PnP Greater Malison

[Ardanis]

Dispel fix

It'll be a separate component in SR and SCS.

 

Malison

But I don't like the thought of having to face dangerous enemies whose Saves I can only lower by 3 (2 from Malison, 1 from Doom, unless that's been changed), regardless of how experienced my own Mages are.

Aye. I was fighting SCS2's Hell Irenicus recently and the bastard saved against 4 Disintegrates! Despite being malisoned and -5 penalty on Dis itself. But on the other hand, had he failed at least twice under the effect of GM the fight would have been easier than I'd like it to be.

[Demivrgvs]

But I don't like the thought of having to face dangerous enemies whose Saves I can only lower by 3 (2 from Malison, 1 from Doom, unless that's been changed), regardless of how experienced my own Mages are.

Aye. I was fighting SCS2's Hell Irenicus recently and the bastard saved against 4 Disintegrates! Despite being malisoned and -5 penalty on Dis itself. But on the other hand, had he failed at least twice under the effect of GM the fight would have been easier than I'd like it to be.

What you say about Irenicus is exactly why till now SR save penalties never seemed to be a problem. Anyway, good to know bosses don't fail saves against Disintegrate as often as some fear.

 

Regarding Six's statement, I don't understand, some players are currently asking to reduce save penalties and you're saying that you'd like to have more penalties? Anyway, just so you know, Doom still causes -2 penalty (though it currently allows a save within V3 as per PnP). I already fear a lot a base -4/-6 penalty with -2 from Malison and -2 from Doom, more would be utterly imbalanced imo.

[DavidW]

OK, I don't want to push this too far, because ultimately it's not my mod (and I can offer revert options if I think it's sensible), but let's have one more go.

 

There are two ways in which Malison might be overpowered in its vanilla form.

 

1) When Malison is present, the game as a whole is unbalanced

2) The game as a whole is balanced just fine with Malison, but Malison itself is too powerful for a fourth level slot

 

I think Demi's point is (2), but I'll mention both.

 

For (1), all I can say is that I haven't seen much in the way of empirical evidence for it, and it's not what I've seen on my playthroughs. I'm fairly unmoved by purely theoretical considerations as they're very dependent on assumptions about the particular situation, and those assumptions are at best controversial. (It is, for instance, questionable that Malison is "designed for opponents with very good saves" given that it's in BG1). I also think there's a serious lack of appreciation for how much time matters in practice in combat. In a game where the critical phase of combat often lasts only 4-5 rounds, or less, delaying your high-grade attack spell by one round is expensive.

 

For (2), all I can say is that I don't see the issue. So what if it's generally attractive for any high level mage to use one of his L4 slots for Malison? It's generally attractive for any high level mage to use one of his L4 slots for Stoneskin, but I don't see that causing problems.

 

I don't really think this is about balance, it's about how one likes the flow of combat to go. The current game gives a significant (though in my view not decisive) advantage in most circumstances to mages who start off using Malison. On balance I like this. It's perfectly defensible to prefer a different style of play in which spells basically carry their own save penalty and Malison is a more marginal choice, but that's independent of balance considerations as I understand them.

 

As Aranthys suggest, within SR you really can't use vanilla Malison, thus I'd suggest you to not revert it for SCS or you'll end up with serious balance issues for high level spells.

 

If you still think vanilla Malison is fine I don't think I can add much to what I just said, but keep it at -4 penalty only for non SR players please.

 

I'm confused by this. Shouldn't this be advice aimed at players ("I recommend that you don't install this, as it will be unbalancing")? My tentative guess is that SCS will probably work better with SR and vanilla Malison than with SR and nerfed Malison, but the best way to find out is to give people the option. As I've said before, modularity is the beauty of WEIDU.

[Demivrgvs]

OK, I don't want to push this too far, because ultimately it's not my mod (and I can offer revert options if I think it's sensible), but let's have one more go.

 

There are two ways in which Malison might be overpowered in its vanilla form.

 

1) When Malison is present, the game as a whole is unbalanced

2) The game as a whole is balanced just fine with Malison, but Malison itself is too powerful for a fourth level slot

 

I think Demi's point is (2), but I'll mention both.

Exactly what I was trying to say, my point is more or less (2), but vanilla Malison was fine in vanilla, whereas within SR the old Malison is indeed too powerful.

 

 

As Aranthys suggest, within SR you really can't use vanilla Malison, thus I'd suggest you to not revert it for SCS or you'll end up with serious balance issues for high level spells.

 

If you still think vanilla Malison is fine I don't think I can add much to what I just said, but keep it at -4 penalty only for non SR players please.

I'm confused by this. Shouldn't this be advice aimed at players ("I recommend that you don't install this, as it will be unbalancing")? My tentative guess is that SCS will probably work better with SR and vanilla Malison than with SR and nerfed Malison, but the best way to find out is to give people the option. As I've said before, modularity is the beauty of WEIDU.

Yeah, let's see what players will say after they start facing a lich casting Wail of the Banshee with a -10 penalty! And why not adding Doom on top of it for a nasty -12 penalty?!

[Aranthys]

OK, I don't want to push this too far, because ultimately it's not my mod (and I can offer revert options if I think it's sensible), but let's have one more go.

 

There are two ways in which Malison might be overpowered in its vanilla form.

 

1) When Malison is present, the game as a whole is unbalanced

2) The game as a whole is balanced just fine with Malison, but Malison itself is too powerful for a fourth level slot

 

I think Demi's point is (2), but I'll mention both.

Exactly what I was trying to say, my point is more or less (2).

 

 

As Aranthys suggest, within SR you really can't use vanilla Malison, thus I'd suggest you to not revert it for SCS or you'll end up with serious balance issues for high level spells.

 

If you still think vanilla Malison is fine I don't think I can add much to what I just said, but keep it at -4 penalty only for non SR players please.

I'm confused by this. Shouldn't this be advice aimed at players ("I recommend that you don't install this, as it will be unbalancing")? My tentative guess is that SCS will probably work better with SR and vanilla Malison than with SR and nerfed Malison, but the best way to find out is to give people the option. As I've said before, modularity is the beauty of WEIDU.

Yeah, let's see what players will say after they start facing a lich casting Wail of the Banshee with a -10 penalty! And why not adding Doom on top of it for a nasty -12 penalty?!

They can already face a lich casting Wail of the Banshee with a -8 penality

[Shaitan]

I must admit I usually install the component of the Tweackpack which gives highlevel mages/clerics ST bonuses. As DavidW said: it's all 'bout modularity.

[Demivrgvs]

I must admit I usually install the component of the Tweackpack which gives highlevel mages/clerics ST bonuses.

On top of SR? If that doesn't end up with everyone failing every save let me know...because in that case SR's current save system is fine!

[Shaitan]

I must admit I usually install the component of the Tweackpack which gives highlevel mages/clerics ST bonuses.

On top of SR? If that doesn't end up with everyone failing every save let me know...because in that case SR's current save system is fine!

It did work in tutu and in BG2 (untill spellhold as I haven't been further with SR 2.9).

[Salk]

I agree with Demivrgvs here.

 

It's also a matter of philosophy.

 

SR tries to not make any spell stand too much out as the absolute favourite choice per spell level.

[amanasleep]

I agree with Demivrgvs here.

 

It's also a matter of philosophy.

 

SR tries to not make any spell stand too much out as the absolute favourite choice per spell level.

 

There is no way that GM is the best choice at Level 4 in vanilla. Stoneskin is the obvious pick and nobody claims that it's overpowered.

 

GM + Spell has to be more effective than 2x of the same spell or there's no reason to use it.

[Demivrgvs]

There is no way that GM is the best choice at Level 4 in vanilla. Stoneskin is the obvious pick and nobody claims that it's overpowered.

GM is not the best 4th level spell, and I think there are a lot of great spells at that level.

 

P.S Actually Stoneskin do is overpowered if you ask me...but I simply accept that I can't do nothing about it.

 

GM + Spell has to be more effective than 2x of the same spell or there's no reason to use it.

You're absolutely wrong here, that would be true only if GM lasted 1 round and you could cast only a second spell before it expires!!! If you can't see how effective is using a -4 penaly GM combined with on hit effects, and innate abilities of characters and summons I don't know what to say. And unless you're the worst strategist in the realms you're going to use at least 3-4 spells after firing GM!

 

You can consider a -2 penalty GM not enough powerful, but saying it has no use is really too much please. Go say Aranthys you don't care about GM raising a -6 penalty to a -8 and see what he says!

 

Malison simply requires more strategy, but I can suggest you many examples of how overpowered a -4 penalty can be within SR:

- Vorpal Swords (without IR it would be 25% chance on each hit to save at -6 penalty or die! )

- Celestial Fury's (stun on each hit with a -4 penalty!)

- Create Undead's ghasts (3x3 attacks = 9 attacks, each can paralyze for 5 rounds, and GM would allow them to do it at -4 penalty).

- any 7th level spell would have -10 penalty!

- more?

[Aranthys]

-2 penality is just right for malyson.

 

Now, about the penalities of other spells.....

[amanasleep]

There is no way that GM is the best choice at Level 4 in vanilla. Stoneskin is the obvious pick and nobody claims that it's overpowered.

GM is not the best 4th level spell, and I think there are a lot of great spells at that level.

 

P.S Actually Stoneskin do is overpowered if you ask me...but I simply accept that I can't do nothing about it.

 

GM + Spell has to be more effective than 2x of the same spell or there's no reason to use it.

You're absolutely wrong here, that would be true only if GM lasted 1 round and you could cast only a second spell before it expires!!! If you can't see how effective is using a -4 penaly GM combined with on hit effects, and innate abilities of characters and summons I don't know what to say. And unless you're the worst strategist in the realms you're going to use at least 3-4 spells after firing GM!

 

You can consider a -2 penalty GM not enough powerful, but saying it has no use is really too much please. Go say Aranthys you don't care about GM raising a -6 penalty to a -8 and see what he says!

 

As DavidW already proved, there is a diminishing return to lowering already lowered saves. The difference between -6 and -8 is actually not that much for most targets. But casting Malison first loses you a spell action.

 

Malison simply requires more strategy, but I can suggest you many examples of how overpowered a -4 penalty can be within SR:

- Vorpal Swords (without IR it would be 25% chance on each hit to save at -6 penalty or die! )

- Celestial Fury's (stun on each hit with a -4 penalty!)

- Create Undead's ghasts (3x3 attacks = 9 attacks, each can paralyze for 5 rounds, and GM would allow them to do it at -4 penalty).

- any 7th level spell would have -10 penalty!

- more?

 

GM at -4 is OP only in SR where you allow people to create Ghasts and cast normal spells at huge modifiers. You have created the problem yourself! I am arguing that GM is balanced in vanilla/SCS2 only.

 

I have already said that I agree that the major concern with Malison in vanilla is the interation with on hit affects, and that the solution is reduced duration, not reduced save penalty. I will certainly concede that this point is debatable however.

 

If you want to change GM because it interferes with your plans for the entire save structure of SR I can understand, but do not claim that you are doing this because GM is OP in vanilla.

 

GM is very solid in vanilla, and somewhat abusable with on hit affect items and insta-death spells against certain enemies when combined with Lower Resistance and/or Doom. It is significantly less useful already in SCS2 because the AI casts GoI (immunity) and II (neutralizes the save penalty) at the drop of a hat.

 

Your nerf makes sense in SR only because you have compensated by changing the save structure of every spell in the game.

[SixOfSpades]

A lot of what's been said has merit. All told, I would say that the existing SR system (nerfed Malison, harsher Saves on other spells) appears to be just as valid and balanced as the vanilla arrangement, with the obvious difference that it's the halfway point between vanilla and no Malison spell at all.

 

Personally, I prefer the vanilla setup, as I like the option to lower my opponents' Saves if I see the need, and can appreciate an AI smart enough to do the same to me. But SR adds so many other improvements that my small regret about losing Greater Malison is easily overcome.

 

Demi has made much of Malison's potential to magnify subsequent spells, but personally I think he's putting too much of a spin on it: Of course you pile on spells afterward, that's the point. You wouldn't argue that sending in your Tanks after neutralizing your foes with a Greater Command proves that GC is overpowered, would you?

 

No one has yet mentioned that Malison can have no effect on Liches, or those under a Globe of Invulnerability. It's quite probable that SCS II uses SI: Enchantment to shield against disabling spells. Most importantly, enemies in-game can have ridicuously low Saves, especially at high levels: BioWare was calculating for a party that had access to a Greater Malison that imposed the full -4 penalty, but that this party only had enough GMs to throw them for mid- to high-level boss fights. With SR's system (nerfed Malison but tougher everything else), we would be walking through ToB with (effectively) a half-strength Malison affecting all enemies, all the time. Also of note is that if the Saves on spells, but not weapons or kit abilities, are made harsher, then the power balance of the whole game takes a more caster-friendly shift.

[Demivrgvs]

GM at -4 is OP only in SR where you allow people to create Ghasts and cast normal spells at huge modifiers. You have created the problem yourself! I am arguing that GM is balanced in vanilla/SCS2 only.

 

If you want to change GM because it interferes with your plans for the entire save structure of SR I can understand, but do not claim that you are doing this because GM is OP in vanilla.

 

Your nerf makes sense in SR only because you have compensated by changing the save structure of every spell in the game.

Yeah it makes sense only with SR, it's probably for that reason that each and every edition of AD&D uses -2 penalty like I do, and probably it was because of SR that they decide to use -2 within IWD and BG1.

 

Ghasts are normal creatures, not uber powerful SR additions (BG developers planned to add them to 3rd level Animate Dead spell), Vorpal Swords and Celestial Fury are vanilla weapons which become brokenly overpowered with -4 additional penalty, and I may give you tons of additional examples which have nothing to do with SR:

- fighter's Power Attack + GM = stun for 2 rounds on each hit with a -8 penalty;

- monk's stunning blow + GM = stun for 1 rounds on each hit with a -4 penalty and 4.5 attacks per round;

- monk's Quivering Palm + GM = on hit 100% chance target must save at -4 or die;

- vanilla's Spook + GM = target must save at -10 penalty or be disabled; (with SR the total is -6)

- vanilla's Web + GM = each round everyone within 30 feet must save at -6 or be paralyzed; (with SR the total is -3)

- more?

 

Let's be clear, I'd prefer PnP/IWD/IWDII/BG1 Malison over BG2 Malison even without SR save penalties (which we are probably going to reduce or remove). But you can avoid installing it, fine with me.