SR V3

[Guest Guest]

Kit Revisions

I'm hopeful that a future version of Level 1 NPCs will allow us to assign Kit Revision kits to NPCs in the same way that it does with Divine Remix kits.

 

As a subcomponent of Kit Revisions, would you be so kind as to allow us to change Branwen's Spiritual Hammer x3 innate ability to x3 of whatever Spiritual weapon you're assigning her? It would be much "cleaner" than having your Spiritual weapon (e.g. Axe) as a 2nd level domain spell plus her original Spiritual Hammer innate.

[Guest Guest]

Sorry, just to clarify, when I say "whatever Spiritual weapon you're assigning her" I mean whatever Spiritual weapon the Battleguard of Tempus gets.

[yarpen]

Also there are not so many spells to cover all of these "additional slots". I was always waiting for one of these solutions on DR kits - create similiar kits but without sphere system, or add tones of new spells.

[Aranthys]

Erm, i hope you won't create new spells for kits.

 

One of the things I despise in my games, is having a character that's waaay different from the NPCs I can fight... and new spells just gives me this impression.

 

And there's still a lot of room to play with using the Wizard / Druid spells.

Or you can use existing spells and rename them.

[Demivrgvs]

Erm, i hope you won't create new spells for kits.

 

One of the things I despise in my games, is having a character that's waaay different from the NPCs I can fight... and new spells just gives me this impression.

 

And there's still a lot of room to play with using the Wizard / Druid spells.

Or you can use existing spells and rename them.

Ok, I'll open a topic on this matter right now because we're going massively off-topic here. Long story short, I agree with you and that's why SR rarely adds new spells. I made exceptions for druids (because they had an incredibly poor spell selection compared to clerics, especially at low levels), and I'll make exceptions for schools of magic which completely lacks spells at certain levels (e.g. I'll surely add a Transmutation spell at 8th level, and ).

[yarpen]

Mass Polymorphy owns, but only as a concept in Arcane Remixes. It's 8th level spell.

[Aranthys]

Erm, i hope you won't create new spells for kits.

 

One of the things I despise in my games, is having a character that's waaay different from the NPCs I can fight... and new spells just gives me this impression.

 

And there's still a lot of room to play with using the Wizard / Druid spells.

Or you can use existing spells and rename them.

Ok, I'll open a topic on this matter right now because we're going massively off-topic here. Long story short, I agree with you and that's why SR rarely adds new spells. I made exceptions for druids (because they had an incredibly poor spell selection compared to clerics, especially at low levels), and I'll make exceptions for schools of magic which completely lacks spells at certain levels (e.g. I'll surely add a Transmutation spell at 8th level, and ).

 

Well, it's allright then

[phordicus]

touch spells

 

could standardize all of them re:enchantment. based on caster level. +1 @ 1, +2 @ 9, +3 @ 18, etc.

 

aren't touch spells supposed to ignore non-DEX AC? either way, i think a successful hit should be just about automatic re:thac0 bonus.

[Salk]

I was reading this:

 

Web

 

"Elementals, incorporeal and flying creatures are not affected from this spell, as well as exceptionally large or strong creatures who may suffer little or no distress".

 

As usual, I like your modifications but I would like to make sure that the spell will be ineffective against the player too whenever the "exceptionally strong" limit is met (temporarily or otherwise).

 

And please (I guess you didn't notice my former requests): confirm also that Haste is not going to be changed to a single target only spell.

 

Thanks!

[Demivrgvs]

Touch Spells

aren't touch spells supposed to ignore non-DEX AC? either way, i think a successful hit should be just about automatic re:thac0 bonus.

In AD&D touch attacks granted only +4 to thac0, and I've done the same simply because there's no way to implement 3rd edition feature to ignore any non-DEX AC bonus of the target.

 

 

Web

"Elementals, incorporeal and flying creatures are not affected from this spell, as well as exceptionally large or strong creatures who may suffer little or no distress".

 

As usual, I like your modifications but I would like to make sure that the spell will be ineffective against the player too whenever the "exceptionally strong" limit is met (temporarily or otherwise).

There's no way to have the spell check you character current strength value, the line is there only to imply that giants, ettins, dragons and similar creatures are immune because of their strength and size.

 

And please (I guess you didn't notice my former requests): confirm also that Haste is not going to be changed to a single target only spell.

I guess you didn't notice my former answer.

Please confirm also that Haste won't be changing to become a single targeted spell.

I'm not going to do it, as I generally don't do anything unless there's a general consensus.

[DrAzTiK]

There's no way to have the spell check you character current strength value, the line is there only to imply that giants, ettins, dragons and similar creatures are immune because of their strength and size.

I 'am not an expert about web and spiders but Imo size is the more important aspect in this situation in order to escape from web. (more that STR). So for Salk It may be not so obvious that player deserve immunity, even with an incredible STR.

 

Are you planning to implent same immunity for Entangle ?

 

"Elementals, incorporeal and flying creatures are not affected from this spell, as well as exceptionally large or strong creatures who may suffer little or no distress".

 

I don't know if it is your final version but if you allow me, I would also suggest to increase casting time of this spell coz your modifications will reduce power of web only in SoA and ToB not in BG1.

I think that increase casting time will reduce power of this spell in BG1. (coz player don't have minor Sequencers)

In comparaison, Entangle (level 1) got 5 casting time while web got only 2 : obviously, there is a problem considering that web is a lot more powerfull (even if it's a level 2 spell).

 

 

Yes, I am very preoccupied about this spell ^^

[Demivrgvs]

Web

There's no way to have the spell check you character current strength value, the line is there only to imply that giants, ettins, dragons and similar creatures are immune because of their strength and size.

I 'am not an expert about web and spiders but Imo size is the more important aspect in this situation in order to escape from web. (more that STR). So for Salk It may be not so obvious that player deserve immunity, even with an incredible STR.

Yeah, size is probably much more important.

 

Are you planning to implent same immunity for Entangle ?

Entagle already had such features implemented since either V2 or V2.9.

 

I don't know if it is your final version but if you allow me, I would also suggest to increase casting time of this spell coz your modifications will reduce power of web only in SoA and ToB not in BG1.

I think that increase casting time will reduce power of this spell in BG1. (coz player don't have minor Sequencers)

In comparaison, Entangle (level 1) got 5 casting time while web got only 2 : obviously, there is a problem considering that web is a lot more powerfull (even if it's a level 2 spell).

Yeah, if we care about consistency Web should probably have a higher casting time.

 

Note: as "standard" casting time vanilla used 4 for most spells (though there were tons of exceptions and inconsistencies), while SR uses 5.

[Shaitan]

How are coding going?

 

Cheers

[Guest Guest]

Sorry if this is the wrong thread in which to ask, but will Fire Shield (Blue) and other cold damage spells destroy loot even if Gore is off? Or is there no loot destruction of any kind with Gore off? Just wanted to double check.

[Shaitan]

With gore off, there's no loot destruction