Spell Immunity

[Guest amanasleep]

Is it possible to script the AI to use:

 

SI:Div (undispellable Invis)

SI:Alt (no Ruby Ray)

SI:Con (no Insect spells)

SI:Abj (no Breach or Spell removal)

SI:Enc (no Chaos)

 

1. Does SI:Alt + SI:Abj protect against Spellstrike?

 

2. The SI description states:

 

Casting this spell grants the wizard protection from one spell school of her

choice. After the spell is cast, the wizard must choose the school she

wishes to be protected from. All spells of this school will not be able to

harm or aid the caster for the duration of this spell. This includes all

spells from this school, including any priest spells that might benefit the

caster.

 

Does this mean that SI:Abj prevents the user casting PfMW? Does SI:Alt prevent Stoneskin? etc.

 

3. Along with GoI, II, PfMW, and elemental damage protection, does this combination prevent all spell removal/disruption?

 

4. If 3. is true and 2. is false, should SCS2 mages use this strategy? If not, why not?

 

5. If 2. is false, do you think it can be made true (maybe a fixpack question)?

[Drelnza]

Spellstrike takes down anything. In SCSII, all antimagic attacks penetrate improved invisibility so undispellable invisibility is impossible thankfully.

[Guest amanasleep]

Spellstrike takes down anything. In SCSII, all antimagic attacks penetrate improved invisibility so undispellable invisibility is impossible thankfully.

 

Spellstrike belongs to the Alteration and Abjuration schools. So if you have SI:Alt and SI:Abj it does not protect against Spellstrike?

 

Antimagic attacks penetrate II, but they do not get rid of II.

 

Let's pretend for a moment that you do not have Spellstrike (or that SI:Alt + SI:Abj really does protect against it)

 

Your opponent has:

 

II

GoI

SI:Div

SI:Abj

SI:Alt

 

Your antimagic attacks will penetrate II, but SI:Alt stops Ruby Ray and SI:Abj stops all the other ones. So you cannot dispel any of his protections, and SI:Div prevents you from dispelling II.

 

edit:

 

After some research, it seems that SI:Abj protects from Dispel and Remove Magic, but not Breach or antimagic attacks. SI:Alt doesn't prevent Ruby Ray, and neither prevent Spellstrike.

 

Sorry for the bother.

[Demivrgvs]

After some research, it seems that SI:Abj protects from Dispel and Remove Magic, but not Breach or antimagic attacks. SI:Alt doesn't prevent Ruby Ray, and neither prevent Spellstrike.

Wow, you've edited your post while I was going to say you exactly this.

 

I don't like at all how SI is handled, and I've bother DavidW for ages about it.

 

To summarize what I think:

- multiple SI shouldn't stack

- they should grant immunity as inteded (SI:Abj don't protect from 90% of Abjuration spells)

[Guest amanasleep]

After some research, it seems that SI:Abj protects from Dispel and Remove Magic, but not Breach or antimagic attacks. SI:Alt doesn't prevent Ruby Ray, and neither prevent Spellstrike.

Wow, you've edited your post while I was going to say you exactly this.

 

I don't like at all how SI is handled, and I've bother DavidW for ages about it.

 

To summarize what I think:

- multiple SI shouldn't stack

- they should grant immunity as inteded (SI:Abj don't protect from 90% of Abjuration spells)

 

Hm, interesting. If the AI did that then things could get interesting.

 

If you can run SI:Abj that protects against 100% of Abjuration spells, but cannot have any other SI running, that means that you lose your invisibility and can be targeted with Power Words and the like (unless you use Mislead--see below). But if the opponent wants to remove the SI:Abj he must use either SpellStrike or Ruby Ray. Would be an interesting challenge at lower levels (SI: Abj, GoI, Spell Deflection, Spell Turning would require 4 Ruby Rays to defeat--too many for many mage builds), but even easier at higher levels with SpellStrike.

 

Ultimately I don't think such a change is doing the AI any favors. This only improves SI: Abj, but weakens the other SI's because you can no longer use them together and they are much weaker than SI:Abj (SI:D is still pretty decent).

 

In general, the spell system in SCS2 works decently at lower levels. AI mages protect themselves with GoI, SI:D, Spell Turning, and appropriate combat protections. To break this in SoA (without Spellstrike) there are a few strategies:

 

1. If you don't yet have 7th level spells, 2x Pierce Magic, Spell Thrust, True Seeing, Breach.

2. With 7th Level Spells, Warding Whip, True Seeing, Breach.

3. If you have a Druid it's even easier: Insect Spell, then wait for PfMW to run out.

4. If you don't have level 6 spells or a Druid, cast Multiple Chaos spells--decent chance they'll fail the save. Cloudkill is good if you can keep them under it since it does poison damage.

 

Later on, their defenses don't get much better, but their offense does. They might add in a Spell Trap, but once you have 7th Level spells, you just need to cast a Ruby Ray first, then as above. It doesn't really matter if they are running Spell Deflection or more SI's, they all die to Spell Thrust as soon as GoI goes down.

 

As everybody has noticed, once the PC gets Spellstrike, all mages become totally easy. There is no defense against it.

 

Things I would like to see more of:

 

1. Spell Shield fix. This looks like it's on the way. Could be huge. The real question is whether the new SS will still intercept a spell that is harmless, like Spell Thrust or Secret Word when GoI is up. If not, then that would force the PC to burn at least a Pierce Magic to bring down Spell Shield, after which the AI mage would have a chance to get another one up before the PC can cast another anti magic attack.

 

2. One possible defense against Spellstrike would be increased use of Mislead. This delays significantly when the party can damage the mage, and requires them to deal with the clone before SpellStrike can be cast at the mage (unless they aim very carefully). Can the AI cast Mislead and then immediately cause the clone to run away from the party? Combining this with things like Teleport Field could really hamper PC efforts to get rid of the clone.

 

3. Increased use of Fireshields. Attacking a Stoneskinned Mage with 2 Fireshields running is a tricky proposition, and can vastly increase a mage's staying power. Even a lower level AI mage could have 7 skins and both Fireshields running and deal out over 100 damage to attackers before taking any damage and without needing to cast anything. A second stoneskin will really spoil your day. Later on this is less effective since higher level parties can afford to strip spell protections and Breach.

 

4. More Death Spells. I find the AI cannot handle Nishruu/Hakeshar very well at present, and they are pretty much game over for almost any mage, even Liches and Rakshasas.

 

5. SI: Conjuration to defend against Insect Spells. Any human mage can be dealt with if you have 2 Insect Plagues. Liches are defenseless against Creeping Doom.

[Jarno Mikkola]

To summarize what I think:

- multiple SI shouldn't stack

- they should grant immunity as intended (SI:Abj don't protect from 90% of Abjuration spells)

Well, SI:Adj has the flaw that it's level is so low that most of the spells go above it's power level, so they effect the target... but remember that you actually wouldn't actually need the SI:Abj if you didn't already have a Adjuration spell as your protection(the worst being PfMW of course), which would all need to be removed for the effect to be total Spell Immunity to the school, after all the spell description says it to be something like: no hindrance, no benefits.

[Demivrgvs]

In general, the spell system in SCS2 works decently at lower levels. AI mages protect themselves with GoI, SI:D, Spell Turning, and appropriate combat protections. To break this in SoA (without Spellstrike) there are a few strategies:

 

1. If you don't yet have 7th level spells, 2x Pierce Magic, Spell Thrust, True Seeing, Breach.

2. With 7th Level Spells, Warding Whip, True Seeing, Breach.

3. If you have a Druid it's even easier: Insect Spell, then wait for PfMW to run out.

4. If you don't have level 6 spells or a Druid, cast Multiple Chaos spells--decent chance they'll fail the save. Cloudkill is good if you can keep them under it since it does poison damage.

I suppose you forgot to mention the mage is under II else True Seeing isn't needed.

 

1. If Secret Word bypasses GoI then just use 2x SW (4th lvl spells) instead of Pierce Magic (6th lvl). Furthermore, once Spell Turning is down shouldn't Spell Thrust tear down SI:D ignoring GoI?

2. Khelben's Warding Whip bypasses II with SCS? Wow, that makes KWW outstanding.

3. Not true with SR, Insect spells allow a save each round to avoid spell failure.

4. Hold Monster in this case may be even better than Chaos.

[DavidW]

@amanasleep

 

- one more observation: SI doesn't block spells cast by the caster himself/herself (so SI:Abj doesn't block Pro/MW).

 

- The issue with Nishruu/Hakeashar is probably partly a targeting issue: I hadn't really realised how effective these things were. Does the AI bother to target them with Death spells and just run out of them? Or does it just not do it in the first place.

 

- Insect Plague is a perennial issue that I really can't think of a block for (short of getting every wizard to cast SI:Conj, which gets dull). I probably need to tweak the spell itself, and/or borrow SR's tweak.

 

@Demi

 

I don't like at all how SI is handled, and I've bother DavidW for ages about it.

 

To summarize what I think:

- multiple SI shouldn't stack

- they should grant immunity as inteded (SI:Abj don't protect from 90% of Abjuration spells)

 

This never gets old I still wait to hear reasons why this actually needs to be changed (as opposed to: is cool to change in a Spell Revision mod). At the most, I can see a case for altering the description of SI:Abj. From the point of view of gameplay, my feeling remains that mage combat is more interesting this way around: I'm not keen, for instance, to set up a situation where Ruby Ray is the only way to penetrate the defences of a caster with SI:Abj.

 

2. Khelben's Warding Whip bypasses II with SCS? Wow, that makes KWW outstanding.

One of the suggestions I've had for the next version, which I might well implement, is to make the area effect apply only to single-spell antimagic, i.e. not KWW and Spellstrike.

[Demivrgvs]

Insect spells

- Insect Plague is a perennial issue that I really can't think of a block for (short of getting every wizard to cast SI:Conj, which gets dull). I probably need to tweak the spell itself, and/or borrow SR's tweak.

You're welcome.

 

Spell Immunity

I don't like at all how SI is handled, and I've bother DavidW for ages about it.

 

To summarize what I think:

- multiple SI shouldn't stack

- they should grant immunity as inteded (SI:Abj don't protect from 90% of Abjuration spells)

 

This never gets old I still wait to hear reasons why this actually needs to be changed (as opposed to: is cool to change in a Spell Revision mod). At the most, I can see a case for altering the description of SI:Abj. From the point of view of gameplay, my feeling remains that mage combat is more interesting this way around: I'm not keen, for instance, to set up a situation where Ruby Ray is the only way to penetrate the defences of a caster with SI:Abj.

Don't worry, I'm not going into this discussion anymore.

 

I don't have a SI:Abj scroll within SR, but you're right, I may improve each and every magic attack description to mention that they bypass SI:Abj and most immunities (e.g. Spell Thrust bypasses MGoI but don't bypass liches permanent GrGoI ). Furthermore I should update SI description to make the whole "spells of x school will be unable to harm or aid the caster for the duration of this spell" as spells cast by the caster himself do aid him (e.g. PfMW under SI:Abj).

 

Speaking of it, could you take a look here and let me know which is the intended behaviour of Secret Word and Spell Thrust within SCS? because there are various inconsistencies right now.

 

 

Magic Attacks AoE

2. Khelben's Warding Whip bypasses II with SCS? Wow, that makes KWW outstanding.

One of the suggestions I've had for the next version, which I might well implement, is to make the area effect apply only to single-spell antimagic, i.e. not KWW and Spellstrike.

I take it Spell Thrust would be nerfed too, right? If you ask me I'd leave the AoE only to two spells, Secret Word and Ruby Ray. That would still allow mages to have a low level spell (SW) able to take down almost any protection (the only exception being Spell Trap) bypassing improved invisibility. Spell Trap is only used by high level mages like liches, and Ruby Ray would have been the lowest level spell able to take it down anyway.

 

Isn't it a great solution?

 

This way each magic attack would have an advantage other the other:

- Spell thrust can take down multiple SI+MGoI+Minor Spell Deflection, but can't bypass II

- Secret Word would finally become really appealing

- Pierce Magic wouldn't steal the thunder to Secret Word anymore as it wouldn't bypass II, but would still have the noticeable advantage of lowering target's magic resistance

- Ruby Ray and Pierce Shield would compare just like SW and Pierce Magic

- KWWhip, well, we all know how powerful it is against anyone who isn't under Spell Trap

- Spellstrike won't be overpowered anymore (though actually I think it would become very unappealing considering its spell level)

[Ardanis]

Insects

Lower their power level to 4 for IP and 5 for CD. Human wizards will rely on GoI, and CD being 7th level, well, it should be useful against any ordinary being. But not to the point of lich-killing.

 

AoE antimagic

- Spellstrike won't be overpowered anymore (though actually I think it would become very unappealing considering its spell level)

That's funny. When I installed SCS+SR in January and proceeded to play I considered the whole 'ignore-II' stuff to be cheapening spell protections to frightening degrees. But during the process I've changed my opinion, to the point that I even had two Spellstrikes memorized (which have never happened before) in preparation for Irenicus fight and actually made a good use of one.

So I think Spellstrike should keep AoE, it is, as you put it, 'damn 9 level slot'.

 

Secret Word and RRR, well, I've said much about the same not long ago.

[Demivrgvs]

Insects

Lower their power level to 4 for IP and 5 for CD. Human wizards will rely on GoI, and CD being 7th level, well, it should be useful against any ordinary being. But not to the point of lich-killing.

No please, it would be a mess. I would have to add to GoI a note saying that for no apparent reason it protects from a 5th level spell, and how would I justify to players that Creeping Doom isn't working because it's considered a 5th level spell? SR's current solution is by far much better imo.

 

 

AoE antimagic

- Spellstrike won't be overpowered anymore (though actually I think it would become very unappealing considering its spell level)

That's funny. When I installed SCS+SR in January and proceeded to play I considered the whole 'ignore-II' stuff to be cheapening spell protections to frightening degrees. But during the process I've changed my opinion, to the point that I even had two Spellstrikes memorized (which have never happened before) in preparation for Irenicus fight and actually made a good use of one.

So I think Spellstrike should keep AoE, it is, as you put it, 'damn 9 level slot'.

 

Secret Word and RRR, well, I've said much about the same not long ago.

Yeah, Spellstrike is tricky because on one side it has the rights to be uber-powerful, on the other some players complain that it makes mage fights too easy. If you ask me, I think it deserve to remain uber-powerful, because 9th level slots are quite limited, and by using it you're sacrificing other incredibly powerful options like Dragon's Breath, Comet, IA, Time Stop...but I can live with a single target Spellstrike too (though in that cas I'd personally add a remove magic effect on it ).

 

Regarding SW and RRR, yeah I've come to agree with you that these should be the only spell removals with the additional AoE feature, mainly because removing a single spell protection is the only damn thing they do, whereas all other spell removals either dispel multiple protections, lower magic resistence, or breach, ...

 

I'd like to know DavidW opinion, as if possible I want SR to use the very same "spell protection vs. spell removal" system.

[Guest amanasleep]

@amanasleep

 

- one more observation: SI doesn't block spells cast by the caster himself/herself (so SI:Abj doesn't block Pro/MW).

 

It would be pretty neat if it did this as per the spell description. As it is the SI spells are kind of unbalanced.

 

- The issue with Nishruu/Hakeashar is probably partly a targeting issue: I hadn't really realised how effective these things were. Does the AI bother to target them with Death spells and just run out of them? Or does it just not do it in the first place.

 

Sometimes it gets a Nishruu with a Death Spell, but more often I just sent some Orcs or Skeletons in there first. So the AI really needs multiple Death Spells to deal with other player summons, or it needs to ignore summons that are not a threat. I would happily memorize 2 Nishruus even if the AI behaved this way, though.

 

A permanent solution to this problem is to have the AI run SI:Evocation and Death Fog, giving long-lasting total protection from summons.

 

- Insect Plague is a perennial issue that I really can't think of a block for (short of getting every wizard to cast SI:Conj, which gets dull). I probably need to tweak the spell itself, and/or borrow SR's tweak.

 

Well, it might be worthwhile having at least some mages run SI:Conj. Is it possible for the AI to detect the presence of a Druid class and use the spell dynamically? In any event, I am unconvinced that even the SR version actually gives a mage a chance. Even if they save every round they take damage every 2 seconds, which limits spellcasting to sequencers or casting times of 3 or less (if that's even possible).

 

@Demi

 

2. Khelben's Warding Whip bypasses II with SCS? Wow, that makes KWW outstanding.

One of the suggestions I've had for the next version, which I might well implement, is to make the area effect apply only to single-spell antimagic, i.e. not KWW and Spellstrike.

 

If Spellstrike is single target it becomes pretty weak. Because of GoI, there is no way to remove SI:D before removing higher level protections, so by the time you dispel the II you can probably just cast Breach already. You might consider removing SI:D from the game at this point or make at least one anti-invis spell a different school. If, say, Oracle was Alteration or something, then it would get rid of II, but not Mislead or PI or Simmy. This would also have the side effect that if a PI or Simmy casts II and SI:D, you can dispel the II without automatically dispelling the clone.

 

So under this suggestion (KWW and Spellstrike are single target, Oracle is Alteration magic), an enemy mage casts:

 

SI:D

Mislead

GoI

Spell Deflection

Spell Turning

Spell Trap

Mass Invisibility (I assume you can't script the AI to cast II on Mislead clones)

 

Oracle dispels the II on the mislead clone (mage is still Misled)

Kill the clone with damage (Mage is still II? Not sure)

Oracle dispels II (if necessary)

 

At this point you can cast Spellstrike, then Breach. If you don't have Spellstrike you must cast:

 

Ruby Ray to drop Spell Trap

KWW to get rid of Spell Turning/Deflection

Breach

 

If the AI meanwhile casts another invisibility, you'll need to cast another Oracle (or get rid of SI:D).

 

I think that making Breach, Spellstrike, and KWW single target actually makes a compelling case that SI:D can be removed from the game (perhaps in favor of other SI's). In vanilla, Breach ignored Spell Protections, so II was the only defense. Now that Breach gets bounced, II is not so important anymore, so IMO it will improve the game to get rid of the II/SI:D combo. In that case you would at least be required to dispel II before casting Spellstrike.

 

If you were to implement the Oracle scenario above, Liches would finally recapture the crown of most dangerous spellcasters, since a Lich with the standard protections would require you to remove at least 4 spell protections using only Pierce Magic/Shield and Ruby Ray before you could finally dispel their II and Breach them.

 

I take it Spell Thrust would be nerfed too, right? If you ask me I'd leave the AoE only to two spells, Secret Word and Ruby Ray. That would still allow mages to have a low level spell (SW) able to take down almost any protection (the only exception being Spell Trap) bypassing improved invisibility. Spell Trap is only used by high level mages like liches, and Ruby Ray would have been the lowest level spell able to take it down anyway.

 

Isn't it a great solution?

 

This way each magic attack would have an advantage other the other:

- Spell thrust can take down multiple SI+MGoI+Minor Spell Deflection, but can't bypass II

- Secret Word would finally become really appealing

- Pierce Magic wouldn't steal the thunder to Secret Word anymore as it wouldn't bypass II, but would still have the noticeable advantage of lowering target's magic resistance

- Ruby Ray and Pierce Shield would compare just like SW and Pierce Magic

- KWWhip, well, we all know how powerful it is against anyone who isn't under Spell Trap

- Spellstrike won't be overpowered anymore (though actually I think it would become very unappealing considering its spell level)

 

Keep in mind that under this scenario SW is blocked by GoI, which then forces you to take down everything with Ruby Ray alone. If SW is changed so that it beats GoI, then under the standard protections of a high level SCS2 mage, you would cast:

 

2x SW (Spell Turning, GoI)

more SW (depending on how many SI's or Minor Spell Turning are on until you removed SI:D)

Dispel II

Breach

 

Against Liches you have to Ruby Ray everything, possibly 5 or more RRR's.

 

The problem with ST remains that it's main use is to cheaply remove SI:D, but if it does not bypass II then it can never be used for this purpose.

 

Once again, if we imagine that SI:D doesn't exist, then things start to work. If we furthermore make SI:Abj also affect Breach, we get:

 

Enemy Mage protected by:

 

II

SI:Abj (he heard un-nerfed Keldorn was in your party)

SI:Evo (to cast Death Fog on your Nishruu)

GoI

Spell Deflection

Spell Turning

Spell Trap

 

To counter:

 

True Sight and then either:

 

Spellstrike

 

or:

 

Ruby Ray

KWW

ST

Breach

 

In lower level battles where you do not have true sight, SW might be used to avoid losing your KWW to a Potion of Invisibility or Mislead Contingency. Keep in mind that even under True Sight these can probably spoil a KWW (casting time of 7).

 

Yeah, Spellstrike is tricky because on one side it has the rights to be uber-powerful, on the other some players complain that it makes mage fights too easy. If you ask me, I think it deserve to remain uber-powerful, because 9th level slots are quite limited, and by using it you're sacrificing other incredibly powerful options like Dragon's Breath, Comet, IA, Time Stop...but I can live with a single target Spellstrike too (though in that cas I'd personally add a remove magic effect on it ).

 

Interesting. Single target Spellstrike, but it gains Breach, too. Probably still good even without it if we get rid of SI:D.

[DavidW]

Regarding SW and RRR, yeah I've come to agree with you that these should be the only spell removals with the additional AoE feature, mainly because removing a single spell protection is the only damn thing they do, whereas all other spell removals either dispel multiple protections, lower magic resistence, or breach, ...

 

I'd like to know DavidW opinion, as if possible I want SR to use the very same "spell protection vs. spell removal" system.

 

I'm sympathetic to trying it this way.

[Demivrgvs]

Nishruu/Hakeashar

- The issue with Nishruu/Hakeashar is probably partly a targeting issue: I hadn't really realised how effective these things were. Does the AI bother to target them with Death spells and just run out of them? Or does it just not do it in the first place.

DavidW, aren't Dispel/Remove Magic against them as effective as a Death Spell? And they are 3rd level spells which most mages usually memorize.

 

Insect spells

- Insect Plague is a perennial issue that I really can't think of a block for (short of getting every wizard to cast SI:Conj, which gets dull). I probably need to tweak the spell itself, and/or borrow SR's tweak.

Well, it might be worthwhile having at least some mages run SI:Conj. Is it possible for the AI to detect the presence of a Druid class and use the spell dynamically? In any event, I am unconvinced that even the SR version actually gives a mage a chance. Even if they save every round they take damage every 2 seconds, which limits spellcasting to sequencers or casting times of 3 or less (if that's even possible).

Don't understimate me. SR's Insect spells have been seriously revised, and damage is applied only once in the middle of each round, and once at the end of each round. A successful save means that the victim isn't affected by 100% spell failure and takes only half damage, more precisely, only the one at the end of each round. I'm really proud of my solution.

 

@ amasleep

Keep in mind that under this scenario SW is blocked by GoI, which then forces you to take down everything with Ruby Ray alone. If SW is changed so that it beats GoI, then under the standard protections of a high level SCS2 mage, you would cast:

 

2x SW (Spell Turning, GoI)

more SW (depending on how many SI's or Minor Spell Turning are on until you removed SI:D)

Dispel II

Breach

You know that the mage can't have more than a single spell turning right? Thus once removed the higher level protections go for Spell Thrust. And you were talking about a MGoI not a GoI, thus you could just cast Spell Thrust (which bypasses MGoI) and tear down all SI leaving GoI there. Who cares about MGoI when you can Breach the mage?

 

Anyway you're forgetting a lot of spells in case we're not talking about a lich. Invisibility Purge is a Abjuration spell and would bypass SI:Div, Glitterdust is a Conjuration spell and thus bypasses both SI:Abj and SI:Div (though only when fixed by SR).

 

I think that making Breach, Spellstrike, and KWW single target actually makes a compelling case that SI:D can be removed from the game (perhaps in favor of other SI's).

It would be the opposite...SI:Div would be much more effective!

 

 

Regarding SW and RRR, yeah I've come to agree with you that these should be the only spell removals with the additional AoE feature, mainly because removing a single spell protection is the only damn thing they do, whereas all other spell removals either dispel multiple protections, lower magic resistence, or breach, ...

 

I'd like to know DavidW opinion, as if possible I want SR to use the very same "spell protection vs. spell removal" system.

I'm sympathetic to trying it this way.

[Ardanis]

You know that the mage can't have more than a single spell turning right?

He can have both Minor and normal version active at once.