Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
CamDawg

v11 To-Fight-About List

Recommended Posts

This is well, well, well beyond the scope of the Fixpack.

The very ring issue is well behind the scope. There is a whole lot of items that are unique as their description suggests, and yet available in multiple copies. Unless you're "fixing" them all, there's no reason to touch the ring.

Share this post


Link to post

Fewer than you might think, in an unmodded game.

Maybe, but the point is that it's not "the ring" issue. It's all of them.

Share this post


Link to post

Is it? I doubt that those AC 6 bracers refer to CHARNAME being involved in their making, which is downright immershun breaking.

 

10th

Share this post


Link to post

Is it? I doubt that those AC 6 bracers refer to CHARNAME being involved in their making, which is downright immershun breaking.

 

10th

Why does it matter whether CHARNAME is being mentioned or not?

Share this post


Link to post
Is it? I doubt that those AC 6 bracers refer to CHARNAME being involved in their making, which is downright immershun breaking.

10th

Why does it matter whether CHARNAME is being mentioned or not?
If I remember it correctly, gaining the exact same item 9 times and each of them, -even while the character might had not ever been involved in the making of any, all of the 9 mention the protagonist been involved in making- is kinda odd, yes, if we calculate, that the tenth item is the one that the mage protagonist can be involved in making off, the other 9 being droppable items in the original game.

Share this post


Link to post

Fewer than you might think, in an unmodded game.

Maybe, but the point is that it's not "the ring" issue. It's all of them.

I suspect you'll find that (a) there aren't actually that many of them, when you play unmodded; (b) Cam would also be keen on preventing duplication of unique items there too, i.e. would embrace this conclusion.

 

(I might be wrong about (a). Do you have a list?)

Share this post


Link to post

There are two rings of wizardry. The description is correct for one of them but not the other.

 

There were really only two other unique items that were widely copied--every chapter 6 creature and its dog had a copy of Varscona, and there were multiple copies of Suryris's Blade (these were addressed way back in the alphas IIRC). This one's really under discussion for which solution we wish to pursue--right now it looks like description change. There are a handful of other uniques that had a copy or two that are addressed as well (Ring of the Ram, sahuagin treasury items). They even have their own section in the docs.

Share this post


Link to post
I suspect you'll find that (a) there aren't actually that many of them, when you play unmodded; (b) Cam would also be keen on preventing duplication of unique items there too, i.e. would embrace this conclusion. (I might be wrong about (a). Do you have a list?)

I'd say loads. Starting from Amulet of Protection+1. I think that mod has a list http://www.shsforums.net/files/file/154-unique-artifacts/

Share this post


Link to post

Minor spell turning at level 5 is currently useless as the fixpack changes it to reflect only spell levels 1-4 whereas level 3 minor spell deflection still absorbs spells up to level 7, so counterintuitively the lower level spell is more useful in every way.

 

Please make the changes to minor spell turning optional.

Share this post


Link to post
There were really only two other unique items that were widely copied--every chapter 6 creature and its dog had a copy of Varscona, and there were multiple copies of Suryris's Blade (these were addressed way back in the alphas IIRC). This one's really under discussion for which solution we wish to pursue--right now it looks like description change. There are a handful of other uniques that had a copy or two that are addressed as well (Ring of the Ram, sahuagin treasury items). They even have their own section in the docs.
I would have stuffed it into GTU (which I hate and never install :) )

 

Spells like Globe of Invulnerability and Spell Immunity do not protect you from spells you cast yourself. Fixpack already takes care of GoI, but Spell Immunity remains lacking. (Implied "I think this should be fixed, any objections?")
You mean, it's *STILL* not fixed?????? Dear Bhaal...

Share this post


Link to post

Blade's Defensive Spin ability and Free Action don't work together - this needs to go. Either OBC or remove it (my vote goes to remove), since the way it's handled is worse off than vanilla behaviour.

Share this post


Link to post

Would you consider reverting Beta Core Secret Word fix?

 

Secret Word (Abjuration)

Level: 4

Range: Visual sight of caster

Duration: Instant

Casting Time: 4

Area of Effect: Target creature

Saving Throw: None

 

When this spell is cast at a target creature it will dispel one spell

protection of 8th level or lower. The spells that are affected by this

are: Minor Spell Turning, Minor Globe Of Invulnerability, Spell

Immunity, Spell Deflection, Spell Turning, and Spell Shield. The

target's magic resistance, if any, does not affect this spell.

 

The first sentence in the spell's description is false, or at best a generalization, since no spell protection exists at 8th level (I cannot dispel something that does not exist in the first place). Since the first sentence is unreliable, the spell's behavior should conform to the sentences that follow. Thankfully, the remainder of the description avoids words/phrases like "like," "such as," and "included but not limited to," instead opting for the explicit words/phrases "are affected...are" and "does not affect." If the vanilla spell conformed to this vanilla description then the Fixpack errs with this Beta Core fix.

Share this post


Link to post

Minor spell turning at level 5 is currently useless as the fixpack changes it to reflect only spell levels 1-4 whereas level 3 minor spell deflection still absorbs spells up to level 7, so counterintuitively the lower level spell is more useful in every way.

 

Please make the changes to minor spell turning optional.

 

Minor Spell Turning's vanilla description states that "this spell will only affect up to 4th level spells." IIRC it's vanilla behavior reflected spells up to the 7th level; a contradiction demanding resolution. Maybe the vanilla behavior (and not the description) represents developer intent, but I wouldn't bet on it. I'd chalk it up to a bug that the Fixpack rectifies. I'll concede that the lower level Minor Spell Deflection is more useful (though not in every single way) and that this is counterintuitive, but game balancing is outside the Fixpack's scope (I think).

Edited by N00ber

Share this post


Link to post

Minor Spell Turning's vanilla description states that "this spell will only affect up to 4th level spells." IIRC it's vanilla behavior reflected spells up to the 7th level; a contradiction demanding resolution. Maybe the vanilla behavior (and not the description) represents developer intent, but I wouldn't bet on it. I'd chalk it up to a bug that the Fixpack rectifies.

 

It's hard to believe that the developers accidentally wrote in three extra repeats of the spell turning effect for levels 5-7 under the spell's feature block. This isn't like leaving a usability flag unchecked or a casting time or projectile incorrect due to copying the item or spell from another resource, someone deliberately coded MST to reflect 5th-7th level spells.

 

Anyway, the seventh level "spell turning" provides better protection than the sixth level "spell deflection", so logically the fifth level "minor spell turning" should likewise not be weaker than the third level "minor spell deflection". Not to mention a similar progression is evident for "minor globe/globe of invulnerability" - besides, who would cast a spell reflecting up to 4th level spells once when globes provide the same protection for 1 round/level?

 

 

I'll concede that the lower level Minor Spell Deflection is more useful (though not in every single way) and that this is counterintuitive, but game balancing is outside the Fixpack's scope (I think).

 

If game balance is outside the fixpack's scope then no change should have been made at all: This doesn't fix a game breaking bug, it just alters the spell system in a way that is, as you say, counterintuitive (don't get me started on the broad spectrum immunities elves got with previous fixpack versions, or how ironskins has become useless in combat).

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...