Jump to content

Feedback


Recommended Posts

I just noticed that SR's Call Lightning can be cast indoors. Perhaps it's just me, but I find this change a bit immersion breaking.

 

If I may, I'd suggest doing what Icewind Dale did here e.g. add a Static Charge spell which works similarly but can be cast everywhere. At the same time, restrict Call Lightning to outside areas again but improve its damage which seems too low right now.

Link to post

Call Lightning

I just noticed that SR's Call Lightning can be cast indoors. Perhaps it's just me, but I find this change a bit immersion breaking.

 

If I may, I'd suggest doing what Icewind Dale did here e.g. add a Static Charge spell which works similarly but can be cast everywhere. At the same time, restrict Call Lightning to outside areas again but improve its damage which seems too low right now.

We somewhat discussed the same back in the 2008 here, but it's quicker if I re-post my point on this matter.

 

I've opted for 3E here (though there it also deals slightly more damage if cast outdoors and during a storm), and I don't regret it because druids do needed some serious help with their incredibly lacking speelbook, and having a good spell which cannot be used for 99% of the encounters is kinda pointless (at least within SR's scope of making all spells appealing).

 

Regarding the "immersion breaking" aspect, perhaps it is just me, but can't we simply assume this spell works as Static Charge when cast indoor, and a Lighting Storm when cast outdoor? Not to mention I don't see how casting Entangle or an Ice Storm within a small room is fine whereas calling a lightning bolt is not. If we really want to be pedantic and say "this is a real lightning storm, not a magical bolt", then it should require bad weather, and it should bypass magic resistance (making it almost never usable, and OP when usable). Am I wrong?

 

I'm not sure I'd vote to raise its dmg output. Let's see...right now CL caps at L15 with 30d6, whereas Flame Arrow at the same lvl deals 15d6 (caps at L20 with 20d6), and Lightning Bolt deals 10d8 (because it's capped at L10). CL's dmg output is almost twice as much of similar spells of the same lvl, while its drawbacks are a slower casting time and that it takes 24 seconds to inflict its full dmg. Does it seem so unbalanced in favor of FA or LB? :cool:

 

P.S On a side note, afaik SCS now uses Call Lighting if SR is detect, and it assumes it can be cast indoor.

Link to post
I've opted for 3E here (though there it also deals slightly more damage if cast outdoors and during a storm), and I don't regret it because druids do needed some serious help...

 

While I agree with your choice, I'd have changed the name of the spell (perhaps Discharge?). Call Lightning is obviously pointing to the open sky.

Link to post
Guest guest
I've opted for 3E here (though there it also deals slightly more damage if cast outdoors and during a storm), and I don't regret it because druids do needed some serious help...

 

While I agree with your choice, I'd have changed the name of the spell (perhaps Discharge?). Call Lightning is obviously pointing to the open sky.

 

'Static Discharge' rather than just 'Discharge' if anything, but both are a bit meh.

'Electric Storm' might be a better idea as far as changing names is concerned, among others, as it is along the lines of 'Ice Storm', for example.

 

The 'Call lightning' name isn't the thing that 'points to the open sky' in my opinion, and is fine as is. Once again, if anything, changing the spell icon depiciting a cloud would be better. Yet again, not a big problem in my view.

Link to post

+1 vote for being able to Call Lightning anywhere one can cast Ice Storm, Flame Strike, Comet, Sunray, Storm of Vengeance, etc. But at the same time, I'd reduce the damage from the original, seeing as how it's party-friendly.

 

Stupid but realistic tweak: Casting Earthquake while on Saemon's (formerly Desharik's) ship, or in Irenicus's miniature Elemental Plane of Air, does absolutely nothing.

Link to post

Call Lightning

I've opted for 3E here (though there it also deals slightly more damage if cast outdoors and during a storm), and I don't regret it because druids do needed some serious help...
While I agree with your choice, I'd have changed the name of the spell (perhaps Discharge?). Call Lightning is obviously pointing to the open sky.
'Static Discharge' rather than just 'Discharge' if anything, but both are a bit meh.

'Electric Storm' might be a better idea as far as changing names is concerned, among others, as it is along the lines of 'Ice Storm', for example.

 

The 'Call lightning' name isn't the thing that 'points to the open sky' in my opinion, and is fine as is. Once again, if anything, changing the spell icon depiciting a cloud would be better. Yet again, not a big problem in my view.

+1 vote for being able to Call Lightning anywhere one can cast Ice Storm, Flame Strike, Comet, Sunray, Storm of Vengeance, etc.
Six's point is exactly what I was trying to say...I really don't understand why Call Lightning indoor makes less sense than conjuring a Comet.

 

If the spell's name really is a problem (it isn't imo, and 3E still uses it), the only other name I'd support probably is Lightning Storm (the 5th lvl version of this spell within 3E is called Call Lighting Storm, though it's identical to the 3rd lvl spell other than a slightly higher dmg output). Actually I do thought about chaning it, especially because of Call Lightning's icon (and having a storm spell for each element would be cool), but I also thought it was unnecessary (uncalled for changes may annoy some players), and the storm spells have a slightly different "template" (Ice/Fire Storm last 4 rounds with an unfriendly or partially friendly huge AoE, whereas Call Lightning has a variable duration, and seems more like a single target friendly spell).

 

But at the same time, I'd reduce the damage from the original, seeing as how it's party-friendly.
Indeed, I've hugely nerfed the dmg output. It previously wasn't a big deal because despite its OP dmg output the spell could almost never be used, but I had to nerf it (as per 3E) to balance its vastly superior usability.

 

Within V3 each bolt deals 6d6 dmg. Within PnP indoor bolts deal 3d6 and outdoor bolts deal 3d10. Vanilla's bolt were outstandingly more powerful, as their dmg capped at 20d8 per bolt! :blush:

 

P.S Also note that in PnP this spell requires concentration, which is a major "nerf".

 

 

Lightning Bolt

@Ardanis, I was messing with Celestial Fury's custom Lightning Bolt tonight to implement your solution to restore vanilla's animation while keeping SR's single target property, and a wild thought stroke me...do you think it's possible to make LB work as it should using a cone shaped projectile? I didn't had the time to try it yet, but can't we use a very long cone with an uber thin width value? :suspect: If it works, we could even further refine it by using two projectiles, with one animation only projectile to avoid multiple bolts being displayed by the cone shaped projectile (if I wasn't a PnP purist I could actually like that :) ). Should I try it out or is it clearly a dead end of a crazy mind?

 

Though my dream stil is a LB spell working a la Aganazzar's Scorching Ray, or at least to have vanilla's projectile not bounce. I'm too shy to try asking A64 for one of these. :cool:

Edited by Demivrgvs
Link to post

Call Lightning

 

I can understand but I honestly can't agree with Demi's and SixOfSpades' point of view here. Call Lightning does not belong to arcane magic and shouldn't be mixed with other spells like Ice Storm or Lightning Bolt. It's a druidic spell and it invokes the power of Nature, in this case from the sky. At least, that's how I see it.

 

Thinking of it again, I wouldn't even have changed it to nerf it and make it work indoor. Its vanilla outstanding damage was justified by the outdoor only usability and the face that druidic magic is generally weaker than other classes'.

Link to post

Call Lightning

I can understand but I honestly can't agree with Demi's and SixOfSpades' point of view here. Call Lightning does not belong to arcane magic and shouldn't be mixed with other spells like Ice Storm or Lightning Bolt. It's a druidic spell and it invokes the power of Nature, in this case from the sky. At least, that's how I see it.
Aren't Ice Storm, Flame Strike, Fire Storm, Sunray and so on druidic spells as well?

 

Thinking of it again, I wouldn't even have changed it to nerf it and make it work indoor. Its vanilla outstanding damage was justified by the outdoor only usability and the face that druidic magic is generally weaker than other classes'.
Sorry but on this I won't be democratic. Having a spell which is unusable for 99% of the encounters, and extremely overpowered the 1% of times it's usable (100d8 with a 3rd lvl slot?!? :cool: ), is a very bad design decision from a balancing point of view.
Link to post
Call Lightning

 

Aren't Ice Storm, Flame Strike, Fire Storm, Sunray and so on druidic spells as well?

 

Yes, but they have a different background as you well know. PnP version of Call Lightning even requires favorable weather condition, not only that it is cast outdoors! Now, the outdoors only condition is a trademark of this specific spell and I would rather see its name changed in its SR-tweaked version because SR is changing the most defining characteristic of this spell.

 

Sorry but on this I won't be democratic. Having a spell which is unusable for 99% of the encounters, and extremely overpowered the 1% of times it's usable (100d8 with a 3rd lvl slot?!? :cool: ), is a very bad design decision from a balancing point of view.

 

The maximum damage dealt is certainly too much (but saving for half damaged is allowed and also: should we evaluate a spell only by its maximal damage?), but its outstanding power is available to those who decide to use one of their 3rd level slots to memorize a spell that most times won't be useful. Game-balance wise I don't find this concept extremely wrong.

Edited by Salk
Link to post

Lightning Bolt

@Ardanis, don't mind my last post. I've spent half of this evening on Celestial Fury, testing various solutions to make LB as per PnP but without that damn bouncing effect, and after tons of failures I've managed to found a decent solution, the best I can imagine...which sadly isn't good enough to me.

 

The only way I can make it work is using a cone shaped projectile (width 20) with no animation and casting speed 0 (which actually seems to be the fastest possible), which casts a second spl on every target. This secondary spell contains both vanilla's LB animation and dmg output. In terms of "functionality" it works very fine, but from a cosmetic point of view it doesn't, at least not always (e.g. if two targets are far away from each other you clearly see two bolts instead of a thin long single bolt).

 

Long story short, unless someone have an outstandingly brilliant idea (or A64 can help us), I probably have to keep it single target.

 

Call Lightning

Aren't Ice Storm, Flame Strike, Fire Storm, Sunray and so on druidic spells as well?
Yes, but they have a different background as you well know. PnP version of Call Lightning even requires favorable weather condition, not only that it is cast outdoors! Now, the outdoors only condition is a trademark of this specific spell and I would rather see its name changed in its SR-tweaked version because SR is changing the most defining characteristic of this spell.
Just to make the devil's advocate (because I don't have much problems changing the name if most players prefer so and very few are against it): when you say PnP, you should say AD&D PnP, because within 3E PnP this spell neither requires to be cast outdoors nor to have favorable weather conditions.

 

Regarding its supposed "background", I know well it could have a non-magical nature as you seem to prefer (as per AD&D - though it still allows a magic resistance check, which is a nonsense), but it can as well have a classic magical nature (as per 3E) as 99% of druid's spellbook. Should we also start questioning about things such as Entangle being usable pretty much anywhere?

 

Sorry but on this I won't be democratic. Having a spell which is unusable for 99% of the encounters, and extremely overpowered the 1% of times it's usable (100d8 with a 3rd lvl slot?!? :cool: ), is a very bad design decision from a balancing point of view.
The maximum damage dealt is certainly too much (but saving for half damaged is allowed and also: should we evaluate a spell only by its maximal damage?), but its outstanding power is available to those who decide to use one of their 3rd level slots to memorize a spell that most times won't be useful. Game-balance wise I don't find this concept extremely wrong.
I don't judge a spell by its max dmg output alone, but 100d8 makes it a Disintegrate spell on steroids (with the disadvantage of requiring 24 seconds to take full effect, but with an outstandingly higher min dmg output). Just compare it with vanilla's Flame Strike, which is two lvls higher and capped at 20d8 (with a save for half just like CL).

 

Leaving aside that I don't agree that game-balance wise the concept is fine, the premises are not even there imo, because within BG you're not taking a gamble by memorizing CL. You do know if you're going to fight outdoors or not, and you are not going to waste a slot on it unless you know you'll be using it.

 

Druids already have a very thin spellbook, thus there's no way I'm going to vote for having one of those few spells turned back into something you can almost never use (not to mention SCS uses SR's CL indoor).

Edited by Demivrgvs
Link to post

I hope you don't mind if I continue with this discussion. Since I know you are a civil person I try debating.

 

Call Lightning

Just to make the devil's advocate (because I don't have much problems changing the name if most players prefer so and very few are against it): when you say PnP, you should say AD&D PnP, because within 3E PnP this spell neither requires to be cast outdoors nor to have favorable weather conditions.

 

This specification is not really need in my opinion because Baldur's Gate is built around AD&D 2nd Edition for its bigger part. I would feel the need to point out what PnP sources I am talking about only if different from 2nd Edition PnP.

 

Regarding its supposed "background", I know well it could have a non-magical nature as you seem to prefer (as per AD&D - though it still allows a magic resistance check, which is a nonsense), but it can as well have a classic magical nature (as per 3E) as 99% of druid's spellbook. Should we also start questioning about things such as Entangle being usable pretty much anywhere?

 

Entangle being usable everywhere is:

 

1) Consistent with PnP (2nd Edition :cool:)

2) Easier to envision in, if not all, many indoor environments (vegetation of any kind could find its way through cracks in walls, stone, etc.)

 

so on my part there is no questioning Entangle being usable pretty much anywhere. :)

 

I don't judge a spell by its max dmg output alone, but 100d8 makes it a Disintegrate spell on steroids (with the disadvantage of requiring 24 seconds to take full effect, but with an outstandingly higher min dmg output). Just compare it with vanilla's Flame Strike, which is two lvls higher and capped at 20d8 (with a save for half just like CL).

 

The problem here is the lack of a more reasonable cap. Still, in the context of the druidic offensive magic and that the spell is intended to be used only outdoors, I don't find Call Lightning, even in the vanilla version, a shame to be corrected at its root. Though I envision the spell as a manifestation of Nature and as such I agree with you that the Magic Resistance check is out of place.

 

In the end, Call Lightning in AD&D 2nd Ed. has a very specific character which SR changes deeply. For that reason only, I would change the spell's name. This new SR version of the spell will certainly be more balanced and perhaps reasonable. But also less original.

Link to post

Call Lightning

I hope you don't mind if I continue with this discussion. Since I know you are a civil person I try debating.
I don't mind at all, and there's nothing else particularly important we're overshadowing or leaving behind right now (Lightning Bolt's discussion is more a thing between me, and well...me :suspect: ).

 

Just to make the devil's advocate (because I don't have much problems changing the name if most players prefer so and very few are against it): when you say PnP, you should say AD&D PnP, because within 3E PnP this spell neither requires to be cast outdoors nor to have favorable weather conditions.
This specification is not really need in my opinion because Baldur's Gate is built around AD&D 2nd Edition for its bigger part. I would feel the need to point out what PnP sources I am talking about only if different from 2nd Edition PnP.
Point taken, but you know how I feel about this.

 

Regarding its supposed "background", I know well it could have a non-magical nature as you seem to prefer (as per AD&D - though it still allows a magic resistance check, which is a nonsense), but it can as well have a classic magical nature (as per 3E) as 99% of druid's spellbook. Should we also start questioning about things such as Entangle being usable pretty much anywhere?
Entangle being usable everywhere is:

 

1) Consistent with PnP (2nd Edition :cool:)

2) Easier to envision in, if not all, many indoor environments (vegetation of any kind could find its way through cracks in walls, stone, etc.)

 

so on my part there is no questioning Entangle being usable pretty much anywhere. :)

"Easier to envision" yes, but still questionable, especially in places where there shouldn't be any vegetation (Planar Prison, Irenicus's Pocket Plane of Air, Hell, etc.) or where such vegetation (we're not taking of thin grass) would find its way only by destroying the area. Once again, I would also mention the spell has to be magical in nature or it would bypass magic resistance (I very much like that 3E conjurations bypass it).

 

Anyway, you're still talking about one example but there are plenty of other spells (Ice Storm, Flame Strike, Fire Storm, etc.) that make clear druids can shape the elements without the need for real vegetation or bad weather.

 

I don't judge a spell by its max dmg output alone, but 100d8 makes it a Disintegrate spell on steroids (with the disadvantage of requiring 24 seconds to take full effect, but with an outstandingly higher min dmg output). Just compare it with vanilla's Flame Strike, which is two lvls higher and capped at 20d8 (with a save for half just like CL).
The problem here is the lack of a more reasonable cap. Still, in the context of the druidic offensive magic and that the spell is intended to be used only outdoors, I don't find Call Lightning, even in the vanilla version, a shame to be corrected at its root. Though I envision the spell as a manifestation of Nature and as such I agree with you that the Magic Resistance check is out of place.

 

In the end, Call Lightning in AD&D 2nd Ed. has a very specific character which SR changes deeply. For that reason only, I would change the spell's name. This new SR version of the spell will certainly be more balanced and perhaps reasonable. But also less original.

On the last part I do agree. In fact I thought about making it deal more dmg when used outdoors (as per 3E) to preserve the uniqueness, but my attempts were vain (the outdoor flag is checked before casting the main spl, and thus I cannot make it exclude only part of the spell).

 

Summarizing, I still don't regret the changes made to this spell within SR because:

- they are consistent with 3E PnP (which is almost as valid as AD&D for me, if not more in some occasions)

- they make the spell much more balanced

- they drastically improves the spell's usability (and thus druid's efficiency/appeal in general)

- they are consistent with its pre-existing magic resistance check

Edited by Demivrgvs
Link to post

Lightning Bolt

So the thin cone hits targets correctly, even if barely touching the selection circle? When I was working on traps, I found out that the trigger radius is checking for the circle's center, so a dragon could easily walk over radius=1 trap and not trigger it.

 

How to enforce a single bolt, hmm... Offhands I've no idea. Maybe using the VVC field would help, like it did with Flame Strike, but this is a cone... Well, added it to the 'try to do' list.

 

Call Lightning

What about making it stronger when used outdoors? Two subspells, one has the 'outdoors only' flag, the other doesn't.

Heck, Entangle may be tweaked the same way too then.

 

For it's name, in NWN2 it's still called the same, but can be used indoors just as fine.

Edited by Ardanis
Link to post

Lightning Bolt

So the thin cone hits targets correctly, even if barely touching the selection circle? When I was working on traps, I found out that the trigger radius is checking for the circle's center, so a dragon could easily walk over radius=1 trap and not trigger it.
Well, I tested it only with human-sized targets...I don't know how it behaves with huge creatures.

 

How to enforce a single bolt, hmm... Offhands I've no idea. Maybe using the VVC field would help, like it did with Flame Strike, but this is a cone... Well, added it to the 'try to do' list.
Actually I do tried a solution with a single bolt:

- the main spell casts 2 subspells at 1 target

- the first subspell has only vanilla's LB animation and targets only the selected creature

- the second subspell has the cone shaped projectile with no animation, and applies the dmg

The problems here are:

- the timing between LB's animation and dmg application is tricky (though it seems to work fine)

- if any creature quickly moves out of the cone shaped area during LB's animation weird things happen (such targets are damaged despite being clearly not hit by the lightning bolt animation).

 

I don't think the VVC solution is any different, but if you manage to make it work you're welcome! :cool:

 

Call Lightning

What about making it stronger when used outdoors? Two subspells, one has the 'outdoors only' flag, the other doesn't.

Heck, Entangle may be tweaked the same way too then.

As I said in my previous post, I do tried back then. I seem to recall the problem was that only the external main spl check for the flag, whereas the subspells ignore it. I'll try it again. Edited by Demivrgvs
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...