Jump to content

Feedback


Recommended Posts

Fiends

In my game, I have a problem with Death Knight. sandard ennemy (255) just don't attack death knight. :/

 

I will try to test with others demons.

 

EDIT : In fact it seems that Ennemy attack Demon only if they have don't see the player before. (witch in theory never occurs)

 

But I should make more test. If some others can confirm...

:mad: I can't reproduce this issue...anyway, what I'm doing here would probably solve that if it's really there.

 

 

Protection from Fire/Elements/Energy

A note on Protection from Fire/Elements/Energy: it doesn't prevent the Balor's cast-on-death fireball (BALDEAD.SPL) from disrupting casting, even if the damage is prevented. This is part of SCSII "improved fiends", btw.
It's quite hard for me to keep track of all mod-added custom spells, and there's no way to take them into account until I know their name. I'll baldead.spl to the list asap. :beer:
Link to comment

Feedback

1.

Comparing Burning Hands, Magic Missile and Shocking Grasp, the first seems to come out strongly on top, and the last way behind.

BH: 1d4 --> 5d4 @ lvl 5; auto hit, area effect

MM: 1d4+1 --> 5d4+5 @ lvl 9; auto hit, long range

SG: 1d6 --> 5d6 @ lvl 9; roll to hit or wasted, touch range, can also stun

 

BH seems to win out both through the fast levelling of damage, but also the area effect. Though for the times when you have allies/neutrals in the area, MM would be the better option. But SG.. the damage is actually statistically the same as MM, but it's touch range and one-try hit-or-wasted (based on Mage THAC0, albeit with +4 bonus). The stun effect is a plus though. Any way to fine tune this? (see 2. also)

 

2.

Spells with melee touch attacks; there are 4 divine - that all expire on attempt (hit-or-wasted), 2 divine equivalents (Spiritual Hammer and Flame Blade) - that last 2 turns, and 3 arcane (Shocking Grasp, Chill Touch, and Ghoul Touch) - of those the latter two have a 1 turn duration and only SG is hit-or-wasted. Possibly give SG a duration?

 

3.

Phantom Blade:

The caster wields the phantom blade as if it was a long sword but he suffers no penalty for non-proficiency.

Shillelagh:

The character using the shillelagh wields it as if it was a club, but suffers no penalty for non-proficiency.

Flame Blade:

This blade-like ray is wielded as if it was a scimitar, but the character using it will suffer no penalty for non-proficiency.

Black Blade of Disaster:

The caster wields the blade as if it was a long sword but he suffers no penalty for non-proficiency, and brandishes it with a base THAC0 of 0.

All good, but if you ARE proficient with the weapon (i.e. Specialized or Master) - will you benefit from it?

 

4.

Spiritual Hammer:

The caster wields the spiritual hammer as if proficient with the weapon, at his normal THAC0.

No proficiencies apply then, only base THAC0?

 

5.

Fire Seeds:

They have a +6 enchantment level, which I kind of like, but I seem to recall you saying "NO +6!!" :mad:

Link to comment

1st lvl Invocation Spells

Comparing Burning Hands, Magic Missile and Shocking Grasp, the first seems to come out strongly on top, and the last way behind.

BH: 1d4 --> 5d4 @ lvl 5; auto hit, area effect

MM: 1d4+1 --> 5d4+5 @ lvl 9; auto hit, long range

SG: 1d6 --> 5d6 @ lvl 9; roll to hit or wasted, touch range, can also stun

 

BH seems to win out both through the fast levelling of damage, but also the area effect. Though for the times when you have allies/neutrals in the area, MM would be the better option. But SG.. the damage is actually statistically the same as MM, but it's touch range and one-try hit-or-wasted (based on Mage THAC0, albeit with +4 bonus). The stun effect is a plus though. Any way to fine tune this? (see 2. also)

Let's start with Magic Missile vs Burning Hands. Magic Missile also has the advantage of using 'magic damage', while BH is fire-based, which is the most common resistance for monsters. The multi-hit property is a plus too, because each projectile makes its own check to bypass magic resistance, making MM the most effective spell-disrupting spell against targets with magic resistance, and also useful to tear down Mirror Image. MM is still almost always the better choice imo, because BH's AoE is quite small (you can easily hit 2-3 targets if they're close, but not much more) and its very short range makes the caster vulnerable. That being said, BH is the only 1st lvl damaging spell with AoE, and in the right hands can indeed cause more damage than MM, but it's "harder" to use. One thing you're correctly pointing out though is that BH's damage goes up much more quickly. If I've convinced you about the above things (let me know) then I can probably agree to make it progress more like MM and cap at 9th lvl (it may actually be a must have for BG1 balance). Deal?

 

...Shocking Grasp, Chill Touch, and Ghoul Touch) - of those the latter two have a 1 turn duration and only SG is hit-or-wasted. Possibly give SG a duration?
Shocking Grasp and similar "on-hit or wasted touch spells" are a pain to handle. I come to the conclusion that I don't like this kind of spell at all, and I'd remove all its instances. For V4 SG will lokk like one of the two following way:

1) electrical equivalent of Chill Touch, with stun as secondary effect

2) major overhaul, to make it work like Vampiric Touch (no hit roll required)

 

And speaking of the latter solution, that's what I'm going to suggest for the Cause Wounds serie to make those spells at least a little appealing. Making CW spells work like that has the following advantages:

- the effect wouldn't be considered a "weapon" anymore, preventing the weird issue of PfMW granting immunity to it

- the effect would be considered a "true" spell, thus protections like Spell Deflection or Globes of Invulnerabilty are correctly applied

- working via spl allows many refinements such as making CW not harm Golems (yes, you can harm them with CW now), or having Protection from Magic Energy work flawlessly against it (no "damage animation" issue)

- minor consistency improvement, because they'd work more like Cure Wounds (no hit-roll)

Long story short, they'd be a sort of Magic Missile with no range. :mad:

 

 

Magically created weapons

Phantom Blade:

The caster wields the phantom blade as if it was a long sword but he suffers no penalty for non-proficiency.

Shillelagh:

The character using the shillelagh wields it as if it was a club, but suffers no penalty for non-proficiency.

Flame Blade:

This blade-like ray is wielded as if it was a scimitar, but the character using it will suffer no penalty for non-proficiency.

Black Blade of Disaster:

The caster wields the blade as if it was a long sword but he suffers no penalty for non-proficiency, and brandishes it with a base THAC0 of 0.

All good, but if you ARE proficient with the weapon (i.e. Specialized or Master) - will you benefit from it?
Yes, that's exactly the improvement I've added over vanilla's behaviour.

 

Spiritual Hammer:

The caster wields the spiritual hammer as if proficient with the weapon, at his normal THAC0.

No proficiencies apply then, only base THAC0?
Correct. I probably have to re-consider a ltittle all these spells and make everything more consistent.

 

 

Fire Seeds:

They have a +6 enchantment level, which I kind of like, but I seem to recall you saying "NO +6!!" :beer:
They still "suffer" from an old solution I used to make it bypass most "weapon immunities" because in theory these shouldn't be considered weapons by combat protections. Anyway, making them a sort of improved MMM is the best solution, and thus you're right, +4 enchantment should be enough (no creature is immune to +4 with PfMW or simialr spells).
Link to comment
If I've convinced you about the above things (let me know) then I can probably agree to make it progress more like MM and cap at 9th lvl (it may actually be a must have for BG1 balance). Deal?

In early BG1 it is even more suicidal than normal for a mage to get close enough to use burning hands due to the inferior protection spells and the 4-10 HP issue. The increased damage of BH compared to MM is rather nice because of the large risk involved. Anything that makes a mage think twice about filling the level one slots with only Magic Missile is good in my opinion. Maybe I'm overestimating Magic Missile, but I still think it trumps the other level 1 offensive spells due to magic damage and MI-annihilating alone.

Link to comment

1st lvl Invocation Spells

Let's start with Magic Missile vs Burning Hands. Magic Missile also has the advantage of using 'magic damage', while BH is fire-based, which is the most common resistance for monsters. The multi-hit property is a plus too, because each projectile makes its own check to bypass magic resistance, making MM the most effective spell-disrupting spell against targets with magic resistance, and also useful to tear down Mirror Image. MM is still almost always the better choice imo, because BH's AoE is quite small (you can easily hit 2-3 targets if they're close, but not much more) and its very short range makes the caster vulnerable. That being said, BH is the only 1st lvl damaging spell with AoE, and in the right hands can indeed cause more damage than MM, but it's "harder" to use.
You've totally convinced me about the merits of MM, it's fine details and thinking like this that's so gosh-damn impressive with SR! :beer:

 

If I've convinced you about the above things (let me know) then I can probably agree to make it progress more like MM and cap at 9th lvl (it may actually be a must have for BG1 balance). Deal?

In early BG1 it is even more suicidal than normal for a mage to get close enough to use burning hands due to the inferior protection spells and the 4-10 HP issue. The increased damage of BH compared to MM is rather nice because of the large risk involved. Anything that makes a mage think twice about filling the level one slots with only Magic Missile is good in my opinion. Maybe I'm overestimating Magic Missile, but I still think it trumps the other level 1 offensive spells due to magic damage and MI-annihilating alone.

I've been mulling the damage question for a while, and while I initially was inclined to slow down the damage increase/level, I'm now not so sure. It's much like Kalindor says, a BG1 mage trying to use BH will have to stand in the front rank (not party-friendly), and there he's a few critical hits from gibberlings, two bites from a wolf or a thump from an ogre away from death :p That being said, 5d4 @ lvl 5 is possibly too much, but 5d4 @ lvl 9 feels like too much a nerf given the above (I'd guess people would stack max MM's and 9d6 Fireballs instead). So unless you feel BH is unbalanced, I've convinced myself to actually leave it like it is. :)

 

...Shocking Grasp, Chill Touch, and Ghoul Touch

Shocking Grasp and similar "on-hit or wasted touch spells" are a pain to handle. I come to the conclusion that I don't like this kind of spell at all, and I'd remove all its instances. For V4 SG will lokk like one of the two following way:

1) electrical equivalent of Chill Touch, with stun as secondary effect

2) major overhaul, to make it work like Vampiric Touch (no hit roll required)

I detest the hit-or-wasted spells myself... I really like option 2, but then I feel that all "touch" spells should work like that - and that might be out of the scope :( Option 1 would really be fine.

 

And speaking of the latter solution, that's what I'm going to suggest for the Cause Wounds serie to make those spells at least a little appealing.
I love it. The three CW-spells + Harm also? It's an awesome improvement in consistency and efficiency.

 

Magically created weapons

If you ARE proficient with the weapon (i.e. Specialized or Master) - will you benefit from it?
Yes, that's exactly the improvement I've added over vanilla's behaviour.
Great!

 

Spiritual Hammer

No proficiencies apply then, only base THAC0?
Correct. I probably have to re-consider a little all these spells and make everything more consistent.
Well it's mostly consistent now, might have been worded more clearly (I take responsibility for that :mad: ) but it actually works like the description says!

 

Fire Seeds:

They have a +6 enchantment level, which I kind of like, but I seem to recall you saying "NO +6!!" :D
They still "suffer" from an old solution I used to make it bypass most "weapon immunities" because in theory these shouldn't be considered weapons by combat protections. Anyway, making them a sort of improved MMM is the best solution, and thus you're right, +4 enchantment should be enough (no creature is immune to +4 with PfMW or similar spells).
Good stuff. Edited by Dakk
Link to comment

New post to avoid Wall-of-Text.

 

Vampiric Touch has this line

Note that this spell may not be cast multiple times to radically increase the caster's hit points. The caster must wait for the first Vampiric Touch spell to run its course before casting another
- does the exact same thing apply to Larloch's Minor Drain ?

 

Contagion

The divine and arcane spell with the same name (confusing :mad: ) have different saving throw modifiers, saving throws (death/poison) and even casting time - intended?

 

Magical Stone

Duration 5 turns, but description states "each stone expires after one hour".

 

Blindness

Duration 8 hours, but description states "permanently blinds its target".

 

Luck

Duration 5 turns, but description states "lucky in everything that he does for the next hour".

 

Maybe I misunderstood something about time... Anyway - let me know if I annoy you! :beer:

Edited by Dakk
Link to comment

Vampiric Touch

has this line
Note that this spell may not be cast multiple times to radically increase the caster's hit points. The caster must wait for the first Vampiric Touch spell to run its course before casting another
- does the exact same thing apply to Larloch's Minor Drain ?
No, multiple LMD spells currently stack. Should I make it not stack? :beer:

 

LMD's max hp bonus is 10, instead of VT's 30, and they last 10 rounds instead of 50...thus it may be unnecessary in terms of potential abuse.

 

Contagion

The divine and arcane spell with the same name (confusing :mad: ) have different saving throw modifiers, saving throws (death/poison) and even casting time - intended?
It's intended, because within SR casting time and save penalties are tied to the spell lvl. Thus the 3rd lvl version is fester to cast with an easier save, while the 4th lvl one is slower to cast but it's harder to resist. Save vs death/poison is the very same thing, but I should make both descriptions use the same "name", will do.

 

Magical Stone & Luck

Duration 5 turns, but description states "each stone expires after one hour".
5 turns (real time) = 1 hour (in game) Perhaps I should always use rounds/turns.

 

Blindness

Duration 8 hours, but description states "permanently blinds its target".
Eh, leftover of its old V2 version, where it and Blindness were indeed permanent (a la Contagion). I'll fix the description.
Link to comment
Duration 5 turns, but description states "each stone expires after one hour".
5 turns (real time) = 1 hour (in game) Perhaps I should always use rounds/turns.
Actually, the best way is too keep it clear, like you did try in that post, so when you write about a turn, you aren't talking about the time it takes for you in turning your chair upside down :mad: , but about the game turn, which is 10 rounds... with I think is still the 60 second in real time(+ pauses), and when you are talking about exact time you keep it in real time, not in the game time terms. At least in the statistical part of the spell description... Edited by Jarno Mikkola
Link to comment

What other non-damaging AoE spells besides entangle and web cause those affected to go hostile?

 

I'm not a fan. While it is odd for the random bystander to have no reaction to being held by a spell, I think it is more odd to have them re-classified as enemy after the same effect. The subtleties of a PnP game are lost with the coarse categorizations of BG, but I don't imagine many PnP games where bystanders would seek the party's deaths after being caught in non-damaging crossfire...

 

Or have you implemented this feature to prevent webbing/entangling and abusing of NPCs who would otherwise go hostile after a dialogue with the PC?

 

EDIT: btw, I think all save penalties should be capped at 4. If I had the time, I'd hack the SR spls to give -4 to level 9 and 10 arcane, and maybe level 8 divine (not level 7, though). Dunno how I'd break down save penalties on lower levels.

Edited by StrixO
Link to comment
Or have you implemented this feature to prevent webbing/entangling and abusing of NPCs who would otherwise go hostile after a dialogue with the PC?
Erhm, no, it's there to make you visible ... as the "Hostile Spell" flag is used to make the user, who is currently under the effect of invisibility, visible.

Aka, spells like Invisibility and Sanctuary.

Link to comment

AoE spells causing neutral characters to go hostile

What other non-damaging AoE spells besides entangle and web cause those affected to go hostile?
Probably any AoE spell that has negative effects on those affected.

 

I'm not a fan. While it is odd for the random bystander to have no reaction to being held by a spell, I think it is more odd to have them re-classified as enemy after the same effect. The subtleties of a PnP game are lost with the coarse categorizations of BG, but I don't imagine many PnP games where bystanders would seek the party's deaths after being caught in non-damaging crossfire...
I discussed this very thing not long ago, and I kinda agreed.

 

Or have you implemented this feature to prevent webbing/entangling and abusing of NPCs who would otherwise go hostile after a dialogue with the PC?
What Jarno says is a good reason, though spells cast on others automatically break invisibility, but what you say is also true and may cause serious exploits...thus I'm not sure I'm fine removing the 'break invisibility' (aka "hostile") flag from those spells. :undecided:

 

 

Save Penalties

I think all save penalties should be capped at 4. If I had the time, I'd hack the SR spls to give -4 to level 9 and 10 arcane, and maybe level 8 divine (not level 7, though). Dunno how I'd break down save penalties on lower levels.
Then you'll be glad to know that SR V4 will indeed cap save penalties at -4 (no more -5 and -6). There won't be a "fixed" rule for save penalties anymore, as the saves will be based on the spell effects to balance everything out (more or less as PnP AD&D): for example Entagle might remain with no penalties (it had +2 bouns in vanilla) but the new "slippery" effect of Grease probably requires an easier save like +2 bonus because it completely disables the targets making it potentially OP.
Link to comment
stuff

 

Thanks for the reply. Are you expecting to get a working v4 out in the next few months, or more long term? Have you considered/thought of any spells to replace Divine 7 Confusion/Sphere of Chaos? Neither seem wholly appropriate to a divine spellbook. What about an extra-strength Chant, or an AoE chaotic commands?

 

Edit: And are there any plans to tone down the summons? I agree that many were rubbish prior to revisions, but as I've played with it a bit, several now seem severely strong (as do the new ones, like Shambling Mound). I'd be curious to know other user's impressions.

Edited by StrixO
Link to comment

AoE spells causing neutral characters to go hostile

What Jarno says is a good reason, though spells cast on others automatically break invisibility, but what you say is also true and may cause serious exploits...thus I'm not sure I'm fine removing the 'break invisibility' (aka "hostile") flag from those spells.
First, I'd reconsider following Anvil's route that strictly, and second, can't you use Nature's Beauty solution?
Link to comment

SR V4

Thanks for the reply. Are you expecting to get a working v4 out in the next few months, or more long term?
I don't know, I'll probably be back on SR within a month yes, but after IR V3 I have to work on Kit Revisions thus I'm not sure how much time a new SR release could take, it could be 2 months, but it could just as well be 4.

 

Divine Confusion/Sphere of Chaos

Have you considered/thought of any spells to replace Divine 7 Confusion/Sphere of Chaos? Neither seem wholly appropriate to a divine spellbook. What about an extra-strength Chant, or an AoE chaotic commands?
I partially agree with you that Confusion-like spells doesn't seem to fit clerics much (I replaced Rigid Thinking with Contagion myself), but they do have other Enchantment spells like Hold Person, Mental Domination or (Greater) Command (they had Rigid Thinking too in theory). I'm not sure I have strong arguments to replace it with somthing completely different.

 

Summons

And are there any plans to tone down the summons? I agree that many were rubbish prior to revisions, but as I've played with it a bit, several now seem severely strong (as do the new ones, like Shambling Mound). I'd be curious to know other user's impressions.
You're probably the first one asking to tone them down instead of improving them. I'll look into Shamblers but it's a 7th lvl summon, thus very hard to balance when compared to things like Genies or Mordy Sword, not to mention that it has to be quite stronger than a Greater Earth Elemental for example. Which other summoned creature seems too powerful?

 

 

AoE spells causing neutral characters to go hostile

What Jarno says is a good reason, though spells cast on others automatically break invisibility, but what you say is also true and may cause serious exploits...thus I'm not sure I'm fine removing the 'break invisibility' (aka "hostile") flag from those spells.
First, I'd reconsider following Anvil's route that strictly, and second, can't you use Nature's Beauty solution?
Probably yes...I simply didn't thought back then that having Web as an hostile spell could be a problem rather than normal behaviour. Edited by Demivrgvs
Link to comment

Regarding the hostile-flag of non-damaging spells I'm still in favour of removing it :hm: Of course you could abuse it, but trying to stop intentional abuse should be lower priority within SR's scope compared to unintentional and unwanted side-effects.

 

The subtleties of a PnP game are lost with the coarse categorizations of BG, but I don't imagine many PnP games where bystanders would seek the party's deaths after being caught in non-damaging crossfire...

QFT :undecided:

 

ADD:

This is something I've been meaning to ask you for some time but never got around to - Call Woodland Beings.

It's a 4th level divine spell, and the summon you receive can cast 4th level spells..? So instead of casting Animal Summoning I (lvl 4) I could just summon a nymph that can do this:

1° Cure Light Wounds (x2), Entangle (x2), Shillelagh, Doom

2° Barkskin, Charm Person or Animal (x2), Resist Fire and Cold, Slow Poison

3° Call Lightning, Hold Person or Animal, Summon Insects

4° Animal Summoning I

 

Intended?

Edited by Dakk
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...