Dispel/Remove topic (continued from SCS forum)

[Demivrgvs]

Well, Arda's code is easy to change, no?

Yes it is.

 

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.

Afaik you cannot stack multiple deflection opcodes...please don't tell me it's possible.

 

If I'm not wrong, the max you can stack is:

1 Spell Deflection

1 Globe of Invulnerability

1 Dispelling Screen (if it remains a spell protection)

1 Spell Shield

Not that many if you ask me, and if we take out DS than Spellstrike completely loses all its mojo imo (it gets absorbed by SS thus the max you could do with it would be removing 2 spell protections). Deflections and Globes limit your options yes, but they don't completely block your offensive like for example PfMW does.

 

What was super annoying to counter back then was SI:Abj+Div + II, but while Non-detection + II is still great, you don't need to fully cancel them to fight back within SR thanks to True Seeing new mechanic.

 

If there's a way to make mages less omnipotent w/o messing AI none I'm all for it.

Me too.

 

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

On one hand it makes sense (PnP Dispelling Screen affects a 10 feet radius area indeed), otoh it's kinda difficult to implement imo. An aura centered on the caster would make its removal odd (you should target the source of the aura to counter it not the affected allies imo), thus it would have to be a "Mass" spell (is that what you mean with "similar to ProEvil"?) but that would ruin the "screen" concept after the affected creatures start to spread around.

 

On a side note, if you make Dispel Magic counter DS (aka SI:Abj) what's the point of DS in the first place? A sort of Spell Shield but limited to counter a 3rd lvl removal (albeit a powerful one)?

 

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

Because it's pretty much SI:Abj, which was flagged as a spell protection. Same as Non-detection which is a spell protection because I "merged" it with SI:Div.

[subtledoctor]

1 Spell Deflection

1 Globe of Invulnerability

1 Dispelling Screen

1 Spell Shield

Not that many if you ask me,

Four layers is a lot. Especially if Breach can't get through them. Three layers is enough imho.

 

and if we take out DS than Spellstrike completely loses all its mojo imo (it gets absorbed by SS).

Well, again I say it would be reasonable to say "Spellstrike destroys *all* defenses" - it's a 9th level spell after all.

 

Even if Spell Shield blocks Spellstrike (SS blocks SS?) then you use Secret Word/Spell Thrust first, then Spellstrike to remove everything else... which is at least double what any other removal spell can do (triple if it affects ND also). It's still the king of removal spells. Maybe include a Breach effect in Spellstrike (make it a Pierce Shield with extra spell-removals) and you're really cooking. Or make it like vanilla Warding Whip, so it removes Spell Shirld on the first round and everything else on the 2nd round.

 

There are ways to make Spellstrike stay powerful.

 

 

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

On one hand it makes sense (PnP Dispelling Screen affects a 10 feet radius area indeed), otoh it's kinda difficult to implement imo. An aura centered on the caster would make its removal odd (you should target the source of the aura to counter it not the affected allies imo), thus it would have to be a "Mass" spell (is that what you mean with "similar to ProEvil"?) but that would ruin the "screen" concept after the affected creatures start to spread around.

This is an extremely good point... but realistically, most players won't notice. ProEvil 10' affects an area, Confusion and Silence affect an area, but people can wander around and Dispels are targeted where they wander, not at the source. This behavior, while inferior, is what players are used to.

 

On a side note, if you make Dispel Magic counter DS (aka SI:Abj) what's the point of DS in the first place? A sort of Spell Shield but limited to counter a 3rd lvl removal?

Plus Breach, which is more important.

[kreso]

Afaik you cannot stack multiple deflection opcodes...please don't tell me it's possible.ble stuff.

No, you can't.

 

 

 

If I'm not wrong, the max you can stack is:

1 Spell Deflection

1 Globe of Invulnerability

1 Dispelling Screen (if it remains a spell protection)

1 Spell Shield

Not that many if you ask me, and if we take out DS than Spellstrike completely loses all its mojo imo (it gets absorbed by SS thus the max you could do with it would be removing 2 spell protections). Deflections and Globes limit your options yes, but they don't completely block your offensive like for example PfMW does.

You left out Spell Trap, that stacks with all above. You also have Mind Blank as spell protection at level 8. Spellstrike would still keep it's power imo - in apsence of Spell Shield, it wipes out everything within one go (still no.1 spell to use vs really tough casters like Liches/Sendai/select ToB mages higher than level 20).

Hence, for players use it could destroy Deflection/Globe/Spell Trap/Archons shield/Non-Detection (up to 5); AI could destroy all that + Mind Blank (up to 6). Fully worth a level 9 slot for me...

If you're still worried it would be too weak, make it apply a 100% spell failure rate for 1 round after it hits. (SCS recognizes that and would act accordingly; i.e. not attempt casting). That'd leave mages with only contingencied defences....

It can also be made to destroy Dispel Screen as well, so it can work the same as it did.

 

 

On a side note, if you make Dispel Magic counter DS (aka SI:Abj) what's the point of DS in the first place? A sort of Spell Shield but limited to counter a 3rd lvl removal (albeit a powerful one)?

 

The point of DS is to protect your party from at least one (first) Dispel/Breach attempt made against them. It would be limited to countering 3rd & 5th level removals, but in an AoE. If it makes your fighters survive the initial Dispel onslaught which players complain about, I'd say it's quite a spell; pretty much a must-pick; just as it is in it's current state.

Imo, it would lead to a much more immersive gameplay. And you'd loose out on that feeling "I spend 2 minutes buffing Minsc, only to have him hit by Dispel".

 

 

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

Because it's pretty much SI:Abj, which was flagged as a spell protection. Same as Non-detection which is a spell protection because I "merged" it with SI:Div.

 

I'm more concerned about how it preforms then wether it's combat/spell/custom protection, in any case.

 

 

 

 

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

On one hand it makes sense (PnP Dispelling Screen affects a 10 feet radius area indeed), otoh it's kinda difficult to implement imo. An aura centered on the caster would make its removal odd (you should target the source of the aura to counter it not the affected allies imo), thus it would have to be a "Mass" spell (is that what you mean with "similar to ProEvil"?) but that would ruin the "screen" concept after the affected creatures start to spread around.

I tought about that. Given the two options I can think of (delayed 146s or repeating eff); I'd vote for something similar to Pro Evil (in my current game, I used same .pro like Imp.Haste does, albeit it's effects are centered on caster).

The problem I see with both 146s & effs (besides the flunkiness of eff) is that unless I use 206 vs it DS protection would be re-applied even when a fighter would be hit by Breach. And I can't use 206 since the spell needs to be re-applied. I could make Dispel/Breach cast yet one more effect that has 206 vs DS, but that's all overly complicated and the net effect would probably be less then stellar, since 206 would be applied even w/o DS.... . Likewise, AI wouldn't benefit nearly as much from it.

It's not perfect; but given the alternatives - the best I can mingle out.

[toxin]

 

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.

 

I was asking for turn/level because it's a spell I usually walk around with, just like Chaotic Commands and Death Ward (IMO it doesn't make sense to die from a Finger of Death just because you were caught by some demon by surprise). Seeing as the AI whips up DS the second it sees you in a contingency, I think it's fair not to let you waste the first spell of the battle (which is usually the most important) on it. Like you said, it's pretty much a must.

 

%-based change sounds cool, maybe even level based if possible but not ridiculous like it is for Dispel (5 lvl gap and it's useless), maybe keep at least 50%. To be honest I wouldn't complain if it didn't protect against Breach - like I said before it's single target so it's not the end of the world. Besides, I rarely (ever?) see the AI use it on fighters (and at least for parties, that makes sense IMO) and like you said mages have many more levels with which to protect themselves.

[Demivrgvs]

Spellstrike

...it could destroy Deflection/Globe/Spell Trap/Archons shield/Non-Detection (up to 5); AI could destroy all that + Mind Blank (up to 6). Fully worth a level 9 slot for me...

Shield of the Archon is a deflection spell (with or without SR) and I thought I made Spell Trap an infinite spell deflection but that was only on one of my internal builds.

 

Speaking of Non-Detection and Mind Blank, they are spell removals because they replace SI:Div and SI:Enc, but I think at least the latter should be a specific protection like its little brother Chaotic Commands. Would that screw SCS AI?

Dispelling Screen

The point of DS is to protect your party from at least one (first) Dispel/Breach attempt made against them.

I know, I just fear that instead of fixing the root of the problem (Dispel Magic power lvl and stackable buffs) we just add the following scenarios:

- DS absorbs DM, then AI detects DM didn't worked and cast it again (a simple 1 round delay)

- DS absorbs DM, AI doesn't have a 2nd DM memorized (players can enjoy an entire party insanely buffed)

Am I wrong?

 

On a side note, shouldn't the smaller AoE (from 30' to 20') already give a chance to players to not have the entire party struck by a single DM? Has anyone tried the last build with it?

[geg_Ma3gau]

Among other things. Consider capping the dispel chance at ~35% flat regardless of level diffirence. This will give the buffs more staying power. Also, nerf breach so that it only affects PFMW and its alternatives. possibly not touching stoneskins. Nerfing breach means people will actually need to use the new, weaker dispel magic. Or use on hit dispelling.

 

Why do i want that. Because its often 100% dispelled party after 1 cast by some high level. And also breach shouldbe nerfed imo. Why do you need dispels if you can 100% breach pretty much anything you would like to.

 

If the ~35% dispel chance cap is in effect, then the "carsomyr dispels on save failed" can go.

 

There could also be a new larger lower dispel chance cap maybe 5% or 10%.

Keeping the dispel chances regardless of a level between ~10% and 35% sounds balanced

[kreso]

Spellstrike

...it could destroy Deflection/Globe/Spell Trap/Archons shield/Non-Detection (up to 5); AI could destroy all that + Mind Blank (up to 6). Fully worth a level 9 slot for me...

Shield of the Archon is a deflection spell (with or without SR) and I thought I made Spell Trap an infinite spell deflection but that was only on one of my internal builds.

 

Deflection-type spells don't stack when it comes to spell apsorption, but do stack when it comes to removing them with spell removals.

Try buffing with Minor Deflection + Deflection. You need two Secret Word spells to remove them both.

 

Speaking of Non-Detection and Mind Blank, they are spell removals because they replace SI:Div and SI:Enc, but I think at least the latter should be a specific protection like its little brother Chaotic Commands. Would that screw SCS AI?

Given it stops PW spells, yes.

 

 

add the following scenarios:

- DS absorbs DM, then AI detects DM didn't worked and cast it again (a simple 1 round delay)

- DS absorbs DM, AI doesn't have a 2nd DM memorized (players can enjoy an entire party insanely buffed)

Am I wrong?

 

On a side note, shouldn't the smaller AoE (from 30' to 20') already give a chance to players to not have the entire party struck by a single DM? Has anyone tried the last build with it?

AI may not have 2nd Dispel (usually does however - just checked Sendai, she has 5 of them!); Breach is always there, or simply use damage/disables/summons. Mages also come in pairs and similar.

SCS dispels/uses spell removals and similar on a timer, so you'd have more than one round breather.

PC party isn't commonly insanely buffed (at least not all of them), since slots are expensive with SR.

[toxin]

Among other things. Consider capping the dispel chance at ~35% flat regardless of level diffirence. This will give the buffs more staying power.

I think this is hardcoded (a lot of modders here to point me out if I'm wrong).

Also, nerf breach so that it only affects PFMW and its alternatives. possibly not touching stoneskins [...] And also breach shouldbe nerfed imo. Why do you need dispels if you can 100% breach pretty much anything you would like to.

 

Because DM is AoE, and because it dispels a lot of other stuff as well. I could live with breach only working on Combat protections though, but that will probably mess up the AI, as will keeping stoneskin in place (which doesn't make sense anyway, that's like the first spell it should affect).

[Demivrgvs]

Deflection-type spells don't stack when it comes to spell apsorption, but do stack when it comes to removing them with spell removals.

Sadness. We cannot truly fix this, not even with that new EE opcode imo because it would create the silly option of using Minor Deflection to cancel Greater Deflection on an enemy (much like vanilla's exploit of using Magic Resistance to lower a dragon's res).

 

At least it's a really inefficient exploit because neither Minor Spell Deflection nor the standard version can be used like Spell Shield to protect higher level protections such as Globe of Invulnerability. Greater Spell Deflection "stacking" is annoying, but you would be consuming a second 7th lvl slot for a sort of Lesser Spell Shield (it doesn't even block SpellStrike). Overall, it's probably not a huge deal.

 

PC party isn't commonly insanely buffed (at least not all of them), since slots are expensive with SR.

Maybe you're right.

 

If only we could work on a Quest Revisions mod there's an easy fix imo which would both keep "buff spam/abuse" in check and rebalance the mage class: prevent players from resting everywhere.

 

 

Among other things. Consider capping the dispel chance at ~35% flat regardless of level diffirence. This will give the buffs more staying power.

I think this is hardcoded (a lot of modders here to point me out if I'm wrong).

The opcode is hardcoded. I could use an insane workaround to tweak it, but it would make the % chance depend on target's level rather than the level of the caster who buffed him.

[Jarno Mikkola]

The opcode is hardcoded. I could use an insane workaround to tweak it, but it would make the % chance depend on target's level rather than the level of the caster who buffed him.

How insane is this workaround ? Cause I might actually like this fact far more than the current one.

So long as it doesn't need to touch the innards of the affected buff spells, it might be OK.

[Demivrgvs]

The opcode is hardcoded. I could use an insane workaround to tweak it, but it would make the % chance depend on target's level rather than the level of the caster who buffed him.

How insane is this workaround ? Cause I might actually like this fact far more than the current one.

So long as it doesn't need to touch the innards of the affected buff spells, it might be OK.

Using the "always dispel" flag, and then creating our own % chance with a ridiculous amount of dispel effects each with a different % chance to trigger based on target's level (similar to how SR's Color Spray work).

[kreso]

 

The opcode is hardcoded. I could use an insane workaround to tweak it, but it would make the % chance depend on target's level rather than the level of the caster who buffed him.

How insane is this workaround ? Cause I might actually like this fact far more than the current one.

So long as it doesn't need to touch the innards of the affected buff spells, it might be OK.

Using the "always dispel" flag, and then creating our own % chance with a ridiculous amount of dispel effects each with a different % chance to trigger based on target's level (similar to how SR's Color Spray work).

 

Add multiclasses into mix, and you've got yourself a ball.

[kreso]

Behold....

 

Dispelling screen in action.

 

Activated:

 

 

Hit by Dispel Magic:

Two things here. One, buffs remain. 2nd, Screen vanishes on whoever is hit by Dispel.

 

2nd Dispel from Sorcerous Amon (or Pooky?); proving my point that SCS will debuff with a timer (somewhere from 2 rounds window). Buffs are properly dispelled now on whoever had Screen removed beforehand, and also hits party members which still had it active.

Message "Dispel effects" doesn't display on people still protected by Dispel Screen.

[Demivrgvs]

Nice job Kreso, I guess it's worth including it in the next build which I upload tomorrow.

 

The opcode is hardcoded. I could use an insane workaround to tweak it, but it would make the % chance depend on target's level rather than the level of the caster who buffed him.

How insane is this workaround ? Cause I might actually like this fact far more than the current one.
So long as it doesn't need to touch the innards of the affected buff spells, it might be OK.

Using the "always dispel" flag, and then creating our own % chance with a ridiculous amount of dispel effects each with a different % chance to trigger based on target's level (similar to how SR's Color Spray work).

Add multiclasses into mix, and you've got yourself a ball.

What do you mean? Multiclasses don't change anything imo. Dispel would be more effective against them because their lvl is lower than a true class with same xp but that happens already in vanilla (that's why Viconia's buffs are way harder to dispel than Aerie's ones). Am I missing something?

 

One more thing, with the above mentioned tweak the chance to trigger dispel would be calculated separately for each affected target (a pro imo) but it would not take into account the original caster level (a con imo because it means a multiclass spellcaster buff would be more effective if cast on a single class ally rather than himself, and just as effective as if cast by a single class spellcaster).

[subtledoctor]

Personally, I don't like the idea of checking Dispel against the target's level. Like the magic adheres better to high-level characters, or something? It's weird.