SR v4 (detailed list of changes - ongoing update)

[kreso]

I like the depleting NPP idea, though I'll vote for level-dependent formula to determine the number of protections it offers.

How is this doable?

[Jarno Mikkola]

 

I like the depleting NPP idea, though I'll vote for level-dependent formula to determine the number of protections it offers.

How is this doable?

The old secondary type that the vampire weapon removes trick(with a new type), should work fine.

Edited September 19, 2015 by Jarno Mikkola

[Ardanis]

I would like protective spells (CC, DW, FA, NPP, the Armor spells, Pro damage, etc.) to last 8 hours, and other combat enhancements (Aid, Bless, Shield, Blur, MI, Fireshield, etc.) to not exceed the 5 turns limit.

Edited September 20, 2015 by Ardanis

[Fiann of the Silver Hand]

(*) Random list of places where resting doesn't make any sense... should I go on?

Yes, please. I am making a list

[kreso]

 

 

I like the depleting NPP idea, though I'll vote for level-dependent formula to determine the number of protections it offers.

How is this doable?

The old secondary type that the vampire weapon removes trick(with a new type), should work fine.

 

I understand how to make NPP removable with vampire claws. I don't understand how to make 2nd, 3rd or 4th vampire hit remove NPP (If I understood Ardanis' suggestion correctly "level-dependent formula about no.of protections").

[cipher]

Making rest almost impossible outside inns would IMO make "spell management" more interesting (aka that silly pre-buff routine with dozens of buffs would be impossible), and most of all it would finally highlight the importance of non-spellcasters.

 

[...] where resting doesn't make any sense: Irenicus Dungeon [...] inside Firkrag's dungeon [...] in a random corner of the Underdark,

As much as I agree with you and that's exactly how I play, I'd like to point out that trying to force rest in inns only is an awful, awful solution. PoE tried doing something similar and failed spectacularly. It wasn't convincing in the least thematically, it didn't make the game more tactical, it was a mere and hamfisted annoyance and nothing more. Trying to shoehorn a solution like that without fixing the overarching issue it only making things worse.

 

Unless you want to go in each area by hand and fix how resting should be handled (a task comparable with one of the Revisions mods on each own), I don't think it should be changed at all. At least now every player is able to play according to taste. I prepare and plan for supplies in order to take the whole dungeon in one go. I rest only if it makes sense. Someone else clears a room and clicks the button. It's their loss. Why should I care?. Removing the challenge from a game that's supposed to be challenging should bother me why exactly?

Also in the cases I quote above it would be bad design to disallow rest. First Irenicus dungeon: When you start the game every spellbook is a mess, including the protagonist's. Resting to memorise proper spells is almost a fix. Firkrag doesn't give a shit about you wrecking his dungeon. He's invited you there in the first place. When you confront him he just dismisses you as a lowly pest. And the Underdark... is supposedly a vast underground area, compared to the wilderness and woods above. Why shouldn't you be able to camp everywhere, at your own peril for a random encounter of course.

 

As far SR is regarded, I think your playstyle (the sensible one, after all ) should be the model to use to balance the power/convenience factor. Not too long (8 hours long NPP seems... excessive), not too short (5 round NPP is worthless, no wonder they have so many items providing that).

 

Sorry for the rant, I see the topic raised now and then and, while it has merit, it is blown up to be bigger than it is.

[Ardanis]

I understand how to make NPP removable with vampire claws. I don't understand how to make 2nd, 3rd or 4th vampire hit remove NPP (If I understood Ardanis' suggestion correctly "level-dependent formula about no.of protections").

You can block X levels of sectype Y. The only thing is, it's the opcode used by vanilla Spell Shield, and I don't remember how exactly it was bugged.

[Jarno Mikkola]

The only thing is, it's the opcode used by vanilla Spell Shield, and I don't remember how exactly it was bugged.

Maybe if you take more than the last one down, the number of protections goes to the upper limit so you end up with 255 additional protections. Or what ever the cap is... one can use multiple types of secondary types that protect the lower ones. Over all it's bad for sectype sets, but it's up to the mod maker to make the choice.

[kreso]

 

I understand how to make NPP removable with vampire claws. I don't understand how to make 2nd, 3rd or 4th vampire hit remove NPP (If I understood Ardanis' suggestion correctly "level-dependent formula about no.of protections").

You can block X levels of sectype Y. The only thing is, it's the opcode used by vanilla Spell Shield, and I don't remember how exactly it was bugged.

 

Auch...

May be worth investingating anyway, perhaps it would work better if the attack it blocks wasn't flagged "magical" as in old SS...

That'd be grand if it worked.

[n-ghost]

Demi, that IR discussion about mandatory boots to fight demiliches got me thinking.

 

Could the Freedom spell also grant an immunity to all the things it removes for, say, 5 turns? Like AoE Free Action on steroids, so you can actually counter Imprisonment with it preemptively?

 

I mean, it's 9th level spell, and usually any successful Imprisonment attempt just invokes PW: Reload anyway.

Edited September 21, 2015 by n-ghost

[subtledoctor]

For that matter, why doesn't Free Action counter Imprisonment? Why doesn't it counter Teleport Field?

 

This is yet another example of when it might be appropriate for a protective spell to work against the higher-level attack, but be obliterated by it.

 

Or alternatively, have Free Action block ~9 levels of spells that we'll give the SecType of "mobility debuffers." So FA can block three consecutive Slow spells, or resist Teleport Field for three rounds, or block a single Imprisonment. Then it disappears.

[cipher]

Because Free Action protects from stuff that impair movement. Teleportation is a different beast altogether.
FA is plenty strong as it is, you don't want it to counter 9th level spell on top.

I would even prefer if it didn't protect against stun. Stun to me sounds like an attack that sends the body or mind to a shock, so the afflicted is powerless to react until the shock subsides. Short duration but harder to resist/counter compared to hold type magic. (That some monsters abuse it doesn't help to be honest, loses its short-but-strong nature)

n-ghost does have a point about Freedom. Even with the buff it got I don't think anyone will waste a 9th level spell to a one time Break Enchantment of sorts. Giving it a modest duration (5 turns might be too long) was already an idea twirling in my head. Good to hear someone else thought the same

[Jarno Mikkola]

Because Free Action protects from stuff that impair movement. Teleportation is a different beast altogether.

Actually it's modifies movement, not just imp-air-ment... as it also protects from haste. So smell that. Well, it does so in the original game. Cause it protects from the opcode itself. So you can justify the change to also protect from teleportation this way if you wish. Edited September 21, 2015 by Jarno Mikkola

[kreso]

n-ghost does have a point about Freedom. Even with the buff it got I don't think anyone will waste a 9th level spell to a one time Break Enchantment of sorts. Giving it a modest duration (5 turns might be too long) was already an idea twirling in my head. Good to hear someone else thought the same

If I play with a sorcerer, Freedom (as it is) is my 2nd pick, right after Chain Contingency.

It's that good.

[cipher]

If I play with a sorcerer, Freedom (as it is) is my 2nd pick, right after Chain Contingency.

It's that good.

Hmm, I admit that I wouldn't have thought it's such a good choice even for a sorcerer, but it's does make sense. Especially if the party is big on physical damage, so spells removing debuffs is a priority to damaging the enemies.

It's a much harder pick to shallow for a wizard though. A memorized spell not used is a wasted slot and a very costly one at 9th level.

 

In any case the implication of what you said is that Freedom with a duration (even a modest one such as half a turn) you'd deem as broken, correct?

 

@Jarno: I'm talking about the modified version of FA of course. This, after all, is the SR forum.