Dispel/Remove topic (continued from SCS forum)

[subtledoctor]

5) Merge the two spells aka hide Dispel Magic, rename Remove Magic as such while reducing its AoE from 30' to 20'

What none of the above solutions handle and bothers me is that Remove Magic never existed in PnP and I hate overlapping spells. Furthermore, at this levels Abjurers have Spell Thrust too (3 "removals" at the same level within the same school, 2 of which alsmot identical - YAY!) on top of really important spells such as ProMissile (SCS loves this), Minor Spell Deflection and Non-detection (which is SI:Div within V4!). No mage will pick DM over RM imo.

That being said, I'm not yet convinced on this change because it would completely remove the concept of "dispelling debuffs" from the game. It would be perfect imo if I could keep it not-friendly, but as discussed above I fear I cannot.

 

On a side note, 5) would also make priest's Dispel Magic a more powerful offensive tool imo (not sure if it's a good thing or a bad one).

I thought you said Break Enchantment can handle the "dispelling debuffs" duty? Can Break Enchantment dispel...

 

Sleep?

Charm?

Malison/Doom?

Curse?

Bad Chant?

Confusion?

Blindness?

Emotion: Despair?

 

IMHO Break Enchantment seems like it should cure all of those things, and if so, I vote for option 5.

[Demivrgvs]

@Subtledoctor Break Enchantment can counter all those things and Miscast Magic too (V4 made it possible with a dedicated sec type). It cannot counter 'blindness' though - you need Cure Disease for that or True Seeing.

 

When I say 5) would remove the concept of "dispelling debuffs" from the game it's just a small semantic difference between dispelling (what DM would do) and canceling/countering (what BE does), but I admit that except for the wording they are the very same thing.

[Salk]

I didn't have the chance to try Kreso's custom spell but if it's effective and well tested, I'd tend to agree with Toxin. I would like to see Remove Magic... removed.

[Demivrgvs]

I decided 5) was worth at least trying out, we'll see what beta testers say.

 

On a side note, for some reason I never noticed that vanilla's Remove Magic (spwi302) was using spwi326.bam while Dispel Magic (spwi326) was using the original spwi302.bam. To me, that looks like a clear sign spwi302 was intended to be the one and only Dispel Magic, inb4 they decided players needed a convenient party friendly variant.

[Jarno Mikkola]

So PM'ed kreso, but he hasn't been in here for a bit...

There's still no visual representation of the whole spell & counter system that was requested at one point or another.

Here's the base BG2 system, aka this image:

Could we have a similar for the SR, and that also covers the cleric and druid spells too ?

You'll notice the table doesn't have the Dispel nor Remove Magic spells because the reliability is not great out on those.

[AL|EN]

Hi, there is also a document: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1y7r2Z3FfZk74NdAVHuZuiNmWh14y1tAytNrsFMSY7zc/edit?usp=sharing&pli=1

[Demivrgvs]

@Jarno I wrote to Kreso but he's not around lately. I'll try to put that down myself this week end but within SR the system is a lot more "interconnected".

Take for example Shadow Door, its maze-like effect is countered by True Seeing while the Improved Invisibility per se can be countered even with a less expensive Detect Invisibility, but neither TS nor DI fully remove II, they simply make the target partially visible and targetable. If you want to fully cancel II you need either Dispel Magic or Detect Illusions.

Similarly, to counter Mislead you just needed TS in vanilla, but now TS only highlight the clone (and weakens it in the next build), you need to effectively destroy the clone before using a divination spell and locate the caster.

 

That being said, combat/specific/spell protection vs removals is almost unchanged instead, though my "guide" would also have to indicate important stuff such as Breach being blocked by Spell Deflection.

 

Oracle

can we buff Oracle a bit?

Already planned for the next build.

[Jarno Mikkola]

Similarly, to counter Mislead you just needed TS in vanilla, but now TS only highlight the clone (and weakens it in the next build), you need to effectively destroy the clone before using a divination spell and locate the caster.

Shouldn't the TS be able to both weaken the clone and make it's caster partially visible(to the caster), and thus target-able for spells, after all you should be seeing it, as is ?

What effect does the weakening of the clones have ? Just asking. Spell failure rate set to 49-50% ... too bad the clone AI couldn't adjust to that, it would be nice if it did.

 

Take your time on making the table, it just kinda needs to be there when you release the official v4.

 

Also you have to add the Spell Immunity: x spells, or what's the SI: Abjuration's name ever is.

What comes to the Shadow Door, yes, it has two effects, one illusion and another as a "combat displacement", you can use what ever titles in the table headers, it's your custom table after all. Not a direct copy of the example. Or that would be bad, the kind only I would do.

There's poisonings, regeneration, curses, stat boosts & hindrance, and other sorts... making a good table could actually reveal things and spaces to improve. Or that's just my -thoughts.

 

EDIT: We'll see, as long as it's one of you two, or both in coordination... just make the table.

The google table is... meh, just less informative than the above image, as it shouldn't have cross sections, cause those are not helpful ... most of the time.

[kreso]

I'm somewhat around - it's just that my time is severely limited; I've entered the world of having a "regular" job instead of freelancing.

I'll have holidays soon so that might change; at least I hope so.

I've read PM's from Jarno & Demivrgvs- I'll do the table (afaik I already have the damn sheet somewhere on my computer.....) when I see what comes out of this thread.

 

On topic - I haven't really tried my own AoE Dispel Screen so can't comment on how that works out in gameplay. We could make mages more vulnerable so that Remove/Dispel magic/Breach/Pierce Shield etc. removes Dispel Sreen from the original caster as well (which would mean that the Spell Immunity would finally work as it's PnP incarnation, but I'm worried that it would overlap with Spell Shield) ...... it would make Deflections more valuable.

[kreso]

An idea, to chime in on my toughts above. SCS won't use Breach to counter Spell Shield. How about tweaking Dispel Screen to "absorb" Breach and/or Dispel Magic (Dispel can be made to remove the screen with a %-based chance, while Breach would be 100% guarantee to remove it); so the two spells co-exist and have different "jobs"- DS keeps your Combat/Specific buffs safe, Spell Shield keeps your Spell Protections safe.

[subtledoctor]

In principle at least, that sounds like a great idea.

[Jarno Mikkola]

Why not make the tables, then add components that allow both features(and have the different tables up) and just see how many people use what composition. More choices, the better. The SCS has the choice to make the breach area effective, we can have this.

[Demivrgvs]

An idea, to chime in on my toughts above. SCS won't use Breach to counter Spell Shield. How about tweaking Dispel Screen to "absorb" Breach and/or Dispel Magic (Dispel can be made to remove the screen with a %-based chance, while Breach would be 100% guarantee to remove it); so the two spells co-exist and have different "jobs"- DS keeps your Combat/Specific buffs safe, Spell Shield keeps your Spell Protections safe.

SCS doesn't use Breach vs Spell Shield because it isn't flagged as magic attack anymore within SCS/SR (that's why I removed it from Spell Shield list of absorbed removals), but Arda's Spell Shield fix (used by SCS as well) makes it again interact with it as it did in vanilla (aka I have to add again Breach to that list). It doesn't change much anyway, since using Breach to consume Spell Shield is far from optimal (Spell Thrust and Secret Word are cheaper and faster).

 

Regarding Dispelling Screen, it already performs the role you are suggesting (keeping combat/specific buffs safe from Dispel Magic and Breach), albeit the Breach part doesn't fit the spell concept imo and it's there only because SCS assumes it's there.

 

Even if I don't particulary like how I had to implement Dispelling Screen (it's a sort of SI:Abj instead of PnP Dispelling Screen), it already co-exist well with Spell Shield imo:

- Dispelling Screen is a spell protection that keeps your dispellable/breachable buffs safe but can be canceled by a spell removal

- Spell Shield is an additional layer of protection to keep DS or any other spell protection up for a bit more

Dispelling Screen is a spell protection

 

Making Dispel Magic able to dispel the screen would only help players imo (SCS would still use spell removals), and Breach removing a spell protection doesn't make sense imo.

[kreso]

 

SCS doesn't use Breach vs Spell Shield because it isn't flagged as magic attack anymore within SCS/SR (that's why I removed it from Spell Shield list of absorbed removals), but Arda's Spell Shield fix (used by SCS as well) makes it again interact with it as it did in vanilla (aka I have to add again Breach to that list). It doesn't change much anyway, since using Breach to consume Spell Shield is far from optimal (Spell Thrust and Secret Word are cheaper and faster).

Well, Arda's code is easy to change, no? Just delete spwi513 from SS fix and you're done, Breach kills Spell Shield no more, but ignores it alltogether. Even better, Wand of Breaching now bypasses SShield since it isn't patched right, Wish "Breach on everyone" also isn't patched etc.

Kill spwi513 from Spell Shield fix; make the world a better place.

 

 

- Spell Shield is an additional layer of protection to keep DS or any other spell protection up for a bit more

Dispelling Screen is a spell protection

There's too much layers as it is. Globes, Deflections, Trap, Spell Shield - add Archons for multi clerics as well; not to mention Imp.Invisibility and it's counterparts. Spell Shield still keeps it mojo, since it protects more valuable stuff.

Loosing (partially) one isn't overly big of an issue, quite the opposite imo. If there's a way to make mages less omnipotent w/o messing AI none I'm all for it.

SCS won't patch Spell Shield code if SRv4 is detected, so all is up to you.

 

Making Dispel Magic able to dispel the screen would only help players imo (SCS would still use spell removals), and Breach removing a spell protection doesn't make sense imo.

My idea is to make Dispel Screen an AoE ability; similar to Pro Evil 10'radius. (it even fits the name "screen").

SCS won't be able to detect it (spell removals won't be used) if you use "cast spell" opcode on spwi510/spwi590 and make it cast a sub-spell with real effects; call it spwi510d or whatever. SCS will readily cast Breach/Dispel against it, actually doing what it should w/o tweaking anything. .

That way, even SCS fighters dwelling close to mages using DScreen won't get demolished by Dispels - hence SCS would probably benefit just as much with it.

Additionally, people wouldn't fret that Dispel magic is OP anymore; since now you could protect everyone against it.

It's a win-win situation for me.

I don't know why DScreen should be called a "spell protection" anyway.

If you tweak it this way, it would work more like a proper PnP SI:Abj (absorb one school spell and dissipate) then old SI:Abj or new DScreen ever did.

I can alter the code I wrote fairly easilly (i.e. I'd remove the whole "one spell on caster, another on party" thingie I coded before - all would get the same non-detectable protection; mages can rely on a dozen other spells to keep their asses safe anyhow).

It would actually work even better vs Imprisonment when it comes to AI usage - SCS checks for SI:Abj and doesn't cast vs it, even if the protection from Imprisonment is gone.

This can be fine-tuned to perfection - which spells (I'm thinking Dispel, Breach, Pierce Shield) destroy Dispel Screen, with which probability (50% for Dispel magic seems legit imo, you balance the damn spell outright and fits the theme of the spell), level (0 would allow Breach to remove DS even vs Deflection, 3 would allow Globes to protect against Dispel magic, >5 would affect Liches) etc.

[kreso]

I'm playing with Kreso's Mass Dispelling Screen and as far as I can tell it's working great. Thanks Kreso!

It could make for a great addition to SR, though I have a couple of suggestions:

1. Have the same protection for the mage that cast it, it's a bit inconsistent to confer different protections for the caster and the party - no other spell that I can think of does that. I understand that may nerf it for the AI so I don't care if the AI keeps using the current single-target variant. The AI issue may also be mitigated by:
2. Scale the spell up in levels. At least in duration (turn/lvl?) but possibly in the number of Dispel charges it can absorb (a la spell deflection).

I missed this alltogether.

First, you're welcome.

 

ad 1) agreed; and I share the sentiment. Mage should share the same protection as all others. Easilly doable.

ad 2) I don't think > 5 turns is needed. AI usually slams a Dispel outright. Number of charges would need to use a faulty opcode which I'd rather not resort to (even EE didn't fix this); and it would be very OP to prevent more than one/two dispel attempts imo.

I can, however, make Dispel hava a %-based chance to fail against Dispel Screen.

 

Demi, your call - I can code it all up tomorrow.