Magic Attacks

[amanasleep]

Somewhere, it is a bit inconsistent that SCS II mages use defensive spells in sequencer and contengencies. Imagine what could do only 2 mages using offensive spells in contengencies and trigger (like those you fight with Gromnir) :

mage 1 :

- chain contengency : x3 ADHW

- trigger : lower resistance + GM+ web

 

mage 2 :

- chain contengency : x3chaos

- trigger : x3 web .

 

===> lol

Well, if they'd done this versus the party I had last time I played, the Wilting and Chaos would have been completely wasted, because the party all had Chaotic Commands and Protection from Magic Energy running. The web would have done some good, but Gromnir et al would have been as likely to fail their saves as the party. Meanwhile the wizards would have been killed almost immediately, as there aren't any defences in that mix. (If they prebuffed it would have helped a bit, but they'd still be pretty vulnerable.)

 

That's a good point. Perhaps the disabling should be randomized somewhat (or at least "random" in the sense of not using the same disabling all the time). Grease, Web, Stinking Cloud, Horror, Glitterdust, Slow, Hold Person, Malison, Teleport Field are all very hard to defend against and extremely disabling without causing an immediate reload. AI mages with companions should cast the party friendly spells above (Hold Person, Horror, Glitterdust, Slow, Malison, Teleport Field). Lower level single target save or else spells are also fun for the AI (although sub-optimal for the player) if they are cheap enough: Blindness, Spook, Ray of Enfeeblement (cast at the character with the highest HP), Polymorph Other (same).

 

As for damage spells, although Trigger: 3x Chain Lightning does significantly less damage than Chain Cont. 3x ADHW it uses lower level spells and a party is unlikely to have mass Pro Lightning. Lone Mages with 3x Sun Fire would be nasty as well, and 3x Lightning Bolt would be hilarious and potentially really damaging in certain situations (if you anger Mekrath, for instance). The wizard is immune to Ice Storm as well which can disrupt the party's spellcasting for 4 rounds.

 

As discussed earlier I look forward to seeing implementation and use of Sphere of Chaos and Prismatic Spray against the party.

[DavidW]

Grease, Web, Stinking Cloud, Horror, Glitterdust, Slow, Hold Person, Malison, Teleport Field are all very hard to defend against

 

Horror and Stinking Cloud are pretty easy, actually: Resist Fear and Chaotic Commands.

[DrAzTiK]

Well, if they'd done this versus the party I had last time I played, the Wilting and Chaos would have been completely wasted, because the party all had Chaotic Commands and Protection from Magic Energy running.

 

How are you doing to protect all you party with chaotic Commands and Magic Energy ?O_o It's level 5 or 6 slot who are precious. (especially for magic energy)

It's impossible to protect all party from all effect even with long spell duration (unless rest any hours)and it's a bit unrealistic : you are not supposed to know if mage opponent will use fire, acid, poison, ice , eletectricity or magic energy against you. (personnaly, only one or 2 of my characters are protected from 2 or 3 elements).

 

I can sympathise with a full party protected with Chaotic Commands given that this spell protect from many many attacks (and wonderfull recall enable to mémorize a but more easily this spell. (same for free action ).

 

 

Anyway, I like and prefer the way you use contengencies (with defenfensive spell) and I wonder what is Demivrgvs opininon about tweak this spells in order to allow player to use it like SCS II mages. (only defensive spells and possibility to active contengencies any time)

==> maybe it could also be an interessing tweaks for SCS II no ?

 

 

The single ADHW is just to keep people on their toes!)

Personally, I don't find it very usefull ... Another spell protection could be more consistent and cool IMHO.

[Ardanis]

Anyway, I like and prefer the way you use contengencies (with defenfensive spell) and I wonder what is Demivrgvs opininon about tweak this spells in order to allow player to use it like SCS II mages. (only defensive spells and possibility to active contengencies any time)

Afaik you can't remove spell from contingency list without preventing it's use in triggers as well.

 

Nonetheless, I never put any more offensive in CC than a couple of Mordies.

[amanasleep]

Grease, Web, Stinking Cloud, Horror, Glitterdust, Slow, Hold Person, Malison, Teleport Field are all very hard to defend against

 

Horror and Stinking Cloud are pretty easy, actually: Resist Fear and Chaotic Commands.

 

Oops, shouldn't have included those. I forgot about resist fear and that Stinking Cloud causes sleep.

 

Still, these spells are a cheap way for the AI to probe the player's defenses. Can they be scripted to follow a Remove Magic?

[DavidW]

Grease, Web, Stinking Cloud, Horror, Glitterdust, Slow, Hold Person, Malison, Teleport Field are all very hard to defend against

 

Horror and Stinking Cloud are pretty easy, actually: Resist Fear and Chaotic Commands.

 

Oops, shouldn't have included those. I forgot about resist fear and that Stinking Cloud causes sleep.

 

Still, these spells are a cheap way for the AI to probe the player's defenses. Can they be scripted to follow a Remove Magic?

 

Horror is already. Stinking Cloud runs into problems by virtue of not being party-friendly, but I use it a bit.

[amanasleep]

Grease, Web, Stinking Cloud, Horror, Glitterdust, Slow, Hold Person, Malison, Teleport Field are all very hard to defend against

 

Horror and Stinking Cloud are pretty easy, actually: Resist Fear and Chaotic Commands.

 

Oops, shouldn't have included those. I forgot about resist fear and that Stinking Cloud causes sleep.

 

Still, these spells are a cheap way for the AI to probe the player's defenses. Can they be scripted to follow a Remove Magic?

 

Horror is already. Stinking Cloud runs into problems by virtue of not being party-friendly, but I use it a bit.

 

OK.

 

I had a question earlier that I was very curious about:

 

Can the AI cast Limited Wish?

 

If so what options do they have? I am thinking here of the Mass Minor Globe of Invulnerability option, which allows the AI subsequently to cast some non-party friendly disabling and damage spells.

[DavidW]

Grease, Web, Stinking Cloud, Horror, Glitterdust, Slow, Hold Person, Malison, Teleport Field are all very hard to defend against

 

Horror and Stinking Cloud are pretty easy, actually: Resist Fear and Chaotic Commands.

 

Oops, shouldn't have included those. I forgot about resist fear and that Stinking Cloud causes sleep.

 

Still, these spells are a cheap way for the AI to probe the player's defenses. Can they be scripted to follow a Remove Magic?

 

Horror is already. Stinking Cloud runs into problems by virtue of not being party-friendly, but I use it a bit.

 

OK.

 

I had a question earlier that I was very curious about:

 

Can the AI cast Limited Wish?

 

No. My judgment was that it wasn't worth the coding hassle.

[amanasleep]

Grease, Web, Stinking Cloud, Horror, Glitterdust, Slow, Hold Person, Malison, Teleport Field are all very hard to defend against

 

Horror and Stinking Cloud are pretty easy, actually: Resist Fear and Chaotic Commands.

 

Oops, shouldn't have included those. I forgot about resist fear and that Stinking Cloud causes sleep.

 

Still, these spells are a cheap way for the AI to probe the player's defenses. Can they be scripted to follow a Remove Magic?

 

Horror is already. Stinking Cloud runs into problems by virtue of not being party-friendly, but I use it a bit.

 

OK.

 

I had a question earlier that I was very curious about:

 

Can the AI cast Limited Wish?

 

No. My judgment was that it wasn't worth the coding hassle.

 

Too bad. Is it coding the interaction with the Dao that fouls it?

[Ardanis]

Rather making it correctly affect allies only. Enemy caster's allies.

[DavidW]

All these things are doable, I just didn't think it would add enough to the game to justify the hassle of doing it.

 

(Also, increasingly I'm concerned about keeping the scripts from uncontrolled growth, they're too long as it is...)

[Demivrgvs]

2) Well, these spells seems to ignore everything. They ignore magic resistance, they ignore spell protections (e.g. if Spell Turning + Spell Trap is active the latter won't stop SW from removing Spell Turning!!), and they even ignore SI:Abj despite being abjuration spells. Why on earth should they be stopped by GoI, especially considering the original descriptions explicitly mention that they can remove GoI?!

(M)GoI's are supposed to make you invulnerable to spells of a certain level or lower, while it would be pretty ridiculous if Spell Protections protected against the spells that are designed to remove them!

If it's so ridiculous for why GoI protecting from them is fine?

 

(M)GoI are supposed to make you immune to spells yeah, but apparently not to all spells (a 3rd level spell, Dispel Magic remove them in PnP, BG1, NWN and IWD serie), and certainly not to Magic Attacks judjing by their description (ST description explicitly says that it takes MGoI down!)

 

Not to mention that having SW blocked by GoI brings ups inconsistencies, such as liches being affected by Breach but not from a lower level Magic Attack which is actually supposed to bypass spell protections much better than a combat oriented spell like Breach.

I never argued that SW should not take down GoI. I agree that it should.

SW should take down GoI and ST shouldn't take down MGoI? Now that is consistency!

 

 

I would probably be amenable to keeping AoE on ST and making it remove 1 Spell Protection of Level 5 and lower, but only if it's not blocked by GoI.

That is exactly what I was suggesting.

 

 

If the target uses tons of spell slots to protect himself I feel really too cheap to have Spell Thrust disintegrate them so easily, and in general I feel spell protections in general are not worth their slots within SCS because of the AoE system.

Untrue. SCS2 makes Spell protections vastly more effective than in vanilla because they now protect against Breach. The AoE is to reduce the power of SI:D plus II, which still protects against other targeted spells. Spell protections were useless in vanilla because they couldn't protect you from the really dangerous spells. AoE is a nerf on II, not spell protections!

AoE nerfs II, but at the same time nerfs Spell Protections, because without AoE any spell protection under II was pretty solid, while now tearing down a spell protection under II is as easy as done.

 

 

This whole system works only with GoI up, and it's really sad to always need GoI up only because of a cheap 3rd level spell!

GoI would be worth casting even if ST was not blocked. It protects the caster better than anything. It protects from area damage, area disabling, Malison, your own Skull Traps, Lightning Bolts, Ice Storms, Webs, Stinking Clouds, and Fireballs, against Holy Smites, Silences, Dominations, and Holds. ST is probably the least important spell it protects against!

That's exactly why I think GoI not protecting from spell removals (ST and SW) would be fine. It would still be a really cool spell sprotection.

 

 

ST is pretty good if you meet up with a Level 10 mage running MST, SI:D, II, MSD, MGoI. In that sense you are correct that it's OP. However, since every mage even in SoA is higher level than that it's not OP.

And what about BG1? I cannot design a spell basing it on the assumption "every mage is at least level 14 thus I don't care if the spell is overpowered against a level 10 mage".

[amanasleep]

Rather than responding point by point, it's worth pausing here to generally analyze the balance of power at various casting levels.

 

Some general notes:

 

--Vanilla Spell Protections did not protect against Breach, so they were generally useless.

--Vanilla Spell Removal and Breach could not penetrate II, so removing II was essential, pretty much the only thing necessary.

--A successful Dispel Magic is better than anything, so the higher level mage is always at an advantage. The only defense against this is for the lower level mage to run SI:A.

--BG1 balancing was significantly different than BG2.

--IMO, it is pointless to argue that spell protection regimes depend on GoI. This spell is the best protections because it defends against so many different types of spells. There are always good reasons to cast it.

--I think a big point missing from this discussion is that removing spell protections takes time, and do not in themselves harm the target in any way. Under most situations, even removing all protections still prevents you from doing anything to the target until the following round. During that time the defensive wizard could be casting a damage/disabling spell at you.

--I don't understand the argument that II is necessary to "protect" the wizard from SPR. Removing SP's with SPR's is the whole point. The argument that it is "easy" to remove SP's with SPR's ignores the fact that it is what they are supposed to do. Nobody argues that it's "too easy" to dispel Invisibility with Detect Invisibility.

--I do not see any problem with a 3rd Level spell (Dispel Magic) being "powerful" because it can take down a high level protection like (M)GoI. The design of Dispel Magic is designed to maintain the edge for high level wizards over low level effects.

 

That having been said, let's assume that we are using SoA spells in BG1. Let's further assume the following:

 

1. MGoI is removed by ST. FWIW I never argued that it shouldn't.

2. GoI blocks ST. This is what I argued for keeping.

3. GoI is removed by SW.

4. Dispel Magic removes (M)GoI.

5. Breach is bounced by Spell Protections.

6. We should leave Spell Shield out of this discussion until it can be definitively fixed.

7. Non Detection acts like SI:D but not against spells that detect invis and illusions (like Oracle or True Seeing/Sight)

 

OK, let's see how things work with and without AoE at the level right before gaining the next level spells.

 

At level 6 (L3 spells):

 

--There is no II or Breach. There is DM, which probably decides the battle. There is ST, but the only thing it gets rid of is MSD. ST Definitely not OP at this level (L3 gets rid of a single L3). Detect Illusion gets rid of MI, Detect Invis gets rid of Invis. Non-Detection requires you to cast D Ill. before D Invis. but Glitterdust bypasses this. AoE is irrelevant.

 

At Level 8 (L4 spells):

 

--Add II, MGoI, and SW. At this level DM still determines the outcome. There is no way to get rid of II so neither ST nor SW can get rid of MGoI or MSD. II + MGoI is king at this level, giving a mage almost complete protection (Detect Illusion is blocked by MGoI so MI's are safe and Glitterdust is useless).

--If SPR's have AoE, then ST gets to take down MSD and MGoI, but II still protects against targeted spells and combat protections are still up (although you can now get rid of Illusions and Glitterdust can get rid of II). ST is good, but IMO not OP.

 

At Level 11 (L5 spells):

 

--Add SI:D and SI:A (and theother SI's), Breach, MST, Oracle, Shadow Door. Lots going on here, so much that availability of L5 slots is an issue, but the max is generally 4. Without AoE SPR's, Shadow Door/II protects against ST. Oracle brings down all the Invis and Illusions unless SI:D is up. II + SI:D is unbreakable, so Breach cannot be cast. II, SI:D, SI:A, MGoI is really good protection at this level, particularly against higher level casters. MSD/T are largely unnecessary.

--With AoE SPR's, there appears to be no way to stop ST at this level, although it does not get rid of II or combat protections. In order to beat a fully protected L11 mage with another L11, you must cast ST, Oracle, Breach. However, MGoI, Shadow Door and MSD cast relatively quickly. After the ST and the Oracle, casting Shadow Door or another II requires another Oracle. At this level the initiative definitely goes to the attacker with ST, but clearly does not decide the battle. Dispel Magic is more likely do decide things, although ST gets rid of SI:A and you may need to cast multiple Dispels to have any effect. It is here that arguments against ST having AoE are strongest. Pretty limited situation if you ask me.

 

At Level 13 (L6 Spells):

 

--Add Contingency (Important at this level because it can re-cast II and gives an extra L1-4 slot), GoI, Mislead, Pierce Magic, Spell Deflection, True Sight. Available L6 slots are again an issue. Without AoE, II + SI:D + SI:A + GoI still cannot be broken. Spell Deflection is pointless because II is king.

--With AoE, ST cannot beat GoI. Spell Deflection is now good because it stops a SW before it can bring down GoI (MST has a 50% chance of doing the same). To Breach a protected wizard at this level generally requires: SW's to bring down SD, MST, GoI, then ST to bring down SI's/MST/MSD, then Oracle/True Sight to bring down II/Illusions, then Breach. If ST did not have AoE then you would just need to cast more SW's. If you want to nerf ST so that it cannot be used, well fine, but as I have shown above ST is not really all that abusable at lower levels either.

 

The proposed changes to ST:

 

1. ST doesn't get AoE -- I'm not in favor of this because it doesn't have any use without it, even in most low level situations.

2. ST removes only 1 protection of L5 or lower instead of all -- This is OK. At least it still does something. Keep in mind that even in the L11 example above, this version of ST probably would behave the same way, wiping out SI:D so that II could be dispelled or MGoI so that Glitterdust can be cast. It's only a real nerf if the target is also running MST/D.

3. ST gets AOE, but does not affect the target if there is a 6th Level or higher protection -- IMO ST already works this way, it's just that the 6th Level protection needs to be GoI!

[DrAzTiK]

--I do not see any problem with a 3rd Level spell (Dispel Magic) being "powerful" because it can take down a high level protection like (M)GoI. The design of Dispel Magic is designed to maintain the edge for high level wizards over low level effects.

 

And obviously, dispell magic is totally umbalanced and unfair Imo : how a single mage can dispell ALL protection of a whole party with a single spell... ( only mage can protect with SI abj)

 

Personally, my philosophy is that low level party should have decent hope to win vs high level opponents. If it is not possible, well it's not a strategy game anymore.

 

Even without mod reducing insane amount of XP in BG2, dispell magic remain interessing only for ennemy so I think it's a waste to speak about this spell

 

I think Demivrgvs has reduce AoE of dispell magic, whitch is a good thing Imo.

 

 

--3. ST gets AOE, but does not affect the target if there is a 6th Level or higher protection -- IMO ST already works this way, it's just that the 6th Level protection needs to be GoI!.

 

About this problem , the logic should be to make a choice :

- magic attack is stopped by high level of magic protection

- magic attack is not stopped by high level of magic protection

 

personally I prefer the 2nd option. If I don't mikstaken, it is how the game work in vanilla (expect for ST and SW stopped by GoI ) How does this work in PnP ?

 

 

My silly suggestion is also to make ST remove only 1 spell from level 1-5 (with an AoE) , but also allow this spell to bypass GoI ? It should be consistent no ? (and also more or less balanced)

[Demivrgvs]

Nice post Amanasleep.

 

Non-Detection requires you to cast D Ill. before D Invis. but Glitterdust bypasses this.

Within SR Non-detection is not removed by Detect Illusion because I really can't consider Non-detection an illusion, can you?

 

The proposed changes to ST:

 

1. ST doesn't get AoE -- I'm not in favor of this because it doesn't have any use without it, even in most low level situations.

2. ST removes only 1 protection of L5 or lower instead of all -- This is OK. At least it still does something. Keep in mind that even in the L11 example above, this version of ST probably would behave the same way, wiping out SI:D so that II could be dispelled or MGoI so that Glitterdust can be cast. It's only a real nerf if the target is also running MST/D.

3. ST gets AOE, but does not affect the target if there is a 6th Level or higher protection -- IMO ST already works this way, it's just that the 6th Level protection needs to be GoI!

1. Well, you're giving for granted that each and every opponent has SI:Div+II. Anyway, ST is available at 5th level, SI is available at 10th, I don't see much problems if ST is a weaker choice over for example SW.

2. That's why I'm actually voting for this solution. ST would still be very uselful, but less overeffective against multiple spell protections. As I see it, only Spellstrike should be able to remove more than 1 spell protection.

3. ST doesn't work this way at all as it bypasses any spell protection except GoI, even Spell Trap is ignored. Are you actually suggesting to make it so that if a 6th+ spell protection is up ST doesn't remove lower level protection?

 

 

--I do not see any problem with a 3rd Level spell (Dispel Magic) being "powerful" because it can take down a high level protection like (M)GoI. The design of Dispel Magic is designed to maintain the edge for high level wizards over low level effects.

And obviously, dispell magic is totally umbalanced and unfair Imo : how a single mage can dispell ALL protection of a whole party with a single spell... ( only mage can protect with SI abj)

 

Personally, my philosophy is that low level party should have decent hope to win vs high level opponents. If it is not possible, well it's not a strategy game anymore.

 

Even without mod reducing insane amount of XP in BG2, dispell magic remain interessing only for ennemy so I think it's a waste to speak about this spell

I proposed to nerf Dispel Magic (as per 3rd edition) long time ago, but we never reached a consensus. Look here.

 

 

--3. ST gets AOE, but does not affect the target if there is a 6th Level or higher protection -- IMO ST already works this way, it's just that the 6th Level protection needs to be GoI!.

About this problem , the logic should be to make a choice :

- magic attack is stopped by high level of magic protection

- magic attack is not stopped by high level of magic protection

 

personally I prefer the 2nd option. If I don't mikstaken, it is how the game work in vanilla (expect for ST and SW stopped by GoI ) How does this work in PnP ?

I don't think spell removals such as ST and SW exist in PnP. The whole spell protection vs spell removal system is actually a quite unique feature of BG2 if I'm not wrong.

 

 

My silly suggestion is also to make ST remove only 1 spell from level 1-5 (with an AoE) , but also allow this spell to bypass GoI ? It should be consistent no ? (and also more or less balanced)

This is what currently gets my vote.