Jump to content

SR Revised V1.3.900 (2022 August 8th)


Recommended Posts

I have now read through this entire thread and I'm baffled by the dedication and persistence you guys put into these last "finishing touches" that make all the difference for the player. I'm also amazed at how many things there are that can and have gone wrong, still! Keep up the good work!

Having expressed my gratitude, I have a few suggestions, more on the flavor side of things. 

1) With the new approach to invisibility counter-measures ("demon" opcode rather than dispelling), could you please bring the Thief ability in line with this, even though it's outside the scope of "spell" revisions? Much like Inquisitor's true seeing has been harmonized, it no longer makes any sense for a thief skill to dispel illusions, but rather detect them.

2) The spell "non-detection", as I understand its current functionality, is really a misnomer. It doesn't foil detection via True Seeing, Detect Invisibility etc. (indeed, nothing can anymore), but it prevents illusory effects from being dispelled by counter-measures such as True Seeing and Oracle. Hence, non-detection is exactly what it doesn't offer. I propose that it be renamed for clarity. If we want to use existing spell names from the D&D world, the best I can come up with is "Permanency". PnP Permanency made the duration of various spells permanent, so it's not the same effect, but it fits with what non-detection wants to do: give illusions more staying power.

3) On a related note, I'd like to suggest adopting a meta-terminology of sorts for the current "spell battle" system, to facilitate discussions between SCS/SR users out of game more than add to spell descriptions. The way I've come to understand the current system is that there are basically three categories of spells: protections, counter-measures and foils. Counter-measures remove or handle the protections in some way, and foils prevent the counter-measures from having their effect. So for example, True Seeing is a counter-measure to Improved Invisibility, and Non-Detection is a (partial) foil for True Seeing. 
 

There are, then, 4 different categories of protections: combat protections, spell protections, illusory protections and other protections. The first three have specific counter-measures and foils, whereas the last category is a catch-all with dispel/remove magic and dispel screen as generic counter-measures/foil. I don't intend this as introducing new functionality to SR spells, but as a way of grouping and making sense of spells to make it more understandable for new and returning players. What do you think about adopting this terminology or something along these lines?

Link to comment

1. I would think the Thief's Detect Illusions ability is hardcoded to be how it is. Definitely not my area of expertise, but that's my guess.

2. But that's the thing - Non-Detection *does* foil detection by True Seeing et. al. The tl;dr version: invisibility/stealth and improved invisibility are two distinct statuses, and Non-Detection fully protects the invisibility status, but it only partially protects the improved invisibility status.

Just to be clear, there are two different invisibility statuses that are are applied and can be dispelled differently but often overlap:
A. Standard invisibility that makes it so that nobody can see the invisible character until either dispelled or the affected character does some sort of hostile action (granted by stealth mode and all invisibility spells, including better spells like Improved Invisibility et. al.).
B. Improved invisibility that that creates a semi-transparent mode even after you've engaged in some sort of hostile action that makes it so opponents cannot target the improved invisible character with spells (not granted by Invisibility but by better spells like Improved Invisibility et. al.).

Non-Detection fully protects status A, but not status B. As an example, if you cast Non-Detection upon yourself, then go into a Ranger's/Thief's stealth mode or cast Invisibility, then walk into a pile of wizards and priests casting True Seeing and Oracle and what have you, you will not be detected. The key difference is simply with improved invisibility - if you or an enemy are affected by both Non-Detection and improved invisibility (granted by Improved Invisibility, Shadow Door, Mass Invisibility, and Pixie Dust, etc.) and an opponent casts something like True Seeing, the improved invisibility status will not prevent that specific caster from casting other spells targeting the improved invisibility character...but it will not actually dispel either invisibility or the improved invisibility status. This has two practical functions: 1. If you, the improved invisible character, are also standard invisible (i.e. have not engaged in hostile action or otherwise been detected), you will continue to be invisible to them even if they have cast Oracle or True Seeing; and 2. Only the one character with a spell like True Seeing active will be able to target the improved invisibility character even after they're engaged in hostile action - no-one else will be able to, including even allies in the party. I just tested all of this to make sure my understanding of how Non-Detection works is correct, and it was as far as I could tell. I rewrote the descriptions of True Seeing, Invisibility Purge, and Detect Invisibility to mention this, but perhaps Non-Detection should explain it in further detail as well. And of course, as both you and Relay pointed out, Non-Detection also makes it so Oracle and True Seeing do not dispel other types of illusory protections such as Mirror Image. Improved invisibility would be completely game-breaking for both players and the AI if there was no way to at least partially break it - we'd have to go back to anti-magic attacks always being able to pierce improved invisibility without it, which people seem to regard as the inferior solution.

3. There are four categories of protections:
A. Spell protections: spells that protect wholesale against generic magic attacks, e.g. Spell Deflection, Globe of Invulnerability.
B. Combat protections: spells that protect against generic physical attacks, e.g. Mage Armor, Barkskin, Stoneskin, Protection from Magical Weapons.
C. Specific protections: spells that protect against a very particular type of attack or status type, e.g. Death Ward, Resist Fear, Protection from x Element.
D. Illusory protections: spells that use illusions to prevent detection or misdirect/make attacks miss, e.g. Invisibility, Improved Invisibility.

For your protections, countermeasures, and foils idea, it would probably indeed be helpful, but how exactly would you express it? You pointed out yourself that Non-Detection is only a partial foil for True Seeing. I don't exactly want to have to exhaustively describe every single situation in every spell as to what protects against and counters and foils what, and because some stuff is only partial, you can't really provide a standardized list either (as it would be incorrect to simply state that Non-Detection foils True Seeing in the same breadth as stating it foils Oracle, as it completely foils the latter but not the former). Anti-magic attacks like Breach and Secret Word already list exactly what they dispel, but they're the only ones that do, and it makes sense to do so since they're pretty black-and-white situations.

Edited by Bartimaeus
Link to comment

Thanks for the exhaustive reply.

1. Bummer. It kind of makes the thief ability situationally OP, and makes the refined illusion spell battle system in SRv4 somewhat moot, as long as your party has a thief.

2. I don't have a current install to test, but I have one reason to doubt a part of what you're saying here: I distinctly recall some demons even waaay back in vanilla being able to see through regular invisibility as an "innate ability" - that is, by virtue of the same opcode that I believe True Seeing now applies to its caster. For example, I recall one time when a scout in my party who was only protected by regular (level 2) Invisibilty (long duration and unbroken obviously) got jumped by a demon who simply saw right through the invisibility without any spell casting involved. As I understood it, this was by virtue of its opcode, which True Seeing now grants. The opcode doesn't care if it's regular or improved invisibility, it just ignores it all together as if there was no such thing as invisibility within the game (there is no dispelling involved). 

I may be wrong of course, or maybe the opcode mechanics have changed, but if I am, this would present other interesting problems. For example, you're saying that as long as I don't break regular invisibility and combine it with non-detection, absolutely nothing can target me. That is immensly powerful. Not only can you do many things with impunity without breaking invisibility, but there's also the issue of Mislead (reapplying regular Invisibility every round) and clones (SR Project Image makes you regularly invisible if I recall - now my clone can cast without breaking my untargetability?). 

Either way, this is a MAJOR point that I still feel uncertain about. For solo playthroughs it will have particular significance, because if there is only one invisible, non-detectable target, no enemy script will cast a single spell because there is nowhere to point it at even if it is AoE (IIRC, SCS used cheesy scripting and small AoE counter-measures to get past this - and still I saw a lot of buffing followed by no action at all as the buffs expired, because AI had nothing else to do). At first, I thought the "demonic opcode" bit was a bit shocking in how it changed the entire targetability mechanics I was used to, but now I'm thinking it would be a very good thing if True Seeing and friends indeed ignored ALL forms of invisibility as far as targeting for the affected individual is concerned (i.e. as an opcode and not a dispel effect). It would just solve so many AI problems in one fell swoop, and relegate low level invisibility magic as a convencience to fool simple folks and monsters, but not high level casters - regardless of what actions you take.

3. I'm not really sure how I would express it, just throwing it out there. I might wright up a guide in the distant future once I've reinstalled the game and reacquianted myself with the exact new mechanics. While it might not be in perfect detail, I think this manner of presentation might be clearer to some users than the outdated flowchart I've seen floating around these threads. 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, urdjur said:

I'm thinking it would be a very good thing if True Seeing and friends indeed ignored ALL forms of invisibility as far as targeting for the affected individual is concerned (i.e. as an opcode and not a dispel effect)

That's exactly how Fiend/Lich/Dragon abilitys work. They are able to see through regardless your invisibility state. They target through script and don't suffer negative penalties for attacking II characters.

The new True Seeing adds the same opcode to whomever cast the spell. You can actually have your characters attack enemies who are completely invisible by leaving their attack nearest script on. "They" can technically see the enemy even if you (on your screen) can't.

Link to comment

2. I think you're right in that SCS can (or at least did, as of previous versions) have certain types of creatures somehow force-target invisible creatures. I can't really do anything about that no matter what I change, though - SCS would be forcing that regardless of whether you have SR installed or not. I also am not sure if it's even incorrect behavior, because some types of creatures have psychic powers that can detect invisible creatures via other means than sight like Non-Detection protects against, so it makes sense. The thing I wanted to know is whether a standard mage e.g. Tolgerias or Karun cheats or not, and from my testing, they do not, though they do have the slight problem of them being able to cast anti-magic attacks like Secret Word through improved invisibility (but not regular invisibility) before they their scripting tells them to then cast True Seeing, rather than the other way around. It's not a huge deal, since they still have to cast both, but it is reversed from how a player has to do it. And if your Non-Detection hasn't dispelled and you put standard invisibility back up even if their True Seeing is still going, they can't detect you again, which is correct.

3. Right on.

Edited by Bartimaeus
Link to comment

OH!!! Light bulb moment! At first I was thinking that your posts (Relay's and Bartimaeus') directly contradicted each other yet again, but then I realized what I had been missing! A classic. You, the player, does not equal the selected character. 😅

What Barti has been saying all along is that if a regular invisibility effect is recast, YOU THE PLAYER, cannot select that enemy as a target, for the simple fact that... well, it's invisible!

It doesn't matter if you select Fred the Fighter or Dave the Diviner with True Seeing active or the Demogorgon himself, you still can't select the target until it breaks its invisibility. Your True Seeing party members are actually smarter though - they can see it, the opcode works as normal. With the right script active, they might even be able to target it with single target spells (at least attacks, as Relay points out). You won't, though. 

It's not that SCS "force targets" invisible creatures. If I understand correctly, all SCS does all the time is use scripts after all. Yeah, sometimes they cast True Seeing if you walk past them Invisible, but there's sense and internal realism to that. And if that is so, then it won't matter if you recast Invisibility, because they still have the opcode, and their script, and they still see you. 

It's the player that gets gimped by regular invisibility, whether recast or pristine. Not the in-game characters, whether PC or NPC. Does that about sum it up?

Link to comment
2 hours ago, urdjur said:

OH!!! Light bulb moment! At first I was thinking that your posts (Relay's and Bartimaeus') directly contradicted each other yet again, but then I realized what I had been missing! A classic. You, the player, does not equal the selected character. 😅

What Barti has been saying all along is that if a regular invisibility effect is recast, YOU THE PLAYER, cannot select that enemy as a target, for the simple fact that... well, it's invisible!

It doesn't matter if you select Fred the Fighter or Dave the Diviner with True Seeing active or the Demogorgon himself, you still can't select the target until it breaks its invisibility. Your True Seeing party members are actually smarter though - they can see it, the opcode works as normal. With the right script active, they might even be able to target it with single target spells (at least attacks, as Relay points out). You won't, though. 

It's not that SCS "force targets" invisible creatures. If I understand correctly, all SCS does all the time is use scripts after all. Yeah, sometimes they cast True Seeing if you walk past them Invisible, but there's sense and internal realism to that. And if that is so, then it won't matter if you recast Invisibility, because they still have the opcode, and their script, and they still see you. 

It's the player that gets gimped by regular invisibility, whether recast or pristine. Not the in-game characters, whether PC or NPC. Does that about sum it up?

Yeah, I don't think Relay has contradicted me at any point - we're just adding on to each other explanations. Some specific creature types like fiends and dragons are special and can always see through any kind of invisibility, regular, improved, with or without Non-Detection - it doesn't matter. But for non-special creature types (i.e. players, other demi-human creatures, and most regular monster types), the rules should be pretty consistent between everybody. If Tolgerias wants to target your Non-Detection + Improved Invisibility character with single-target spellcasting, he'll need to wait for you to reveal yourself (as anti-invisibility spells like True Seeing can't dispel the standard invisibility effect when protected by Non-Detection), then he'll be able to cast True Seeing to target you through the improved invisibility effect with single-target spells. A SCS quirk is that once your character has revealed themselves, he'll actually try to dispel your Non-Detection with antimagic attacks like Secret Word first BEFORE casting True Seeing, but the result is pretty similar to what the player has to do, just slightly out of order (actually, if anything, the player has the advantage, because the player can simply wait for a spellcaster like Tolgerias to cancel their standard invisibility by attacking you, then you can cast True Seeing without bothering to dispel the Non-Detection and you can start directly targeting him with other single target spells). Obviously, it'd be nice if it was the other way around, but it's not really a huge deal. Creatures like fiends don't have to do any of that crap because they always see through invisibility literally all of the time, and that's probably for the best.

Edited by Bartimaeus
Link to comment

That is interesting! So how has the difference between fiends and regular casters using True Seeing been implemented in SRv4? I mean, according to Relay they are using the same opcode, so what is causing Tolgerias in your example to "unsee" me when I cast regular Invisibility (or before it is broken), while fiends are unaffected?

Link to comment

If Tolgerias has True Seeing active he will be able to "see" through your regular invisibility. The point is that he actually has to cast it before he can target you. Whereas a Fiend Can immediately PW stun you or w/e.

It also means that, if he begins casting directly at you before he has True Seeing active, you can stealth to break his line of sight and cancel his spell, as opposed to a Lich who will continue to see you regardless.

**There are many caveat's to this scenario, SCS mages will often cast AOE spells or Spells which don't technically need to target anyone *cough* Planetar *cough* directly "AT" you. These spells won't be cancelled by stealthing. Only Direct single target spells. 

Edited by Relay
Link to comment
Guest Slingerbult

Wonderful! All in all, the player and computer side are pretty balanced then. Players will have trouble targeting (or rather: selecting) through regular invisibility (making Mislead a nightmare if you’re unprepared), but lax AI on SCS casters will sometimes backfire and you can fool them twice if they didn’t bother with True Seeing.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Relay said:

If Tolgerias has True Seeing active he will be able to "see" through your regular invisibility. The point is that he actually has to cast it before he can target you. Whereas a Fiend Can immediately PW stun you or w/e.

It also means that, if he begins casting directly at you before he has True Seeing active, you can stealth to break his line of sight and cancel his spell, as opposed to a Lich who will continue to see you regardless.

**There are many caveat's to this scenario, SCS mages will often cast AOE spells or Spells which don't technically need to target anyone *cough* Planetar *cough* directly "AT" you. These spells won't be cancelled by stealthing. Only Direct single target spells. 

From what I tested with both SRR and SCS installed, what you said about Tolgerias/other regular casters (I tested both him and Karun) is not true. Once he casts True Seeing, if you put up invisibility and Non-Detection again, he just sits there and does nothing until you break your invisibility again (presuming he has no other targets, of course). It seemed like their scripts respected the Non-Detection + Invisibility combo where fiends and Firkraag (what I tested) did not, even with True Seeing currently active. Perhaps you have different test results, though?

Link to comment

I play with Spell Revisions: v4 Beta 16 (Revised V1.0.6).

Ogres berserker (monster summing V) are still not using berserk rage abiliy when this spell is cast by the player. 

Call woddland beings (level 4) hamadryads and nymph don't match what the spell description indicate.  Hamadryads have no spell books, only a few innate ability etc..

 

Link to comment

Dryad's spells appear to be correct, while yeah, something's up with Hamadryads, will fix (looking at non-Revised SR's Hamadryad, it appears to be an inherited issue). Ogre Berserkers do correctly use their Berserk ability in combat (confirmed with a clean install with just SRR), except when you install some unknown component of SCS (confirmed with installing SCS after a clean install of SRR). Not sure why SCS is affecting that, since I think @DavidW has previously said that mod-added scripts are usually left untouched. Danged thing. The Ogre Berserker has every script entry blank except for its default script, which is set to dvbrsker - really shouldn't be affected by SCS.

Edited by Bartimaeus
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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.

×
×
  • Create New...