Jump to content

Feedback


Recommended Posts

Do you think it could be a good idea to reduce the speed of magics missiles in order to avoid this spell to be an insta disrupt spell?

I remember that in BG1, missiles go very slowly.

 

The extreme speed (casting and execution) is a trademark of the Magic Missile spell and I wouldn't alter it.

Link to post
Do you think it could be a good idea to reduce the speed of magics missiles in order to avoid this spell to be an insta disrupt spell?

I remember that in BG1, missiles go very slowly.

 

The extreme speed (casting and execution) is a trademark of the Magic Missile spell and I wouldn't alter it.

Agreed, Magic Missiles is THE famous spell of D&D - and it's renowned for the speed of casting and (auto)hitting.

Link to post

Wow, suddenly so many spells to discuss...

 

Feeblemind

Everything you say is correct, I was just saying that having all anti-mage spells ignore II would completely remove the main use AI does of it (and as you say the AI heavily relies on II, especially SCS). Furthermore, unless Ardanis' work to implement my suggested revision of the Spell Deflection system beomces the standard system, having those spells ignore II would also destroy the main purpose of all Spell Deflection/Turning spells.
But there are already area spells in the game, and they are all for that reason "anti-mage". My point is that any single target spell that is only good against mages needs something extra, because all mages in the game will be immune to it, and the moment they become visible that spell becomes worse than Breach.
As Ardanis correctly points out part of the problem is that Breach is so absurdly effective that any other alternative against a visible mage without spell protections pales if compared to the mighty Breach. That being said, I do thought like you that Breach is a death sentece for any mage (and I still believe it's almost true), but a quick PfMW or any trigger/contingency may actually save a breached mage.

 

Regarding Feeblemind getting a small AoE, another option we haven't discussed is to make it ignore II via ToBEx. As I said I don't like this tweak because it creates strange exceptions (why only spell removals ignore II?!?), but it might be different if we make it instead a base rule and decide that only spells which require direct targeting like an Breach or Acid Arrow doesn't work against II (within 3E II doesn't even grant such feature).

 

But then again, tweaking Detect Invisibility and TS to allow such feature probably is an even better solution, which doesn't require to alter pre-existing rules.

 

Last but not least, I still believe that adding non-lethal dmg as a secondary effect could make Feeblemind appealing even compared to Domination and Breach without being a too radical change. I'm still waiting for someone to comment on it, does it suck so much that you'd prefer to replace Feeblemind with another spell like Ardanis suggests?

 

Breach

Breach... yep, you're right about it being always the best choice against wizards. It's been pointed out already several times before.

 

Is it sensible to limit the list of Combat Protections to weapon immunities only? I remember Demi suggested to remove Fireshields, but imo all AC-boosting spells (and Armor of Faith) can go as well. Reason - if fighters have trouble hitting a wizard even after breaching him, then trying to cast offensive spell is the next logical step.

Yep, we discussed this with David back then, and I think he kinda liked the idea as long as we keep Breach working vs specific protections. I think making Breach not work on armor spell (e.g. Armor of Faith, Mage Armor and all similar spells) and similar spells (e.g. Barkskin and even Stoneskin imo) is a must. Long story short Breach should only work against those spells which grant invulnerability imo, it worked only against ProWeapon spells in PnP, but working against ProEnergy spells makes sense, and I can live with it breaching Death Ward, Free Action and Chaotic Commands though it fits slighty less the concept imo.

 

Stoneskin

I wish Stoneskin could be changed to physical resistance. With ToBEx's concentration check, it would work wonders.
I'm still waiting to see that tweak tested, and to know how it exactly works. It surely has a huge potential, but I don't know if Stoneskin can be so radically changed without screwing the AI, not to mention we'd add just another problem to the well known 100%+ physical resistance issue.

 

True Seeing & Detect Invisibility

Ok then, I think I'll opt for making Detect Invisibility work via 136 for V4. It's a nice additional refinement which makes your old suggestion about TS much better for me. Too bad David didn't tried it out in favour of that tweak, but still everything is better than the obsolute AoE spell removals solution.

 

Magic Missile

This spell is really fine as it is.

 

Creature Revisions

All undead creatures should be immune to mind affecting spells (liches are far from "mindless" imo), but I just checked and liches miss quite a lot of immunities they should have, including immunity to feeblemindedness. I started making spells not affect certain creatures via EFF files for SR V3 (e.g. Horrid Wilting doesn't work on undead), but I gave for granted monsters had the most obvious resistances back then, unlike IR V3 which hugely relies upon this system without leaving anything for granted (almost all abilities now have at least a few of these race/type checks). I'll pay more attention for SR V4.
wouldn't it be easier to start working in some Creature Revisions as a recommended but optional component? it seems it'd be better to provide immunities at the source instead of stacking EFFs across multiple spells.
Link to post

Feeblemind

Last but not least, I still believe that adding non-lethal dmg as a secondary effect could make Feeblemind appealing even compared to Domination and Breach without being a too radical change. I'm still waiting for someone to comment on it, does it suck so much that you'd prefer to replace Feeblemind with another spell like Ardanis suggests?
Non-lethal damage is a cool finding imo.

 

Magic Missiles

The projectile is hardcoded, so regardless there can be no change made anyway.

 

Creature Revisions

Using EFFs is actually a better choice, because it doesn't depend on install order and such.

As for starting this project - later, as Demi and I have our hands full atm.

 

True Seeing & Detect Invisibility

Surprise, but I think I suddenly grew quite fond of AoE solution. Fond enough to neglect ToBEx's solution and stick to old one :)

That said... SCS will target II'ed opponents with antimagic in any case, so it's only a matter of how the issue is dealt with by human players. If AI will ignore casting TS prior to antimagic attack, I think I can live with that. It may seem like cheating on AI's part, but then aren't we cheating on it too, like taking the advantage of casting AoE on the ground?

 

Breach

working against ProEnergy spells makes sense, and I can live with it breaching Death Ward, Free Action and Chaotic Commands though it fits slighty less the concept imo.
Imo Pierce Magic makes even more sense as a placeholder for those. We'll see, when I start the next playthrough I'll try out this little tweak (thanks to David for shipping AI in easily adjustable SSL format).
Link to post

Feeblemind

Last but not least, I still believe that adding non-lethal dmg as a secondary effect could make Feeblemind appealing even compared to Domination and Breach without being a too radical change. I'm still waiting for someone to comment on it, does it suck so much that you'd prefer to replace Feeblemind with another spell like Ardanis suggests?
Non-lethal damage is a cool finding imo.
:)

 

Breach

working against ProEnergy spells makes sense, and I can live with it breaching Death Ward, Free Action and Chaotic Commands though it fits slighty less the concept imo.
Imo Pierce Magic makes even more sense as a placeholder for those. We'll see, when I start the next playthrough I'll try out this little tweak (thanks to David for shipping AI in easily adjustable SSL format).
You know I agree regarding Pierce Magic, but such change wouldn't be compatible with SCS.

 

Creature Revisions

Using EFFs is actually a better choice, because it doesn't depend on install order and such.
Ops, I forgot to reply in my last post...but this is exactly what I wanted to say. Using EFFs makes sure that everything works as intended whatever install you have.

 

As for starting this project - later, as Demi and I have our hands full atm.
Indeed.
Link to post
Feeblemind

That being said, I do thought like you that Breach is a death sentece for any mage (and I still believe it's almost true), but a quick PfMW or any trigger/contingency may actually save a breached mage.

 

True, but no other single spell would force that trigger or PfMW recast.

 

Last but not least, I still believe that adding non-lethal dmg as a secondary effect could make Feeblemind appealing even compared to Domination and Breach without being a too radical change. I'm still waiting for someone to comment on it, does it suck so much that you'd prefer to replace Feeblemind with another spell like Ardanis suggests?

 

OK, can you describe exactly how you propose this should work? Weird and PK have obvious applications for non-lethal damage, even brilliant ones, but it seems out of place for Feeblemind. And the central question remains: how does it make Feeblemind a better choice vs. the others at this level?

 

Breach
Breach... yep, you're right about it being always the best choice against wizards. It's been pointed out already several times before.

 

Is it sensible to limit the list of Combat Protections to weapon immunities only? I remember Demi suggested to remove Fireshields, but imo all AC-boosting spells (and Armor of Faith) can go as well. Reason - if fighters have trouble hitting a wizard even after breaching him, then trying to cast offensive spell is the next logical step.

Yep, we discussed this with David back then, and I think he kinda liked the idea as long as we keep Breach working vs specific protections. I think making Breach not work on armor spell (e.g. Armor of Faith, Mage Armor and all similar spells) and similar spells (e.g. Barkskin and even Stoneskin imo) is a must. Long story short Breach should only work against those spells which grant invulnerability imo, it worked only against ProWeapon spells in PnP, but working against ProEnergy spells makes sense, and I can live with it breaching Death Ward, Free Action and Chaotic Commands though it fits slighty less the concept imo.

 

I like this idea. The fact that Breach removed specific protections and combat protections always seemed like overkill to me. However, should there be a seperate spell that only removes specific?

Link to post

Feeblemind

Last but not least, I still believe that adding non-lethal dmg as a secondary effect could make Feeblemind appealing even compared to Domination and Breach without being a too radical change. I'm still waiting for someone to comment on it, does it suck so much that you'd prefer to replace Feeblemind with another spell like Ardanis suggests?
OK, can you describe exactly how you propose this should work? Weird and PK have obvious applications for non-lethal damage, even brilliant ones, but it seems out of place for Feeblemind.
Isn't the application the same of Weird and PK? All these spells attack the mind of the target, damaging it, if it doesn't completely screw it, either killing with fear (Weird and PK) or making the target comatose (Feeblemind).

 

And the central question remains: how does it make Feeblemind a better choice vs. the others at this level?
Assuming we like the concept (I do, but WE may not), Feeblemind would become a quite unique Enchantment spell, somewhat similar in use to Disintegrate imo (with both spells you're pretty much screwed if you fail the save, and if you don't you still take dmg). Even if we give it a relatively small dmg output (PnP PK inflicts 3d6, thus something like 4d6), I may often prefer it over Domination just because even on a successful save it damages the target (for Enchanters this may open the way to PW spells), and even has a chance to incapacitate the target if he was low on hp (unlikely but possible).

 

I'm not trying to make it "better" than the other spells at this lvl (aka Domination), I'm just trying to make it appealing compared to them. For my playstyle for example, I'd probably take this Feeblemind over Domination just because I don't like save or else spells, and for roleplaying reasons I may like my Enchanter to devastate the mind of his targets instead of controlling them.

 

Breach
I do thought like you that Breach is a death sentece for any mage (and I still believe it's almost true), but a quick PfMW or any trigger/contingency may actually save a breached mage.
True, but no other single spell would force that trigger or PfMW recast.
True, I wasn't trying to say Breach isn't dramatically effective, but just that there's a slim change of surviving it in theory. :)

 

Is it sensible to limit the list of Combat Protections to weapon immunities only? I remember Demi suggested to remove Fireshields, but imo all AC-boosting spells (and Armor of Faith) can go as well. Reason - if fighters have trouble hitting a wizard even after breaching him, then trying to cast offensive spell is the next logical step.
Yep, we discussed this with David back then, and I think he kinda liked the idea as long as we keep Breach working vs specific protections. I think making Breach not work on armor spell (e.g. Armor of Faith, Mage Armor and all similar spells) and similar spells (e.g. Barkskin and even Stoneskin imo) is a must. Long story short, Breach should only work against those spells which grant invulnerability imo, it worked only against ProWeapon spells in PnP, but working against ProEnergy spells makes sense, and I can live with it breaching Death Ward, Free Action and Chaotic Commands though it fits slighty less the concept imo.
I like this idea. The fact that Breach removed specific protections and combat protections always seemed like overkill to me. However, should there be a seperate spell that only removes specific?
Eh, in theory I and Ardanis suggested Pierce Magic for it, but David didn't liked the idea much, especially because 6th lvl slots are already very critical (PfMW, Death Spell, True Seeing). Edited by Demivrgvs
Link to post
Guest N-ghost

Heyhey.

 

Could a Cloudkill be reworked a bit? At the end of the first part of the Trilogy (Sarevok & acolytes etc) it's so cheesy it hurts.

Making casting range a half shorter so it couldn't be spammed off-screen would be just fine.

Link to post

Cloudkill

Could a Cloudkill be reworked a bit? At the end of the first part of the Trilogy (Sarevok & acolytes etc) it's so cheesy it hurts.

Making casting range a half shorter so it couldn't be spammed off-screen would be just fine.

All cloud spells can be exploited, especially if you can force the AI in a confined space with it (e.g. a small room with a closed door), but I doubt I can do much other than hoping players don't abuse it too much. :cool: How are you using it right now to feel like a cheater? Do you feel it cheesy because of the usual cast from off sight and let the dumb AI die in it?

 

I fear limiting casting range on a spell with a unfriendly 30 feet radius AoE would mean turning it into a "suicide spell" even worse than vanilla's Skull Trap was. I thought about limiting their duration to 5-6 rounds but I'm not sure about it either. :)

Link to post
Guest N-ghost
Do you feel it cheesy because of the usual cast from off sight and let the dumb AI die in it?

Uh-huh. And gosh, that's especially painful to look when there's a plenty of free space in the room, but them are just to lazy to make a few steps out of it.

 

Maybe make it casting duration shorter, but permit to target creatures only? It could still be exploited (like having invisible character somewhere near hostiles), but it would be harder at least.

 

I'm talking about cloudkill especially because it's only and single cloud-type offensive spell in BG1 part of the game, and later almost always one has a stronger alternatives to such.

Link to post
Feeblemind
Last but not least, I still believe that adding non-lethal dmg as a secondary effect could make Feeblemind appealing even compared to Domination and Breach without being a too radical change. I'm still waiting for someone to comment on it, does it suck so much that you'd prefer to replace Feeblemind with another spell like Ardanis suggests?
OK, can you describe exactly how you propose this should work? Weird and PK have obvious applications for non-lethal damage, even brilliant ones, but it seems out of place for Feeblemind.
Isn't the application the same of Weird and PK? All these spells attack the mind of the target, damaging it, if it doesn't completely screw it, either killing with fear (Weird and PK) or making the target comatose (Feeblemind).

 

Weird and PK "damage" the target by tricking the mind into believing that the target's greatest fears are attacking him. Feeblemind is supposed to reduce intelligence. I don't see how making you dumb translates into damage, nonlethal or otherwise. I still think the best thing to do is make effectiveness inversely proportional to intelligence--a reverse Maze.

 

I'm still a little fuzzy on how non-lethal damage is implemented in BG2. Can you explain? Does it wear off with rest? If so, then it will be most interesting when used by the AI against the player (when the player uses non-lethal damage it might as well be lethal, since the AI cannot rest).

 

And the central question remains: how does it make Feeblemind a better choice vs. the others at this level?
Assuming we like the concept (I do, but WE may not), Feeblemind would become a quite unique Enchantment spell, somewhat similar in use to Disintegrate imo (with both spells you're pretty much screwed if you fail the save, and if you don't you still take dmg). Even if we give it a relatively small dmg output (PnP PK inflicts 3d6, thus something like 4d6), I may often prefer it over Domination just because even on a successful save it damages the target (for Enchanters this may open the way to PW spells), and even has a chance to incapacitate the target if he was low on hp (unlikely but possible).

 

I'm not trying to make it "better" than the other spells at this lvl (aka Domination), I'm just trying to make it appealing compared to them. For my playstyle for example, I'd probably take this Feeblemind over Domination just because I don't like save or else spells, and for roleplaying reasons I may like my Enchanter to devastate the mind of his targets instead of controlling them.

 

The problem with save or else spells in BG2 is that they ramp up to save or die very quickly, then have nowhere to go, especially the single target ones. Even secondary "real" damage would not make Feeblemind different enough to stand out. Incapacitating the target is good, but doing minor damage if the target saves is mostly useless.

 

Breach
Is it sensible to limit the list of Combat Protections to weapon immunities only? I remember Demi suggested to remove Fireshields, but imo all AC-boosting spells (and Armor of Faith) can go as well. Reason - if fighters have trouble hitting a wizard even after breaching him, then trying to cast offensive spell is the next logical step.
Yep, we discussed this with David back then, and I think he kinda liked the idea as long as we keep Breach working vs specific protections. I think making Breach not work on armor spell (e.g. Armor of Faith, Mage Armor and all similar spells) and similar spells (e.g. Barkskin and even Stoneskin imo) is a must. Long story short, Breach should only work against those spells which grant invulnerability imo, it worked only against ProWeapon spells in PnP, but working against ProEnergy spells makes sense, and I can live with it breaching Death Ward, Free Action and Chaotic Commands though it fits slighty less the concept imo.
I like this idea. The fact that Breach removed specific protections and combat protections always seemed like overkill to me. However, should there be a seperate spell that only removes specific?
Eh, in theory I and Ardanis suggested Pierce Magic for it, but David didn't liked the idea much, especially because 6th lvl slots are already very critical (PfMW, Death Spell, True Seeing).

 

OK, that makes sense. As long as there is some way to get rid of Pro Energy.

Link to post
How are you using it [Cloudkill et al] right now to feel like a cheater? Do you feel it cheesy because of the usual cast from off sight and let the dumb AI die in it?

I cast these spells only if

A) I have a Tank in the cloud as well, baiting the enemies into staying there, and/or

B) The enemies can't move fast enough to effectively get out of the cloud (Death Fog is my favorite anti-Lich spell), and/or

C) I have a valid roleplaying means of "locking" them in a small room filled with gas (e.g., all doors are held closed by characters with high STR, who were also carrying a few unenchanted Axes or Short Swords for wedging the doors shut).

Link to post
Do you feel it cheesy because of the usual cast from off sight and let the dumb AI die in it?

Uh-huh. And gosh, that's especially painful to look when there's a plenty of free space in the room, but them are just to lazy to make a few steps out of it.

 

I think your problem is with the dumb AI and not the spell itself.

 

Try using SCS. With that mod, enemies become smart enough to run out of cloud spells.

Link to post

By the way, I've recently discovered the changes that SR makes to Protection from (Normal) Missile, and the spell now seems very overpowered to me. A 3rd level spell giving complete immunity to all missile weapons in the game? Even high powered stuff like Gesen's Bow and Firetooth? Heck, it even blocks arrows fired by the Fallen Solar and Ascension's Illasera. Seriously, that's way too much.

 

Couldn't you make the spell scale somehow? For example, it might be more balanced if it granted immunity to normal missiles at level 5, +1 missiles at level 10, +2 missiles at level 15 and +3 missiles at level 20. The +4 and +5 missiles would only be blocked by higher level spells like Mantle and such.

Link to post
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...