. And MGoI takes care of the most in the list, leaving GoI not much outshining it's lesser counterpart. So the latter might use extra help via providing immunity to antimagic as well. Analogically, same should be doing MGoI, least it'll prove to be inconsistent.

It's a bit sad it can't have immunity to Dispel/Remove Magic - I added that in my game and it proved to be more AI exploiting than I'd expect.

 

Actually if it wasn't for SCS I think I wouldn't give this feature to these spells at all.

My point was a bit different. There're several types of antimagic spells:

1) those that remove a single protection - Secret Word, Ruby Ray

2) same as '1', but with an additional bonus of lowering magic resistance - Pierce Magic/Shield, the letter being further improved in SR

3) Spell Thrust and Spellstrike, that remove any number of protections up to 5/9 level

4) other exotics, like Warding Whip, Lower Resistance, Breach

 

Of them all only the first group seems to specialize in lowering down spell defenses, so balance wise it makes sense they can bypass invisibility. After all, unlike the other groups, the only thing those spells are capable of is to destroy a single one spell protection, no any secondary effect.

The 3rd group behaves consistently within itself, but I thought Spellstrike having a notable AoE was due to it being the 9th level, the strongest of them all? As you've said yourself

a 3rd level spell can wipe out a combination like Minor Spell Turning + MGoI + SI:Abj in a second.

 

PS typos

[Icendoan]

Well, it doesn't have to be totally consistent. You can just have it as a difference. MGoI protects from a few spell levels, GoI protects from a few more but a bit better.

 

Icen