Antimagic Attacks not working against invisible mages?

[Darkmoon]

"I'm quite late, so I'll just say that Kelsey uses the oldest DS version, which doesn't affect spell removals. It was only added erroneously in BP's/Cam's version."

 

What effect would Kelsey using the oldest Detectable Spells version have on modern installs with SR/SCSII? Looking over the spell descriptions I can see the special effects Pierce magic, KWW, and Pierce shield have, but with the exception of PS, those abilities were all the "original game" version of those spells. As far as I can tell with Secret Word, I have two versions installed based on shadowkeeper, one that seems like the standard game version, and one that says it hits the nearest creature regardless of invisibility. Looking at my second mage who has SW, it looks like he has the original version of SW installed and not the SR version. Obviously, this is an easy fix, i'm just uncertain why it would happen in the first place? Even though I have options again of going after mages with II/SI Div, abj, etc I may do a reinstall just to get the expected behaviors from my and enemy mages. Just gotta figure how to tweak the order to get it right. Obviously kelsey goes in sooner, SCSII gets updated and goes in later after SR, RR, IR, refinements and a few others that I'm enjoying or just won't play wihtout (quest pack, Unfinished Business etc),

[DavidW]

I'm quite late, so I'll just say that Kelsey uses the oldest DS version, which doesn't affect spell removals. It was only added erroneously in BP's/Cam's version.

 

I still cannot target invisible creatures with pierce magic, KWW, pierce shield. I can however hit them with Spell thrust (in the event of SI div), or ruby ray. Does this seem like correct behavior?

It does. The first three spells have other effects in addition to the actual spell protection removal, while Spell Thrust, Ruby Ray and Spell Strike need something special to stand out on their own.

 

To complicate matters further, SCSII grants pierce-II to all six spells, whereas SR only grants it to those three, and SCSII AI assumes that all six can penetrate II. Probably, on reflection, I shouldn't be blocking the installation of my component if SR is installed, but just filling in the gaps.

[Demivrgvs]

@DavidW, didn't we managed to convince you to do the same SR V4 will do for this matter? Making all anti-magic attacks bypass II seems a rather arbitrary tweak, and unless "justified" by adding a true AoE it creates an inconsistency.

 

Adding "see invisibility via script" to spellcasters under True Seeing (and its lesser cousin Detect Invisibility) would allow you to achieve the same soal (wouldn't it?), in a much more elegant and appropriate way. What do you think?

[DavidW]

@DavidW, didn't we managed to convince you to do the same SR V4 will do for this matter?

Do you have the thread URL? I don't recall, but I could be wrong and I take my past self's opinions very seriously

 

Making all anti-magic attacks bypass II seems a rather arbitrary tweak, and unless "justified" by adding a true AoE it creates an inconsistency.

What is inconsistent? (And how is it not inconsistent if only some spells are affected?)

 

Adding"see invisibility via script" to spellcasters under True Seeing (and its lesser cousin Detect Invisibility) would allow you to achieve the same soal (wouldn't it?), in a much more elegant and appropriate way. What do you think?

The bottom line is that, in a very complicated mod, I'm disinclined to try to achieve a given effect in a new way when I seem to be achieving it in the existing way. (Other things being equal, obviously; if you think they're not equal, by all means make the case.)

[Darkmoon]

I'm not sure I'm following the thread correctly now...If I understand correctly, going forward, SCSII grants all antimagic attacks the ability to target II (either via an area effect, or disregarding the invisibility all together), whereas SR V3.1 and the upcoming V.4 only grants it to certain antimagic spells? (ST, SW, RR, and SS) via a small area effect? Whats the objection going either way, either all or some? From a tactical perspective it creates a kinda tactical wheel in some respects (a convoluted rock paper scissors)? Course I could be totally off base as I am relatively new to the conversation and I'm terrible at tactical challenges (hence I have SCSII mages set to 50% +3 of their levels).

[Ardanis]

Do you have the thread URL? I don't recall, but I could be wrong and I take my past self's opinions very seriously

http://forums.gibber...88

[DavidW]

Do you have the thread URL? I don't recall, but I could be wrong and I take my past self's opinions very seriously

http://forums.gibber...88

 

Thanks, got it. OTOH, I did in fact work out how to make single-target anti-invisibility spells (with or without ToBEx) so the reasons are somewhat out of date. (At the time I was motivated by dislike of the extant, area-effect-driven, solution.) I don't recall ever being convinced that some but not all antimagic spells should bypass II. (Not that this is something that requires SR/SCS consensus, so far as I can see.)

[amanasleep]

Do you have the thread URL? I don't recall, but I could be wrong and I take my past self's opinions very seriously

http://forums.gibber...88

 

Thanks, got it. OTOH, I did in fact work out how to make single-target anti-invisibility spells (with or without ToBEx) so the reasons are somewhat out of date. (At the time I was motivated by dislike of the extant, area-effect-driven, solution.) I don't recall ever being convinced that some but not all antimagic spells should bypass II. (Not that this is something that requires SR/SCS consensus, so far as I can see.)

 

I think the SCS solution works quite well now that all anti-magic spells are single target again. OTOH, please note the ongoing Fixpack discussions and alterations to the power levels of Spell Thrust and Secret Word. I believe that v10 of the Fixpack is changing ST to PL4 and SW to PL5. This results in ST taking down MGOI and SW taking down GOI, leaving not much room for Pierce Magic to be of use against anything but Liches. My preference is for SW to keep its normal PL, and ST to be PL4, and thereby both SW and ST take out MGOI (but not GOI). Currently ST is PL0, which allows it to take out all 5th level and lower spells while not getting blocked, and SW is PL4.