Dispel/Remove topic (continued from SCS forum)

[toxin]

Maybe YOU look at the console all the time to gain an edge over the (already horribly overmatched) AI. I have my console set to show as little info as possible about what's going on. I want my game to play the way a good book reads. And every good book usually goes like this

 

BG isn't supposed to play like a book. It is supposed to play like a D&D adventure. And in D&D there is a specific skill called Spellcraft that lets you identify spells that are being cast. As far as I know that skill hasn't been implemented in BG, but if anything, looking at the console is more consistent since by the time you care about the spell protections and counters being cast you are probably high enough level to succeed in those checks anyway.

 

You could even put the player and AI on the same footing, by having the console feedback for the base spell just read something vague like "Protected" and have the feedback when it is replaced by the alternate version read "Protected by Chaotic Commands."

 

The player and AI are already on the same footing - they both know which protections the other has (except in kreso's mod, but that specific component could easily be removed from it and still provide a lot of value). I see BG battles like games of chess, where all the pieces are on the board and visible to both players. You suggest to introduce uncertainty and chance to that system (on top of the die rolls). I prefer more strategy/tactics.

 

Honestly, you might be surprised at how unnecessary that kind of stuff actually is.

 

How is it unnecessary, exactly? A high level mage with all of his protections in place is nigh-invincible if you don't have the required counters memorized. You literally have no choice but to wait them out. The same goes for buffs - if you don't have Death Ward, you're just rolling a die and hoping your CHARNAME doesn't fail a finger of death spell. Like I mentioned above, that tilts the battle too much towards luck to my taste.

 

When I play I make a point of pushing onward and onward, even when most of my spells are exhausted, until I started taking a lot of damage that I can't recover from without going through all my healing potions. Then I retreat, heal at a temple, sleep, and start the day. A lot of players end up with something like toxin's buff routine (no offense intended toxin, it's just a great example of how some people play). But try forgoing it. After you spend all your buffs and a bunch of spells and healing defeating the party by the Mask of King Strohm, march straight on to Conlan and take a chance fighting him. Maybe 2/3 of your tactical arsenal is gone... but you might be surprised how well you can make do with whatever's left.

 

That is how I used to play, but I realized that relies on luck too heavily. You were talking about how books go - what was the last book you read that told you how the hero foolishly went onward even though most of his arsenal and protections were depleted, ran into a powerful foe that would have required his entire arsenal to beat, died horribly and then reloaded? (As a side confession, I actually reload a lot. But not because I die, rather because I'm a perfectionist and if I feel I haven't performed well enough in a battle - even though I won - many times I'll reload and fight again)

 

Above all else, I always play as if I don't know what's coming next. Even if I do know, I make a point of behaving as if I don't in-game (including buffs, memorized spells, etc). Under these constraints, you just can't march on when your arsenal is almost depleted (especially when the depletion includes strategic spells like breach and spell thrust) because that would only work out if the next encounter you face happened to be winnable (with high probability) with your current tools.

 

Now, this doesn't mean that I rest after every gibberling encounter where I cast a single magic missile. Far from it - I try to conserve strategic spells to only when need them. As surprising as it may seem to you, I hate resting and I do try to chalk up a couple of encounters before I do. But I hate dying due to not being prepared even more, so when my strategic spells are depleted I rest (theoretically speaking, I would rest even if I still had all of my spells except Breach).

 

The same goes for buffs - at least in some areas, it's suicide to walk around without, say, Chaotic Commands. So when that wears off I'll rest, but I'm not going to rest just because a Bless spell ran out, as you mistakenly imply. I confess to trying the "super buff" routine for a very short time, but that was only because NPP (which I needed in a certain area) lasted the same as some of the other buffs so I thought I might as well stock on them too. That got tiresome real fast though and I actually suggested to decrease the duration of most buffs to prevent exactly that routine (Ardanis agreed, BTW).

[subtledoctor]

The player and AI are already on the same footing - they both know which protections the other has (except in kreso's mod, but that specific component could easily be removed from it and still provide a lot of value). I see BG battles like games of chess, where all the pieces are on the board and visible to both players. You suggest to introduce uncertainty and chance to that system (on top of the die rolls). I prefer more strategy/tactics.

tilts the battle too much towards luck to my taste.

 

What's the point of playing a game of the result is not uncertain? Better to read a book (or write one) if you want certainty. This is literally a game based around rolling dice...

 

A high level mage with all of his protections in place is nigh-invincible if you don't have the required counters memorized. You literally have no choice but to wait them out.

 

That's just not true.

 

The same goes for buffs - if you don't have Death Ward, you're just rolling a die and hoping your CHARNAME doesn't fail a finger of death spell.

 

That's not really true either. I almost never cast Death Ward.

 

what was the last book you read that told you how the hero foolishly went onward even though most of his arsenal and protections were depleted, ran into a powerful foe that would have required his entire arsenal to beat, died horribly and then reloaded?

 

Like, every book ever! Well, not the dying part, but pushing to the limits of your endurance and abilities, and defeating the enemy with your last reserves of strength... that's dramatic! That's fun! What if in Rocky 4, Rocky used the same high-tech training methods as Drago, and was incredibly well-prepared, and just one-punch KO'd the guy? That would be the worst movie ever.

 

Above anything else, I always play as if I don't know what's coming next

 

Me too.

 

Under these constraints, you just can't march on when your arsenal is almost depleted

 

Yes, you often can.

 

(especially when the depletion includes strategic spells like breach and spell thrust)

 

Simple solution: don't use up all your Breaches in a single encounter.

 

would only work out if the next encounter you face happened to be winnable (with high probability) with your current tools.

 

It most likely is winnable, with some nerve and grit and imagination!

 

so when my strategic spells are depleted I rest (theoretically speaking, I would rest even if I still had all of my spells except Breach).

 

Clearly you are memorizing spells on the assumption that you will only need to get through a single encounter. Just memorize more "strategic spells." Memorize more Breach. Try fighting a wizard without Breach memorized. There *are* other viable tactics.

 

in some areas, it's suicide to walk around without, say, Chaotic Commands. So when that wears off I'll rest,

 

In two areas. Even in those areas, there are other viable tactics. All of this is not to criticize - seriously. But you clearly have a very very particular playstyle. You use words like "necessary" so I'm trying to point out that what you call "necessary" could more accurately be deemed "relevant to your personal playstyle."

 

My argument is, if you are protected by a Mind Shield, an enemy wizard would not know that unless and until it tried and failed (once) to Charm or Confuse you. That just makes sense. And I proposed a possible method for a mod to make the game work that way. Your response is, essentially, "but that method would not work well with my personal preferred playstyle!" But that doesn't mean my idea isn't a good one, it just means that you don't want to use it. I respect that, but I'd prefer to discuss the modding idea(s) on its own merits.

[toxin]

That's not really true either. I almost never cast Death Ward.

 

My bad, I should have said - true for me. My CHARNAME is a fighter so unless I'm using an equivalent item, I could always have a bad roll and die.

 

That's just not true...Try fighting a wizard without Breach memorized. There *are* other viable tactics.

 

Viable is a matter of preference, as are the chances of winning with such tactics. I suspect this again comes down to playing style and "risk aversion".

 

Clearly you are memorizing spells on the assumption that you will only need to get through a single encounter.

 

I actually memorize the minimum of spells I deem necessary for a single tough encounter, but I agree that this minimum is again a matter of preference. BTW, I'm not sure that single encounter memorization is so bad - for the AI, every fight is the only fight and it wouldn't think twice before unleashing the most powerful spells and abilities it has, drinking its best potions, etc. So I wouldn't judge too harshly any PC that does the same in a difficult encounter (granted, you have other advantages over the AI, I'm just saying in some circumstances it could make sense.. at least that's what I tell myself when I do it ).

 

Your response is, essentially, "but that method would not work well with my personal preferred playstyle!"

 

My response was more in the line of "in D&D you do know what spells are being cast". I'm just saying that if you want to level the playing field, it makes more sense to make both sides aware of spells/protections than to make none of them aware (again, this plays well with my chess-game analogy). It can be justified on PnP grounds as well, seeing as Spellcraft can be used for spells that are already in effect, too.

 

I'd like to think my playing style isn't all that special. Each of us probably has quirks - my extreme risk aversion, your somewhat artificial challenge enhancements (not resting, not looking at the console). By all means, let us discuss the modding ideas, I just think that I brought up valid points that aren't necessarily tied up with my specific playstyle (which I'd like to think isn't that extreme).

 

it just means that you don't want to use it. I respect that

 

Thank you, and I respect your wish to use it as well. However keep in mind that I'm an SR user too, so if this gets in (in a non-optional manner) I will be forced to use it as well. I am merely defend my point of view.

You use words like "necessary" so I'm trying to point out that what you call "necessary" could more accurately be deemed "relevant to your personal playstyle."

 

I will concede that "necessary" is too strong a word. I meant something like "necessary to win with high probability without using cheese tactics".

What's the point of playing a game of the result is not uncertain? Better to read a book (or write one) if you want certainty. This is literally a game based around rolling dice...

 

I guess the probability issue is indeed our main disagreement - I like coming prepared to fights, such that I am very likely to win (with the odds sometimes completely stacked in my favor). Kind of like batman You like the thrill of a more dangerous battle that you are not completely prepared for, and are wiling to accept defeat with higher probability. Both approaches are totally valid in my book, though I admit I'm not sure which one is more prevalent.

BTW, I have to admit you have piqued my interest. The next time I face a mage, perhaps I'll try to do so without Breach

[toxin]

(Merged with post above)

[Ardanis]

I've NEVER read a book like this:

Evil Enchantress: Gaze into my eyes... wait - I can tell by your smug stupid smile, and by some mysterious, unknowable omniscient presence, that your mind is shielded. Therefore I will not waste my Enthralling Gaze on you.

 

Hunky Paladin: Heh. Cool. Why don't you try a Fireball instead?

 

EE: No! I can tell you are Protected from Fire!

 

HP: So how about you summon a demon to attack me or something?

 

EE: Do you take me for an imbecile?? You are surely protected by one of your innumerable castings of Protection from Evil. The demon would only turn and attack me! (And those things are nasty, y'know - aTweaks is installed. With all that 'demonic gating' it could easily cause a crash.)

 

HP: I don't understand what you're talking about, but it's a shame - I totally would have attacked the demon, I could stand to grind some XP. Hmm... well, do you know that fancy Finger of Death spell?

 

EE: Of course I do - I'm a powerful Enchantress! But don't think I'll waste a high-level slot on you, I can see that you are Warded from Death. ... By the way, why have you not been trying to cleave me in twain all this time?

 

HP: What, and tire myself out so you have an advantage? No dice, lady - I saw Rocky III. I can mysteriously tell that you are protected by a Mantle, and it's not like I'm carrying a Holy Sword +6 or something ridiculous like that. I figure, if I keep you talking for another minute or so, that will wear off - I know I'm a hunky paladin but I totally know all about wizard spells and how long they last.

 

EE: Fool! If I am vulnerable I need simply close my eyes, and the second I open them and you become visible to me, a Contingency will render me invulnerable once again! Then you will have no recourse but to waste four more minutes of your life engaged in this pointless back-and-forth! Do you feel the existential dread creeping up from within you? This is my ultimate revenge - truly, death by inches!

 

HP: Lady you are seriously unhinged. Listen I need a coffee if we're gonna keep this banter up. You want I should get you one too? I assume you want a pumpkin spice latte or something girly like that...?

You know, I think you should write a book like this. I'd buy it

[subtledoctor]

Yeah I ended up having a bit too much fun writing that...

[kreso]

Fwiw, Breach is completely unnececary spell to have. It's convinent, but hardly a "must have". You got a wand/scrolls for those special cases.

[toxin]

Fwiw, Breach is completely unnececary spell to have. It's convinent, but hardly a "must have". You got a wand/scrolls for those special cases.

 

What is so special about these cases? Practically every mage in SCS protects himself with at least Stoneskin, and every mage worth mentioning adds PfMW or Mantle or Absolute Immunity etc. Assuming the mage is around your level or higher, how would you otherwise dispel combat protections reliably?

 

Also I'm not sure which wands and scrolls you're talking about (other than Breach scrolls, but that could be said for any spell that doesn't scale with mage level, and you have a limited supply of those anyway).

[kreso]

 

Fwiw, Breach is completely unnececary spell to have. It's convinent, but hardly a "must have". You got a wand/scrolls for those special cases.

 

What is so special about these cases? Practically every mage in SCS protects himself with at least Stoneskin, and every mage worth mentioning adds PfMW or Mantle or Absolute Immunity etc. Assuming the mage is around your level or higher, how would you otherwise dispel combat protections reliably?

Why would you dispel anything? You can disable/confuse/stun/kill with fire/ice/skull trap/use adhw/Storm of Vengeance/vorpalize/Finger of Death/Sphere of Chaos/......you get the point I hope.

I have never in SCS seen a mage I "needed" to land breach upon. Breach Mellisan, since she's annoying otherwise, but she's one of a kind anyway.

You got options (even more so with SR), use them instead of banging against the wall.

[cipher]

I have to disagree with you on that kreso.

 

Breach removing prot. fire/acid/etc is invaluable and more important than weapon immunity that usually all dangerous mage-like enemies have several of.

I had recently a situation demonstrating this plainly. I woke the Shade Lich and it (he?she?) buffed with the usual magic/fire/acid protection. I finally had Pierce Shield though, so after an orchestrated Detect Illusion>Secret Word>Pierce Shield it was prime time for its comeuppance! Bolt of Glory, Sunray and an already running False Dawn unleashed to smite the unholy creature from the face of Faerun assuredly! Several "Shade Lich is immune to my damage" later I was not so sure anymore. I really miss breach on liches...

 

Btw does Pierce Shield removing combat protections and not specific ones a conscious decision or and oversight?

[Ardanis]

Fwiw, Breach is completely unnececary spell to have. It's convinent, but hardly a "must have". You got a wand/scrolls for those special cases.

It's like saying you don't need Carsomyr to beat the game - sure you don't, but can you blame someone for grabbing a convenient tool when they've got opportunity? I really can't.

 

Btw does Pierce Shield removing combat protections and not specific ones a conscious decision or and oversight?

 

It was intended, though I no longer know the current status of things.

[subtledoctor]

This is getting way, way off the point. There's nothing wrong with the way toxin plays, and there's nothing wrong with the way kreso plays, or the way I play.

 

The point is, a mod should not cater to one particular style of approaching encounters. My suggestion, that it might be possible to have spells (some select certain spells!) start out non-detectable and then, after a single blocked attack, become detectable, is not based in a belief that it would be cool for my personal playstyle. Rather, I think it would be cool for anybody. It would make the AI more organic, and it would assist in suspension of disbelief. (And yes suspension of disbelief matters for a lot of people, even in a 2D tactical combat game.)

 

So when toxin says "I don't like that idea, because the way I play the game I assume everyone has perfect information," I just think that's sort of an invalid criticism. It's too based on your personal playstyle instead of on the general merits of trying to make the AI more organic.

[InKal]

 

 

Fwiw, Breach is completely unnececary spell to have. It's convinent, but hardly a "must have". You got a wand/scrolls for those special cases.

 

What is so special about these cases? Practically every mage in SCS protects himself with at least Stoneskin, and every mage worth mentioning adds PfMW or Mantle or Absolute Immunity etc. Assuming the mage is around your level or higher, how would you otherwise dispel combat protections reliably?

Why would you dispel anything? You can disable/confuse/stun/kill with fire/ice/skull trap/use adhw/Storm of Vengeance/vorpalize/Finger of Death/Sphere of Chaos/......you get the point I hope.

I have never in SCS seen a mage I "needed" to land breach upon. Breach Mellisan, since she's annoying otherwise, but she's one of a kind anyway.

You got options (even more so with SR), use them instead of banging against the wall.

 

for me it looks like this:

 

You can always switch weapons to normal weapons and simply bash the guy (high lvl casters are usually not immune to normal weapons). The only probelm is fireshield I think. But you have items, potions and spells for that. You can have like 100% fire res. from items only. but later there are enemies with mantles and absolute immunity and you kinda need a breach spell for them. in ToB every spellcaster should be using imp mantle or/and absolute immunity imo.

 

against Liches IIRC Sunray burns through all protections. only outright immunity like imp. Bodhi has can block Sunray. if you have Sunray you don't really need breach for liches. not to mention that even Kangaxx can be turned by high enough cleric. with the Amulet of Power from Item Revisions (+2 lvl to caster level) turning liches is easier than ever I think.

[kreso]

 

Fwiw, Breach is completely unnececary spell to have. It's convinent, but hardly a "must have". You got a wand/scrolls for those special cases.

It's like saying you don't need Carsomyr to beat the game - sure you don't, but can you blame someone for grabbing a convenient tool when they've got opportunity? I really can't.

True. It's convinient, as I said; but many No-Reload players (myslef included) simply skip it, at least on sorcerers.

 

 

You can always switch weapons to normal weapons and simply bash the guy (high lvl casters are usually not immune to normal weapons). The only probelm is fireshield I think. But you have items, potions and spells for that. You can have like 100% fire res. from items only. but later there are enemies with mantles and absolute immunity and you kinda need a breach spell for them. in ToB every spellcaster should be using imp mantle or/and absolute immunity imo.

 

against Liches IIRC Sunray burns through all protections. only outright immunity like imp. Bodhi has can block Sunray. if you have Sunray you don't really need breach for liches. not to mention that even Kangaxx can be turned by high enough cleric. with the Amulet of Power from Item Revisions (+2 lvl to caster level) turning liches is easier than ever I think.

 

Mantle & Imp.Mantle are changed in SR. Sunray does magical damage, and many Liches buff with Pro Energy so that may not really work well.

AoP "caster level bonus" won't affect TU I'm afraid.

Apsolute Immunity is however the spell you'll want Breach against, given that a mage under it is immune to everything. Or wait it out; since it lasts no more than 4 rounds.

[toxin]

So when toxin says "I don't like that idea, because the way I play the game I assume everyone has perfect information," I just think that's sort of an invalid criticism. It's too based on your personal playstyle instead of on the general merits of trying to make the AI more organic.

 

I'm actually saying this is how it is both in PnP (to an extent) and in BG, regardless of my playing style. I think it's safe to assume most players do look at the console, and we know that the AI can tell which buffs and immunities you have and act upon them so really I'm not sure how you're tying this to my playstyle. And even if we were planning a new game regardless of PnP or BG, I don't see why "uncertainty" is automatically preferable to "perfect information". Both are valid, and each of us prefers the other, I don't see a problem there...

 

Regarding Breach, I think a big factor here is the amount and level of casters in the party. In "traditional" setups (e.g. mage, cleric, thief, 3Xfighter types) you may not have enough high-level magic to penetrate all the defenses of a high level mage and kill/disable him, at least not reliably IMO. But sure, if you have a lot of high level spells and the mage is not magic resistant, you certainly have non-melee options. Personally I hate having my fighters stand around and do nothing though, seems so inefficient

 

Barring that, I guess we agree it's pretty important against Absolute Immunity (or PfMW when the creature is already immune to normal ones) or even the Mantle variants when you don't have highly enough enchanted weapons (again this brings us to circumstances - it depends on where in the game you are and which items you have). Waiting it out could be problematic as high level casters may just cast it again (either in Time Stop or while still protected by Stoneskin and the likes), not to mention the stuff you'll have to deal with while they're invulnerable...

 

I really miss breach on liches...

 

Why aren't you using subtledoctor's Breachier Breach??

http://gibberlings3.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=27291&page=2&do=findComment&comment=237941