Jump to content

Cure/Cause Wounds & Regenerate Wounds


Demivrgvs

Recommended Posts

Cure/Cause Wounds

...making the spell require both a hit roll and a save is potentially disastrous for its effectiveness imo.
Like I've said earlier, I'm not sure I want enemy priests to walk up and just touch for ~50% hp damage. Hit roll and save reduce the effectiveness, but new damage values should easily make up for that, no?
I'm not sure, probably not. I guess it's time to share the values I showed you and see players reaction, but after studying those values I'm now almost sure of two things:

1) CW spells work best (especially if compared to all other spells) if all of them are capped at 10th lvl - this should keep them balanced in case of no save imo

2) Cause Wound spells should either require a hit roll or allow a save, requiring both of them make these spells extremely unappealing

 

Btw, what about Mass Cause Wound? It's not implementable as a weapon-like spell.

 

I, of course, prefer the removal of weapon on successful hit over one-charged attack.
Well, I give it for granted, because making these spell completely fail if the first attack misses would make them completely pointless (only usable for ridiculous combos such as Time Stop + Harm).

 

Suggested new progression for CW spells

The following tables are based on one assumption: Cure/Cause Wounds spells heal/inflict half as much hit points compared to Regenerate Wounds spells. The first time I put them down they looked incredibly insane, but then I realized that capping them at 10th lvl could actually make those values almost perfect. Note that 10th lvl is where classes stop gaining HD's hit points and CON's hp bonus, thus setting the cap there makes really sense imo.

 

Light Wounds: 1d8 + 1/lvl

 

Cause LW vs. Magic Missile

1st: 5.5 - 3.5

3rd: 7.5 - 7

5th: 9.5 - 10.5

7th: 11.5 - 14

10th: 14.5 - 17.5

 

I do want MM to remain the better spell, but considering CLW allows a save for half dmg (and/or require a hit roll), has no range, and doesn't work on certain targets (e.g. undead, or even Mordy!) it's clear that even with the suggested boost it would still look kinda weak. Even compared to druid's Sunscorch it loses too much imo:

* very same damage - slightly better dmg type, but Sunscorch deals 2x dmg vs. undead while CLW wouldn't even work

* CLW has no range, Sunscorch has long range

* Sunscorch can also blind the target

* CLW has a faster casting time, but if we make it require a hit roll that's not an advantage anymore imo

Long story short, to be at least somewhat appealing this spell absolutely needs to either not require a hit roll or not require a save. That way it would still be clearly inferior to MM but at least viable (note that even without both hit roll and save and it would still be inferior to MM!!!). In this case I think requiring a hit roll but not allowing a save would actually be the most interesting solution, and in certain situations not even so inferior to MM because of the "pre-cast then cast another spell and attack" possibilities (for example a 1st lvl cleric could quickly disable a target with Command and then use CLW in the same round, on another target).

 

Moderate Wounds: 2d8 + 2/lvl

 

Cause MW

3rd: 15

5th: 19

10th: 29

 

Serious Wounds: 3d8 + 3/lvl

 

Cause SW vs. Lightning Bolt

5th: 28.5 - 24

10th: 43.5 - 48

 

This is just another example to point out the values seem fine as long as CW either allows a save for half dmg or require a hit roll (no save). Making CSW allow a save and require a hit roll would make it very unappealing imo. Balance wise, allowing a save seems the better choice here, to avoid this spell becoming too good for fighter-clerics with extremely good thac0, but not allowing the save while requiring a hit roll could work (would it?), I'm just less sure. LB would still be the slightly better spell because it can be cast from a safe distance, but I think it's fine.

 

Critical Wounds: 4d8 + 4/lvl

 

Cause CW

7th: 46

10th: 58

 

What do you think? I'd really need some feedback on both tables and the whole "hit roll and/or save" matter.

 

 

Regenerate Wounds

On a side note, if we agree on the above tables, I'd actually suggest to cap RW spells too at 10th lvl. Keeping the suggested faster progression (+2 rounds/lvl instead of PnP +1/lvl) it would make those spells heal the very same amount of dmg they do in PnP, and still restore twice as much hit points as the respective Cure Wounds spell of the same spell lvl. I'd like to point out that considering RW spells should not stack, druids of 12th+ lvl will almost surely end up using 6th lvl Regeneration for combat purposes, and the lesser RW spells for healing during travels or rest. Longer duration for lesser RW spells could actually become a hindrance, because it prevents the use of the better 6th lvl version for an entire hour.

Link to comment

Cure/Cause Wounds

I vote for requires hit, no save. Though, I don't know about what to do with mass version.

 

Regenerate Wounds

I agree but couldn't you make casting higher level regeneration spell remove currently effective lower level version and make only higher level regeneration spells "protect" against lower level versions. So regeneration rate could be upgraded but not downgraded.

Link to comment

Mass Cure doesn't require a touch, so I'll be fine with Mass Inflict not requiring it either.

 

Capping at 10th level, no to-hit roll vs no save. I'd go with the former, to preserve compatibility with existing AI, and to be different from most other spells.

Link to comment

Cure/Cause Wounds

I opt for a required hit roll, no save and agree with you that these spells should be capped at 10th level. Your suggested tables look really good.

 

Regenerate Wounds

I like F-man's suggestion a lot.

Link to comment

Ok, a new beta is around the corner and I'm finally giving a new chance to Cause Wound Spells.

 

For these spells we have TONS of small variables to handle that heavily alter they performance depending on which combination of values we opt for.

First of all a few fixed things:
- I've made them require an attack roll as per vanilla (for AI sake) BUT the spell do not run out on a failed attack anymore, it persist until a successful one is made
- these spells inflict as much dmg as Cure Wound spells would heal (for a more detailed analysis look here)
- I've made them work via spl files, which opens a bit of opportunities (e.g. making undead not affected, allow spell protections to counter it if we wish so, eventually make NPP grants protection from them, etc.)

Variables:
1) save or no save? If yes, negate or half dmg?
2) bypass magic resistance or not?
3) spell duration

4) count as spell on hit or not?

1) This is the biggest decision to make. For low level spells a no save would be better imo (CLW is pretty much a Magic Missile with no range), but higher lvl variants get really damaging, and Harm can hardly be balanced without a save imo. If we allow a save my first try would be a sort of "save for half" (e.g. deals xd8 + y dmg on failed save, only xd8 on successful one), maybe with the save getting penalties a la Spook. This would clearly make the low level variants deal a not impressive amount of dmg on average (e.g 1st lvl CW would deal 1d8+10, only 1d8 if saved), but 2) and 3) may help balancing it off. Else, we may just start testing them with no save, and let playtesting tell us if they are too effective.

2) On paper they should probably not bypass magic res, but both concepts makes sense imo, and if we decide to allow a save then making it bypass mr can help these spells getting a niche.

3) Now that a failed attack roll do not make the spell completely wasted, this variable can play a real role imo. A long duration can allow a priest to prepare this spell well ahead, and quickly use it in a cast and attack routine.

 

4) Should a CW attack be deflected or absorbed by Spell Deflection or Globe of Invulnerability?

What do you think?

Link to comment

I vote like this:

 

1) Save for half with a penalty (similar to Harm)

2) Not bypass MR

3) One turn is fine for me too

4) Bypass spell protections only if other similar spells do it too (Harm, Vampiric Touch)

Link to comment

Variables:

1) save or no save? If yes, negate or half dmg?

2) bypass magic resistance or not?

3) spell duration

4) count as spell on hit or not?

1; Save vs half.

2; Bypass MP.

3; One hit, be that one second, 1 minute, years. Reason being that the turn gives an ample time for the fighter armed with it to kill magic protected targets when they can hit 10 times per turn(in the worst case scenario), while the non fighter gets much less. Ouh, and the break enchantment spell removes this too.

4; Bypass Spell Deflection, but not Globes if the spell level is too low.

Link to comment

Just finished packaging all Cause Wound spells.

For beta 5 we are going to test them like this:
- no save (the consensus is for save for half, but this is the "hard way" to test their dmg output and quickly notice if it's really so high or not)
- bypass magic resistance
- 1 successful attack during 1 turn
- do not bypass spell protections

Special Notes: Slay Living no longer has -4 penalty to its save (on a successful save it inflicts 2d8+20 points of dmg). Considering that now you do not waste the spell on a missed attack, I think a save vs. spell or die is already a potent enough effect for a 5th lvl spell. Harm now deals 90 points of dmg (no save - casting time reduced from 9 to 6), but I'm using the beta to test if we can implement its PnP feature "cannot reduce the target's hit points to less than 1" (using opcode 208, minimum hp set to 1 for 1 sec before applying the dmg).

Depending on feedback for beta 6 we will eventually try:
1) save for half (save vs. spell should make warriors more easily fail the save, and reduced dmg may still be enough against spellcasters)
2) bypass spell protections (I'd opt for this only if these spells allow a save, and even then I may prefer 3)
3) bypass combat protections (you will notice that the new spell descriptions do not mention any enchantment lvl, I now consider these spells as full fledged touch spells instead of "weapons". Technically they have a "hidden" enchantment lvl 7 which makes them potentially affect any creature type regardless of weapon enchantment lvl immunity, and I can easily code PfMW and Mantles to block "only" +6 enchantment).

Link to comment

Apparently we almost all concur. I personally made an account just now to voice my support because otherwise, I would have to, you know, find a way to make the damn spell line happen, and I would rather prefer to leave this up to the people who know what they're doing when it comes to the Infinity Engine instead of a guy who's stared at Anarchy Online's database long enough to be halfway to coding himself.

 

While I did play Baldur's Gate back when there wasn't a 2 in front of the year (boy, that feels ages ago, doesn't it?), I would have described myself then as a happy min-maxer, and now I'm more of a flavor player than that, though I have a certain fondness for pets, after playing a certain profession in AO and finding it's closest kin in DDO.

 

So when I do return to BG after hearing of the release of the 'Enhanced Edition', I find that Druids, where I wound up gravitating to instead of whatever flavor-of-the-year powergaming setup I used to...suck. Instead of just shrugging, I think up new ideas on how to improve the class within the limits brought on by the Infinity Engine (googling this username will bring up a TON of walls of text from the AO forums on how to improve stuff, and if you'd rather see me post bona fides there, I will be happy to.), and as I'm looking for somewhere to basically post a concept of Vigor, lo and behold, I find out it's already under construction. And if I weren't familiar with how 2nd ed works, I'd almost say OP compared to vanilla BG and BG2 numbers, but you're being nice enough to change those too to not stink.

 

The numbers I've seen so far, are pretty good. If you won't mind me throwing in my own ideas for the community to consider since I'd been trying to think out how to code this up myself, I'd appreciate it!

 

So, we have a few perspectives to consider here: Thematic, and game balance. Thematically speaking, what worked for Druids in AD&D, aka 2nd ed was to be sort of the 'do a lot of good support work so the party can get to the hack 'n slash'. At least this is what I remember, I will admit I wasn't as into the class pre-3/3.5 as I would have been beforehand. Something about how many druids of a given level can exist on a planet probably had something to do with it. 3.5 ish they tended to be the sort of jack of all trades class that you couldn't really go wrong with. You needed muscle power, they could bring it, call it, or shapeshift into it, your choice. You needed healing, yeah, they can do it, differently than your typical cleric both thematically and in terms of game design, but it could be done.

 

A few of my thoughts on Druids, for you guys to kick around:

 

Low levels especially druids tend to be vulnerable, since most of them (who don't go multi-fighter) don't have the AC to really stand up to the sort of constant brawling other classes can get into. My suggestion for balance: Consider having at least the first 2 animal summons be at least 8 hours in length, and most if not all animal summoning spells be at least 2 animals.

 

Failing that: a version of Find Familar for Druids that gets them an animal companion suited for their level would be a good idea.

 

Goodberry: 2nd level spell, let's leave it at that, and make it slightly overpowered by giving it the 'Elixir of Health' effect, I.E. heals 10 pts and poison. 1 per 2 levels or 1/1 will make the druid a popular choice for parties from early to mid levels, since with Vigor of whatever level, Goodberry will be a useful spot-healing tool, and counter-poison, instead of something thematically correct, and horribly underpowered game-balance wise. 24 hours keeps the Druid from being the one-stop shop for every healing item you ever need, but a quick use time on the berries themselves makes them usable for a long time afterwards. Covers the Druid's need to spot-heal nicely once they can cast it. Just make sure bears can eat them and you're good.

 

Consider having the mass regeneration spells earlier than you would normally run into mass cure spells: While they may, over one's levelling career get you more HP than a similar cure spell, a druid's likely strength will be in having access to them earlier, as well as having them to help heal their summons (thematically speaking in both pnp 2.0 and 3.5 Druids were supposed to be the petmasters), which will be nice for those random folks who love soloing stuff.

 

Another thought, this one thematic: The overall idea behind how the Regeneration line of spells is to work is to augment the target's life force, adding certain resistances past a certain point seems like a good idea. Specifically level drain and death magic: If you're recovering life faster than it can be drained by an undead or similar opponent, this could be a good use of higher level druids so that you can't just rely on lower-level regeneration spells and expect to have a good time of it. This would also give reason to have Negative Plane Protection be left to Clerics alone, if a Druid can just buff your life force up to out-pace it, what purpose does the spell have? This would also give you a half-decent reason to delay the amount of HP regenerated if you feel the amount is too high for the level you're casting the spell.

 

Heal..yeah Druids should get that at 7th level, and be debating taking that versus an alternative. Same for Regeneration for Clerics, but I do think the two should be separated in terms of spell lines prior to that. Between Regeneration and Goodberry for Druids and the slew of healing spells Clerics can get (at least as both are suggested now), one class shouldn't need anything the other profession has without actually having the other class in party, and both should complement each other nicely.

 

On the Cause Wounds/Harm front, I think if it's used similar to how the updated Shapeshifter paw is used from Divine Remix, this gives you a certain, rather long, amount of time to 'hit' with that particular spell before it's wasted, but that's only an extreme. Personally, held until struck/used is fine by me. I'd actually use the spell line at that point. No save. Or Save but no chance of avoiding the spell. I lean towards the latter, personally, since it allows the full power to be used.

 

Okay, hope this isn't a TL;DR for you guys, but if so: Druid summons longer, Goodberry = Elixir of Health per berry, Regeneration has extra bennies at higher spell levels, mass regen at lower levels, more summons per cast or Call Companion spell, Harm spells held until struck with no save.

Link to comment

@Dancingrage first of all welcome to G3! :)

Low level druids

Low levels especially druids tend to be vulnerable, since most of them (who don't go multi-fighter) don't have the AC to really stand up to the sort of constant brawling other classes can get into. My suggestion for balance: Consider having at least the first 2 animal summons be at least 8 hours in length, and most if not all animal summoning spells be at least 2 animals.

Failing that: a version of Find Familar for Druids that gets them an animal companion suited for their level would be a good idea.

While spells do play a role in terms of class balance I'm not sure we can balance druids exclusively by buffing their spells, and we shouldn't imo now that Kit Revisions is around the corner. On a side note, SR's Barkskin is a great boon to druid's AC.

 

I won't go into details, but KR's Druid will get shapeshifting forms at 1st level. The plan is that such forms will allow druids to temporary perform the role of a "striker" (wolf form) or "tank" (bear) at the cost of giving up spellcasting.

 

I do studied the whole Animal Companion thing, but I'm still not convinced about implementing it. Leaving aside how much time is required to properly implemented such feature I actually think it's a nightmare to balance, even more so for a class which already has shapeshifting forms and spellcasting. The thing is that either the companion is so powerful that rolling a druid actually gives your party 2 characters instead of 1, or not enough strong to actually matter more than just a good summon spell. It is a good roleplaying material for druids and rangers but not a good balancing factor imo.

 

Goodberry

...make it slightly overpowered by giving it the 'Elixir of Health' effect.

Ehm...and what happens to 2nd level Slow Poison? :)

Regenerate Wound spells

Consider having the mass regeneration spells earlier than you would normally run into mass cure spells...

Judging by a few lines within your wall of text I'm not sure if you are aware that Clerics do not get Regenerate Wound spells, and Druids do not get Cure Wound ones. That being said, I'm not sure why druids should get Mass Regenerate at 4th level instead of 5th.

 

The overall idea behind how the Regeneration line of spells is to work is to augment the target's life force, adding certain resistances past a certain point seems like a good idea. Specifically level drain and death magic... This would also give reason to have Negative Plane Protection be left to Clerics alone...

SR's druids already do not have Negative Plane Protection. I'm not convinced about regeneration having any connection to level drain but your concept have some merit. A creature with supernatural regeneration might be more resistant to things like disease or poison. Speaking of which, within the next Beta I'm probably adding the 7th lvl variant of the Regenerate Wound serie, Mist of Eldath, and it does indeed cure diseases and poisons.

 

Cause Wounds/Harm

Personally, held until struck/used is fine by me. I'd actually use the spell line at that point. No save. Or Save but no chance of avoiding the spell. I lean towards the latter, personally, since it allows the full power to be used.
Harm spells held until struck with no save.

Look the post above yours to see how this spell currently works. Beta testers confirm it works fine in terms of "preserving the spell effect until a successful hit is made" but I'm still waiting to have more feedback to determine how powerful/effective they are (they might be too good right now, but I'm not sure).

Link to comment
Ehm...and what happens to 2nd level Slow Poison? :)

 

Replace with the current Neutralize Poison effect (cure + immunity for 1 turn). As for what to do with the now open 4th slot where Neutralize Poison used to be... Is there a spell in PnP that would ward against poison, disease, polymorph and curse? Or a close substitute?

 

Truth be told, I never used to waste a 2nd level slot when I could buy at ridiculously low price loot more antidote potions than I would ever need.

Link to comment

Cure Light Wounds: 1d8 + 1/lvl (max +10) = from 2-9 to 9-18

Cure Moderate Wounds: 2d8 + 2/lvl (max +20) = from 5-20 to 22-36

Cure Serious Wounds: 3d8 + 3/lvl (max +30) = from 18-39 to 33-48

Cure Critical Wounds: 4d8 + 4/lvl (max +40) = from 32-52 to 44-76

In theory this is all good and fine, but in truth, it's going to mess up the game badly, at least in BGT's start levels where you have only a few spells and curing 2 HP's is a little different than healing say 8-9. And the player is likely to reload. Instead of that, I would appoach the problem from this perspective:

Throw away the silly "light", "moderate", etc. "descriptions" and add a number at the end. So:

Cure Wounds I: 8+1/lvl*d to max of 8+1d10 = from 9-9 to 9-18

Cure Wounds II: 16+2/lvl*d to max of 16+2d10 = from 18-22 to 18-36

Cure Wounds III: 24+3/lvl*d to max of 24+3d10 = from 27-39 to 27-55

Cure Wounds IV: 36+4/lvl*d to max of 36+4d10 = from 40-64 to 40-76

 

The difference is very nominal at the end point, but at the start where it all accounts it's ALOTS.

Yep, you need to manually make each of the levels, but that shouldn't be a great hickup.

 

Truth be told, I never used to waste a 2nd level slot when I could buy at ridiculously low price loot more antidote potions than I would ever need.

Yeah, and here again the BGT's lack of resources at the start comes to mind, you can't really buy a 100+ gold potions when you only have a 100+ gold.
Link to comment
Yeah, and here again the BGT's lack of resources at the start comes to mind, you can't really buy a 100+ gold potions when you only have a 100+ gold.

 

Of course, you do realize 1) there're no poisonous enemies at the start, 2) I said "loot" rather than "buy", 3) nobody's suggesting to remove the spell's antidote effect.

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...