SR Revised V1.3.900 (2022 August 8th)

[Bartimaeus]

DEMGLASU.cre is used for the 8th level arcane "Summon Fiend" in SR/R. But if your version only has a mere 70 current HP and is seemingly weak, then at some point something overrode/edited the SR/R version, because I just checked the .cre file and that sucker should have 160 HP with 4 ApR and 2 base THAC0 and...yeah, you're gonna notice that real quick. Not sure what exactly, though - if it's SCS, then I guess I should probably give the SR version of it its own unique resource name. If you find that that's the case, please let me know. Maybe it'd be smart to do that anyways.

(e): Yes, Summon Death Knight is supposed to be a 7th level arcane (and divine) spell. Fiends are intentionally a bit more powerful than comparative summoning spells for the fact that they are unpredictable and uncontrollable.

Edited October 14, 2021 by Bartimaeus

[subtledoctor]

22 hours ago, Bartimaeus said:

I feel like I've learned everything that you just said probably around 4-5 times throughout the years, but I never remember the details.

Yup, me too. That post only came together after I combing though 3 older threads where I had discussed this stuff with more knowledgeable people like kreso, kjeron, and galactygon.

8 hours ago, Lord_Tansheron said:

I guess it's just a sad reality of the way SCS works that many mage fights are a binary mess where you either win very quickly or lose very quickly.

I don't know, I just played the Tolgerias fight with SR+SCS+my own "MBR" spell system tweaks. It was pretty satisfying - Tolgerias is like 18th level (he has access to Time Stop) and his lackey is probably 12th or so... while I had a 12th-level mage and two 11th-level mages, plus a few tanks. The AI's opening salvo was a Chain Contingency which summoned a nishruu, a djinni, and an efreet, which are all durable and annoying.  I summoned some fodder at Tolgerias and split my party to deal with the genies and the lackey mage. That took some time but I did it eventually, and then really squared off against Tolgerias, who had started summoning cornugons. In each phase of the fight I really felt like I had to chip away at the enemies' defenses and work to "crack the shell," if you will, to eventually make them vulnerable. (In the end, after breaking his spell protections, I managed to tag Tolgerias with a Feeblemind which was super satisfying.) I thought it really went well... how much of that was a normal SCS mage fight and how much is thanks to my personal tweaks, I don't know.

Only worrying thing is that somehow Tolgerias removed all of my Spell Deflections by casting Remove Magic, which is lame and should not have happened... investigating... the Deflection effects are tagged as "not dispellable" so how did that happen...? Ah, I see: it's because of Polytope's Dispel Magic mod. I really like the way he sets up the chance of success with that tweak. But for some reason, instead of using opcode 58 with param2=0 ("always dispel"), it uses 8 op220 effects, removing all protections from every spell school... which includes spell protections. Whoops! Uninstalling that mod now... hmm, should I change to a basic op58 effect, or should experiment a bit and try out the "remove one combat & specific protection" thing we've been talking about?

7 hours ago, FixTesteR said:

Sometimes the game just doesn't give you enough information about enemies. Wouldn't it be cool if there was a mod that introduced books of knowledge about creatures in Faerun all around city libraries alongside Sword Coast? Now that would be another layer of immersion.

Heh heh, careful... I once, not-entirely-seriously, suggested something similar (or an alternative like: display the GOI visual on liches since their immunity acts precisely like a greater GOI) and was savagely attacked by DavidW and a few others for having the temerity to suggest such heresy.

Edited October 14, 2021 by subtledoctor

[subtledoctor]

On 10/13/2021 at 2:11 AM, Bartimaeus said:

You know, I guess I was kind of assuming that if you want Spell Deflection to block Dispel/Remove Magic, you obviously must also want Globe of Invulnerability to do the same.

Just a note: it occurs to me that the reason to make this distinction is the same as the reason to use SCS 'More Consistent Breach' or my own 'Breachier Breach' tweaks: we want casters to be able to protect their combat protections, e.g. with Deflection/Spell Shield, just as they now can with Breach. But we don't (necessarily) want Remove Magic to be completely off the table when fighting enemies with spell level immunities like liches and rakshasa. Especially if Remove Magic is toned down to only remove a single combat and specific protection, it seems reasonable to be able to use it against them.

How to do it is another question... but as I'm trying to fix my current install, I realized the answer: 1) include Remove Magic in the "Deflection Blocks AoE" system, i.e. give the outer projectile spell apply op146 to cast an individual-target subspell; and 2) give the effects of the subspell power level = 9; and 3) add a dummy effect at the beginning of the subspell with power level = 3. That way RM will affect liches and rakshasa, and will bypass GOI, and will be blocked by Spell Deflection, and will knock off 3 spell levels of protection from the active Deflection.

That may only be desired by a few... but it is achievable.

EDIT - and RM needs to cast SPWI513C, and all Deflections need op206 protection against SPWI513C... although, again, in the pre-EE engine it's not a good idea to put timed 206 effects in Deflection spells...

Edited October 14, 2021 by subtledoctor

[Bartimaeus]

3 minutes ago, subtledoctor said:

give the effects of the subspell power level = 9;

Is there a difference between 9 and 0 here so long as the first effect is a 3?

[subtledoctor]

26 minutes ago, Bartimaeus said:

Is there a difference between 9 and 0 here so long as the first effect is a 3?

I don't think so. My mod changes Spell Trap to give op102 spell-level immunity against spell levels 1-9... it's basically like a 'Perfect Globe of Invulnerability.' This, so that is protects against stuff that the AoE Deflection system might miss, like cloud/stationary/repeating effects. Because of this, I personally set the secondary effects of stuff like RM and Breach to level 9, so they are effective against liches but don't bypass Spell Trap.

If SRR uses a more traditional version of Spell Trap then these effects could be set to power = 0, yes.

[Guest Alkaid]

8 hours ago, Bartimaeus said:

DEMGLASU.cre is used for the 8th level arcane "Summon Fiend" in SR/R. But if your version only has a mere 70 current HP and is seemingly weak, then at some point something overrode/edited the SR/R version, because I just checked the .cre file and that sucker should have 160 HP with 4 ApR and 2 base THAC0 and...yeah, you're gonna notice that real quick. Not sure what exactly, though - if it's SCS, then I guess I should probably give the SR version of it its own unique resource name. If you find that that's the case, please let me know. Maybe it'd be smart to do that anyways.

(e): Yes, Summon Death Knight is supposed to be a 7th level arcane (and divine) spell. Fiends are intentionally a bit more powerful than comparative summoning spells for the fact that they are unpredictable and uncontrollable.

Hm, weird. DEMGLASU.CRE is only used by the 7th level priest spell added by Subtle's Faiths n Powers which apparently shouldn't exist, that one has current HP set to 70 on the creature file itself (but not in any of the copies the changelog utility generates. Not sure exactly how those work though, if the last thing on the list is the thing actually in the game pretty sure it has to be SCS.) I'll check the attack stats tomorrow but it may be the right amount. Note it's 70 current hp out of 160 so it spawns badly injured which is kind of weird. It's also controllable. I don't know if that stuff is handled by the spell or the creature file though.

 

Your 8th level ARCANE summon fiend uses DWDVGLAB.CRE and seems to function as intended.

@subtledoctor

If absolutely none of my priests have the Summon Death Knight spell, I imagine that would he because I didn't add it to one of your spheres or something, right?

[Bartimaeus]

1 hour ago, Guest Alkaid said:

Hm, weird. DEMGLASU.CRE is only used by the 7th level priest spell added by Subtle's Faiths n Powers which apparently shouldn't exist, that one has current HP set to 70 on the creature file itself (but not in any of the copies the changelog utility generates. Not sure exactly how those work though, if the last thing on the list is the thing actually in the game pretty sure it has to be SCS.) I'll check the attack stats tomorrow but it may be the right amount. Note it's 70 current hp out of 160 so it spawns badly injured which is kind of weird. It's also controllable. I don't know if that stuff is handled by the spell or the creature file though.

 

Your 8th level ARCANE summon fiend uses DWDVGLAB.CRE and seems to function as intended.

@subtledoctor

If absolutely none of my priests have the Summon Death Knight spell, I imagine that would he because I didn't add it to one of your spheres or something, right?

Whatever is the last component shown in the changelog is the one responsible for what is currently in your override. Likewise, if you go up an item in the changelog, then whatever is in the backup folder for that particular component is what the file looked like BEFORE said component made any changes to it (it's the backed-up version of the file in case of that component being uninstalled!). So if that is indeed SCS, it seems as though I would need to make a change there.

[subtledoctor]

2 hours ago, Guest Alkaid said:

@subtledoctor

If absolutely none of my priests have the Summon Death Knight spell, I imagine that would he because I didn't add it to one of your spheres or something, right?

I don’t really remember... it’s a bit weird because the divine fiend summon is Gate, but on the arcane side Gate is 9th level and Death Knight replaces the lower-level fiend summon. (And for the record, I still think summoning and controlling a death knight with a 7th-level spell is outrageous.) I think maybe FnP turns Gate into an HLA... maybe. If so, and if SR straight overwrites the divine version of Gate with Death Knight, then that’s where it is. 

[Lianos]

11 hours ago, Guest Alkaid said:

If absolutely none of my priests have the Summon Death Knight spell, I imagine that would he because I didn't add it to one of your spheres or something, right?

AFAIK only neutral and evil priests get this spell.

[FixTesteR]

21 hours ago, Cahir said:

This would be fantastic. Normally I would throw such kind of idea on G3 forum over the weekend, hoping that next day when I woke up I'll see a new shiny mod released by @CamDawg, but this is something that cannot be done over the weekend

Maybe books on forgotten realms already have great descriptions of monsters. Or some monster manuals. So it can be a matter of almost c/p. Then, one would only need to add a few technical data in-between the text, mentioning some spell names and levels. Iirc, two or three tomes do exist in Vanilla, a work of Elminster, but they only mention a few specific monsters, nothing groundbreaking.

I wonder how I'll fare against liches. It's time for Durlag now. See you then.

[FixTesteR]

17 hours ago, subtledoctor said:

That way RM will affect liches and rakshasa, and will bypass GOI

Isn't it true that GoI can be brought down by a successful dispel magic? But you think of changing this behavior so that it bypasses in and doesn't dispell it?

[Guest Alkaid]

1 hour ago, Lianos said:

AFAIK only neutral and evil priests get this spell.

Viconia doesn't have it either. 

11 hours ago, Bartimaeus said:

Whatever is the last component shown in the changelog is the one responsible for what is currently in your override. Likewise, if you go up an item in the changelog, then whatever is in the backup folder for that particular component is what the file looked like BEFORE said component made any changes to it (it's the backed-up version of the file in case of that component being uninstalled!). So if that is indeed SCS, it seems as though I would need to make a change there.

Ah, if that's the case then it should be SCS that's making its current HP value be set to 70 then. Though again as I noted, for whatever reason the arcane Summon Fiend spell isn't even using that creature ID, it's using something else created by SCS. By the looks of it, SCS seems to have created a new file (DWDVGLAB.CRE) and then pointed the arcane Summon Fiend at it.

[WeiDU.exe] WeiDU version 24600

Mods affecting DWDVGLAB.CRE:
00000: /* created or unbiffed */ ~STRATAGEMS\SETUP-STRATAGEMS.TP2~ 0 5900 // Initialise AI components (required for all tactical and AI components)34.3

[WeiDU.exe] WeiDU version 24600

Mods affecting SPWI807.SPL:
00000: /* created or unbiffed */ ~SPELL_REV\SETUP-SPELL_REV.TP2~ 0 0 // Spell Revisionsv4 Beta 18 (Revised V1.3.500)
00001:  ~TOMEANDBLOOD\TOMEANDBLOOD.TP2~ 0 1201 // Rebalanced Arcane Opposition SchoolsNo Opposition Schools0.9.18
00002:  ~TOMEANDBLOOD\TOMEANDBLOOD.TP2~ 0 14 // Revised Invisibility and True Seeing0.9.18
00003:  ~TOMEANDBLOOD\TOMEANDBLOOD.TP2~ 0 40 // Revised Specialists0.9.18
00004:  ~TOMEANDBLOOD\TOMEANDBLOOD.TP2~ 0 85 // Sorcerer Kit: Mana Sorcerer0.9.18
00005:  ~MIGHT_AND_GUILE\MIGHT_AND_GUILE.TP2~ 0 210 // Bard Overhaul: Multiclass Bards4.12.6
00006:  ~STRATAGEMS\SETUP-STRATAGEMS.TP2~ 0 5900 // Initialise AI components (required for all tactical and AI components)34.3

File 00006 that the changelog file generates points at DEMGLASU.CRE.

I'd suggest doing a bit of testing on your own end first though to see if it's just SCS + SR having this interaction, my install is a bit wacky despite just using Subtle's example order with nothing weird thrown in (at least, nothing weird I can see.)
 

[WhodaThunk]

My familiars seem to think they're Tiax. Was driving myself crazy trying to figure out what this issue could possibly be until I ended up going through my install order one by one until the problem cropped up. Turns out it's SRR. Regular SR doesn't have this issue, but the moment I install Revised, it pops up. I searched this thread to see if it was posted about, and I found some from earlier last year, but it seems to have come back.

Screenshot was taken from a completely clean install of BGEE 2.6 with SoD, no DLC merge or anything.

Edited October 15, 2021 by WhodaThunk
clarity

[Bartimaeus]

1 hour ago, WhodaThunk said:

My familiars seem to think they're Tiax. Was driving myself crazy trying to figure out what this issue could possibly be until I ended up going through my install order one by one until the problem cropped up. Turns out it's SRR. Regular SR doesn't have this issue, but the moment I install Revised, it pops up. I searched this thread to see if it was posted about, and I found some from earlier last year, but it seems to have come back.

Screenshot was taken from a completely clean install of BGEE 2.6 with SoD, no DLC merge or anything.

That's very weird, I was pretty sure I made that specifically impossible by re-stringing every creature and weapon specifically for the sake of BG1EE. Let's see here...no, no, you're right, that does appear to happen.

COPY ~spell_rev\spwi1##\famrab.itm~      ~override~
  SAY NAME1 @8218   SAY UNIDENTIFIED_DESC @8036

The description is set correctly, the name...oh, blast, it's probably the fact that it says NAME1 instead of NAME2. I also see that the descriptions have double-set usabilities. Okay, thanks, will fix.

(e): Fixed both of those, plus fixed another compatibility issue between IRR and SRR that could arise to do with making sure that Protection from Missiles, Physical Mirror, Gloves of Missile Snaring, and Reflection Shield protect against SRR/IRR-added projectiles.

Edited October 15, 2021 by Bartimaeus

[DavidW]

On 10/14/2021 at 3:15 AM, FixTesteR said:

Well, the reason why I'm asking some of these questions is that I'm running a no-reload saga playthrough, and liches are very positive candidates to end my whole run. That's why it's vital for me to know the logic of the game. If liches are immune to many spell levels, I can't see why their protections would also be immune. When a lich casts Stoneskin, it casts the same level 4 spell as my mage does. It has the same vulnerability to be removed by Breach, and the lich's personal immunity shouldn't block it. It's the protection that's being targeted by Breach, not lich's immune body.

To comment on this from a design perspective: SCS's design philosophy is to adjust the AI to play as effectively as possible within the existing rule system, and only to modify that rule system if it creates hard blocks, hard counters, or otherwise breaks gameplay. (This isn't SR(R)'s design philosophy, because SR(R) is a spell-revisions mod, not an enemy-AI mod.)

So, from that perspective: in the vanilla game liches are immune to all level 1-5 spells, period. (You can't breach a lich's PMW in unmodded BG2, iirc - in fact I don't think there's any alternative to waiting it out.) So I'm not asking 'does it make sense for this to extend to antimagic attacks' but 'does this extending to antimagic attacks create insuperable problems?' From that POV, it's not a problem that Spell Thrust and Secret Word don't affect liches - there are other, higher level, anti-spell-defense spells, like Ruby Ray, that do affect them. But it is a problem that Breach doesn't affect them, because Breach is singular: no other spell does what it does. Short of adding new higher-level spells (which is again rather outside SCS's scope), letting Breach penetrate liches' defenses (and of course documenting that in the in-game description and mod readme) is the most minimal solution.

Now, SCS has over the years got a bit more relaxed about spell system tweaks, both as it's got more popular (so that I don't need to worry so much about losing audience) and as WEIDU, and my ability to code in WEIDU, has got more sophisticated. These days I might consider just having a blanket rule that antimagic spells ignore level-based immunities - it would certainly be more legible to players, without seriously affecting game balance. There are implementation issues but they're not so serious for anti-spell-defense spells. (For Breach, I have to remove liches' immunity to level 5 spells and then manually grant immunity to all other level-5 spells - I can't just mess with the internal spell level because it's referenced in other game effects, e.g. spell turning. But I *think* that would be less of an issue with Spell Thrust and the like.)