Feedback

[ancalimohtar]

Finger of Death: @kreso, the only time you would cast this at a mage is after his Spell Turning/Spell Trap is gone, but before his PfMW is gone. In other words, a thin slice of time before you Breach him.

It's a -6 penalty! Even fighters/monsters drop easilly with it. Definitely worth a 7th level slot. I'm also not keen on save or nothing, but this does damage even on a succesful save.

A sorc has probably 5-6 disintegrates if he needs it, using level 6 spell slots. He has level 7, 8, 9 spell slots as well. How many fingers of death is the party cleric going to want to memorize in his top spell slots just to (potentially!) take out the mage 2 rounds earlier than the melee would have done anyway? I only disintegrate vamps, liches, and potentially mind flayers anyway--things I don't want melee touching any more than they have to, and things that are bugged and can't be breached. Plus, next version this'll probably be reduced to a -2 or -4 penalty, right?

 

Regen: As a level 6 spell, it might make more sense. Even so, 6HP regen per round is just not something I would value all that highly. Why would you pick this over Heal? Regen only makes sense if it heals more damage total, but Heal heals you fully, so you don't need any more HP. Therefore the only use would be to counteract damage in combat. And in combat, if anyone starts taking damage, I'm immediately stepping back to Stoneskin. If that gets interrupted or I'm out of stoneskins or it's a character without stoneskins, 6HP a round is not going to save him in the vast majority of cases.

Haste doubles 6 to 12 HP/round, even tough I don't find it neccecary for this spell. It lasts for long time, you can prebuff with it, saves potions, lets your cleric do other stuff than healing you, can keep you alive even if disabled, stacks with itself and any other regen item/ability you have. 10x better than Heal for me, whose long casting time make it very impractical (altough this will be adressed). Of course, it won't keep an AC 6 character alive vs Fire Giants, but it will help -15 AC character live through them.

As I said, as a level 6 spell for druids, it might be worth it to cast on one or two non-stoneskin characters in certain fights. May also be better for other party compositions. I just have minimal use for it.

 

somehow someway, for the party to protect itself against Int drain!

You know, certain summons can't be stunned nor can they be drained of intelligence

I know you've been hinting this the whole thread, but it doesn't work. I tried Create Undead in the mind flayer lair in the Temple Sewers. First off, the Alhoon cast Death Spell or some other spell that kills summons--they got aced. Then I tried to be cute and send in a different summon first, THEN bring in the undead. The mind flayers straight up ignore the undead, and instead freaking teleport without error straight to Minsc, the lowest Int character, and the only character without stoneskin, who is HIDDEN IN SHADOWS, whom I kept at the entrance to the entire lair. So no, summons don't work with SCS.

[DrAzTiK]

It looks like wands can still be used on improved invisibility opponents. It is intented ? Considering this fact, Wands are very powerfull in BG1. ( and BG1 is quite generous about wands loot )

 

Futhermore, many wands in game (I think especially in BG1) have a very hight amount of charge. (30 magic missiles in a wand you can find in a drawer is quite commun in BG1) . Wand should be patched to not have the maximum amount of charge you have decided.

Edited October 6, 2013 by DrAzTiK

[Demivrgvs]

Wands

It looks like wands can still be used on improved invisibility opponents. It is intented ? Considering this fact, Wands are very powerfull in BG1. ( and BG1 is quite generous about wands loot )

 

Futhermore, many wands in game (I think especially in BG1) have a very hight amount of charge. (30 magic missiles in a wand you can find in a drawer is quite commun in BG1) . Wand should be patched to not have the maximum amount of charge you have decided.

All of this actually belongs to IR more than SR. As discussed there I don't know if their behaviour against II targets can be tweaked, we'll see.

 

Within IR wands are indeed supposed to have 10 charges (30 was just insane imo), we'll make sure BG1 wands follow that rule. As soon as Arda manages to find the time to update his component for BG1 we'll also make sure there aren't too many free wands around, though I've read SCS might play a role in mages leaving them around as loot (can someone confirm it?).

[DrAzTiK]

though I've read SCS might play a role in mages leaving them around as loot (can someone confirm it?).

 

Many mages in BG1vanilla have wands . SCS only allow them to use it Imo.

 

If you check the mod "hard times" for BGT, you will be suprised about the number of wands you can find in Bg1^^

 

About spell revisions, I have noticed that :

 

Bless cannot stack with potion of power and potion of heroism. (and vice versa). but maybe it is intented?

 

It would be nice to add a portrait icon for the Aid spell. (you can borrow the IWD2 one)

 

Detect illusion : I think the aera of effect is shorter than 30 radius. Or maybe the area of effect take place around the caster.

Edited October 20, 2013 by DrAzTiK

[Demivrgvs]

Bless cannot stack with potion of power and potion of heroism. (and vice versa). but maybe it is intented?

It's intended to avoid stacking too many bonuses.

 

It would be nice to add a portrait icon for the Aid spell. (you can borrow the IWD2 one)

Adding portrait icons is not a simple task for many reasons. I really don't know if we can do something about it. :/

 

Detect illusion : I think the aera of effect is shorter than 30 radius. Or maybe the area of effect take place around the caster.

The files seem fine. The pro file is a vanilla one and radius is set to 256 (what vanilla's projectiles always used for 30 feet AoE). The spell's effects are not centered on the caster.

[Incantatar]

Hey, you changed the description of the fiend summon spells. Is there a wis/int lvl/cha check now? The fiend script seems to do the old 85%/15% probability.

[Demivrgvs]

Hey, you changed the description of the fiend summon spells. Is there a wis/int lvl/cha check now? The fiend script seems to do the old 85%/15% probability.

The description update was a preparation for things to come, but the currently available spell still uses the 15% chance to lose control of the summoned fiend (a la vanilla's mental duel vs conjured elementals).

[Incantatar]

Ah, like i thought. Just wanted to make sure.

[yarpen]

I really do like an idea behind D&D Next spells system. To explain it shortly - certain spells can be empowered by casting them using higher level. So, they don't really have Cure Light/Medium/Serious/Critical Wounds. Instead they have spell called Cure Wounds that has a version for levels 1-7 and bases it's power on it. It's close to what we have now, but not perfect. I'd propose standarization and changes.

 

CURE WOUNDS

Restores Xd8 + 1/level (up to 5X) Hit Points to target Ally.

 

I: 1d8 + 5

II: 2d8 + 10

III: 3d8 + 15

IV: 4d8 + 20

V: 5d8 + 20

VI: 6d8 + 20

VII: 7d8 + 20

 

With cycle like that, there is no need for Heal spell, which is kind of all-catch boring and totally broken for some monsters (like Dragons). Curve is smooth, high-level heals are still powerfull.

 

MAGIC MISSLE

Yes, they totally did the same thing with Magic Missle. Instead of adding more missles with levels of caster, they opted for more missles with higher spell level. That gives us up to 9 missles. I'd buff their damage significantly (1d8 per Missle).

 

MONSTER/ANIMAL SUMMONING

The same thing I guess.

 

DEATH WARD/NEGATIVE PLANE PROTECTION

D&D Next simply merged them into single spell (Death Ward). Doesn't seem broken at all.

 

RESTORATION

Imo, it'd be a good idea to merge few effects into this spell. Nobody really needs Cure Disease, Cure Blindness/Deafness spells as those effects are so rare it's not really worth to keep them saved. On the one hand it's cool, as difficult access to remedy is something valuable - on the other hand it's simply inconvenient. Which is why, I'd make Restoration cure:

- Disease

- Blindness and Deafness

- Drained Levels (and stats if possible)

That would give us nice set of priest magic with Break Enchantment and Restoration being remedy for most of ailments that can happen. Well, we still do have Neutralize Poison but emerging it with Restoration would be far too convenient (and it even does sound bad). Because hey, "Restoring your Sight" does sound good, right?

 

I'd also remove the "fatigue" effect. There's like literally no reason for it to exist.

And last but not least, "Greater Restoration" could be just an AoE version of Restoration (but without Heal effect).

 

REINCARNATION

We all know that lack of Raise Dead is one of Druid's features but it makes them really tough choice to have in your party. Maybe that's a bit too convenient, but I've found a spell that seems balanced and while giving Druids ability to revive their teammates - keeps them at bay and makes it sure nobody forgets that it's Cleric's domain.

 

Reincarnation would be a nice fit for Level 6.

Casting lasts full round.

It revives target dead ally either with some minor heal (2d6 Hit Points?) BUT, this ally needs to make a saving throw or he becomes shifted into an animal. Pernamently. Which means "until you'll use Break Enchantment on him".

 

This makes Reincarnation both useless in combat and also, forces you to use two spells instead of one.

 

HOLD PERSON

This spell is a true offender, coming from Priest's spellbook. It's available on level 2, and is AoE Hard Crowd Control with good saves. And it's much rarer to have immunity to it than to Charm.

 

We all know it should be a single-target spell, right? Okay.

Also, it's supposed to create a mental image of metal bars that can't be broken which gave me a good idea.

 

If we'd revamp Saving Throws system - then we could talk about making ST against Hold dualistic.

 

When casted, you are rolling Will Saving Throw to avoid the effect.

When you are inflicted with it, you are rolling Fortitude Saving Throw with severe penalty every round, to try to break these bars.

 

HOLD/DOMINATE MONSTER

How do these effects work? From what I believe, 90% of creatures has immunity to mind-affecting spells built in.I DO want to Hold Firkraag with my 5-level Hold spell. Even if it lasts for short time. Even if I need to lower his saving throws and pray to all the gods. If there are spells that are supposed to do that - then at least make them work.

Stripping most of monsters from their immunities would be a good idea.

 

Hold Person (level 2) and Hold Monster (level 5)

Dominate Person (level 4) and Dominate Monster (level 7)

 

MORE MASS SPELLS

We all want Crowd Control. I'd love to have Mass Charm, Mass Hold, Mass Domination in here!

 

SAVING THROWS

I did mentioned it before. You did a great job with Saves vs. Spells. We could use even more standarization. Because who the hell needs saves vs. Wands.

 

D&D3 had nice set of saves: Reflex (old Breath), Fortitude (Death and Polymorphy), Will (Spells). We could use that in Spell Revisions. I know it'd take a lot of time - but I believe it's worth. Even AD&D lovers can tell, BG2's saves system is silly.

[kreso]

Cure spells - I'd only standardize casting times (up to level 6 Heal - casting time 6) and that's all I'd do with those. They're fine, and hugely buffed as opossed to vanilla game

 

Magic missile - this is probably the single most used spell in the game. I see no need for changing it.

 

Restoration - Cure Disease spell already cures both blindness and deafness, so it's very convinient to have. There are a number of oponnents which transmit diseases (Demons, Undead). It's a decent spell already, especially since it cures Blindness which otherrwise lasts until you rest.

 

Hold - t-up for single target, but I wouldn't exactly "strip" immunites off monsters. You can't hold Firkraag even with a PW:Stun, yet alone some 5th level spell

 

Saving Throws - already included in Kit Revisions

[Jarno Mikkola]

HOLD/DOMINATE MONSTER

How do these effects work? From what I believe, 90% of creatures has immunity to mind-affecting spells built in.I DO want to Hold Firkraag with my 5-level Hold spell. Even if it lasts for short time. Even if I need to lower his saving throws and pray to all the gods. If there are spells that are supposed to do that - then at least make them work.

Stripping most of monsters from their immunities would be a good idea.

 

Hold Person (level 2) and Hold Monster (level 5)

Hold - t-up for single target, but I wouldn't exactly "strip" immunites off monsters. You can't hold Firkraag even with a PW:Stun, yet alone some 5th level spell

How about a compromise that doesn't make the whole hold spell system totally ignorable nor totally OP. We set the Hold spells to (auto) HOLD the monster in place and then stun them if they fail the save(or do both, but the other with a loads of save bonuses).

We have the Entangle opcode, we can use that here, the dragon can be hold in place and killed where it stands ... the game doesn't have a hide in a smaller cave than the dragon cannot pass through, so the party should be able to hold it at far and take it from distance. Yeah, this also brings the fact that the priests needs to be quite strong to take the punishment to be able to cast the hold spell to the 50x larger than him monster. And the spell might not last that long... requiring him to do so again, while it's being damaged.

 

I hate the die rolls in Healing spells. Cause I don't want to die cause my die skill was off.

[kreso]

How about a compromise that doesn't make the whole hold spell system totally ignorable nor totally OP.

Why do you consider it ignorable, because dragons are immune to it? It's fine as it is. In most cases, Hold spells are an AoE save or die for the AI (unless they've got a cleric in their group). I can't see what's wrong with them.

[Jarno Mikkola]

 

How about a compromise that doesn't make the whole hold spell system totally ignorable nor totally OP.

Why do you consider it ignorable, because dragons are immune to it?

If the dragon is not a monster, then what is it ? A magical beast is a monster too.

And even if I hold the dragon in place, but don't stun them so it can't take actions, how are you going to kill the dragon with your spells ? ... and remember the dragon can resist all the things you do, while it's ripping away the holding spell off of it ! You got two ~rounds before it takes a next save with 70% chance to get free to move and slaughter you even in melee if it chooses. Not to mention that your cleric is out of the fight cause it has to heal his own wounds it just took to hold the monster.

Edited May 20, 2014 by Jarno Mikkola

[kreso]

how are you going to kill the dragon with your spells ? .

Fairly easy actually..... One can also use arrows/throwing axes/whatever from range.

Second, nothing prevents you from using Hold Monster over and over again.

In BG2, even vanilla, all dragons are immune to holds and stuns, and this probably won't change any time soon, SR or not (unless you install The Darkest Day, where one can stun dragons with Celestial Fury.)

[Jarno Mikkola]

 

how are you going to kill the dragon with your spells ? .

Fairly easy actually..... One can also use arrows/throwing axes/whatever from range.

Second, nothing prevents you from using Hold Monster over and over again.

In BG2, even vanilla, all dragons are immune to holds and stuns, and this probably won't change any time soon, SR or not (unless you install The Darkest Day, where one can stun dragons with Celestial Fury.)

And if you reach the range that your arrows hit(sight range), you get your butt roasted by the dragons breath weapon or what ever it wants to cast at you. I said, that the Hold spell would hold(in place) the monster, not stun it, like the current spell would do if it is not immune to it(the totality of the spells affects). Yep, this is done with the single target entangle opcode with it's own save vs. penalty etc.

A related but different argument is that the current spell name should be Stun Monster, not Hold Monster.

Edited May 20, 2014 by Jarno Mikkola