Feedback

[janoha]

Well I think lower THAC0 bonus with increased duration could be a nice alternative. 10 rounds might be a bit much though? How about 5?

 

Edit: On second thought 10 rounds might be better, when taking spells like sleep into account.

Edited July 29, 2014 by janoha

[Salk]

Beta testers have suggested to simply reduce the thac0 bonus (e.g. +4) while increasing the spell duration (e.g. 10 rounds).

 

I like Ardanis' idea better than this, to say the truth.

[kreso]

True Strike

Change to 1 critical hit, max duration 1 turn.

This is overkill in BG1. Assassin/Stalker/fighter-thief can kill any mage in a single hit with this.

[Demivrgvs]

True Strike

Change to 1 critical hit, max duration 1 turn.

This is overkill in BG1. Assassin/Stalker/fighter-thief can kill any mage in a single hit with this.

Ehm...none of them can cast True Strike. But yeah, a mage/thief using it would be devastating indeed within BG1. As I said, I don't like a 1st lvl spell to suddenly become a pocket HLA. If enhanced critical looks so cool it should be something like +x% chance to score it, but not a 100% chance to surely hit and deal 2x dmg.

[Lawlight]

One more random idea I had was to make this spell grant the caster fighter's base thac0 for a prolonged amount of time, but I fear it would change PnP concept too much.

 

I like this idea, because it favours true class in comparison to:

 

Beta testers have suggested to simply reduce the thac0 bonus (e.g. +4) while increasing the spell duration (e.g. 10 rounds).

Edited July 29, 2014 by Lawlight

[Salk]

True Strike

Ehm...none of them can cast True Strike. But yeah, a mage/thief using it would be devastating indeed within BG1. As I said, I don't like a 1st lvl spell to suddenly become a pocket HLA. If enhanced critical looks so cool it should be something like +x% chance to score it, but not a 100% chance to surely hit and deal 2x dmg.

 

A possible solution would be to make it add 50% of the ordinary damage, maintaining the 1 turn duration for the spell.

[janoha]

Clairvoyance

While I think the buffs to the spells are a great idea, and fine addition to the otherwise rather lackluster Divination spell group, I think you should reconsider disabling the old ability.

 

I always thought it was very cool and practical to be able to see all of the area, and I have missed it during SR 3.1. Why did you remove it in the first place?

[Demivrgvs]

Clairvoyance

While I think the buffs to the spells are a great idea, and fine addition to the otherwise rather lackluster Divination spell group, I think you should reconsider disabling the old ability.

 

I always thought it was very cool and practical to be able to see all of the area, and I have missed it during SR 3.1. Why did you remove it in the first place?

I don't remember anymore, but I probably remove that feature because it was kinda overlapping with Farsight and I wanted the latter, more expensive spell to stand out more.

[janoha]

Clairvoyance

While I think the buffs to the spells are a great idea, and fine addition to the otherwise rather lackluster Divination spell group, I think you should reconsider disabling the old ability.

 

I always thought it was very cool and practical to be able to see all of the area, and I have missed it during SR 3.1. Why did you remove it in the first place?

I don't remember anymore, but I probably remove that feature because it was kinda overlapping with Farsight and I wanted the latter, more expensive spell to stand out more.

 

But there would still be a pretty huge difference between the two spells.

Clairvoyance would only show the terrain, where Farsight would remove the fog of war over a specific area. I don't really see the overlap.

Edited August 7, 2014 by janoha

[Dakk]

 

Clairvoyance

While I think the buffs to the spells are a great idea, and fine addition to the otherwise rather lackluster Divination spell group, I think you should reconsider disabling the old ability.

 

I always thought it was very cool and practical to be able to see all of the area, and I have missed it during SR 3.1. Why did you remove it in the first place?

I don't remember anymore, but I probably remove that feature because it was kinda overlapping with Farsight and I wanted the latter, more expensive spell to stand out more.

 

But there would still be a pretty huge difference between the two spells.

Clairvoyance would only show the terrain, where Farsight would remove the fog of war over a specific area. I don't really see the overlap.

 

For us crazy remove-all-fog-OCD-completionists Clairvoyance was a godsend... It wouldn't really be a problem with Cv keeping the old ability too, would it?

As janoha puts it, Farsight is real-time spying, Cv is just terrain reveal.

[Salk]

I support janoha and Dakk's request in full.

[Demivrgvs]

Clairvoyance

Mmm..."reveal area map" doesn't really fit its current concept imo, don't you agree?

 

What if I add that effect to Farsight? That way by casting it you first reveal the general outline of the whole map and then more easily pick the correct spot you want to fully "spy".

[Jarno Mikkola]

What if I add that effect to Farsight? That way by casting it you first reveal the general outline of the whole map and then more easily pick the correct spot you want to fully "spy".

It could go well there too.

[janoha]

Clairvoyance

Mmm..."reveal area map" doesn't really fit its current concept imo, don't you agree?

 

What if I add that effect to Farsight? That way by casting it you first reveal the general outline of the whole map and then more easily pick the correct spot you want to fully "spy".

 

This makes a lot of sense to me. It is of course a bit more problematic for BG 1, but I still think it would be a good compromise.

 

Would make me use farsight, which is something I don't normally do at all.

[Salk]

 

Clairvoyance

Mmm..."reveal area map" doesn't really fit its current concept imo, don't you agree?

 

What if I add that effect to Farsight? That way by casting it you first reveal the general outline of the whole map and then more easily pick the correct spot you want to fully "spy".

 

This makes a lot of sense to me. It is of course a bit more problematic for BG 1, but I still think it would be a good compromise.

 

I pretty much dislike to not be able to remove 100% of the fog of war and being able to do this only using Farsight makes it more than problematic for BG1 but like everybody else said, it does make full sense so thumbs up, Demi.

Edited August 9, 2014 by Salk