Jump to content
grodrigues

Dealing with anti-spell protections

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, Jarno Mikkola said:

Then perhaps it shouldn't be named as it is.

Take it up with Bioware.

Share this post


Link to post

Spell Immunity, graphically speaking, makes a giant shimmering sphere around you - presumably, the idea is similar to Globe of Invulnerability in that it simply protects against spells coming from outside itself, not from inside or spells that were already applied before the spell went up.

Share this post


Link to post
42 minutes ago, Bartimaeus said:

graphically speaking, makes a giant shimmering sphere around you - presumably ... t simply protects against spells coming from outside itself, not from inside or spells that were already applied before the spell went up.

Yeah, just like the Star Trek shields do. Now, if you could just point me how that is done, without movie magic, I would be happy to let this go. And there's no Spell Immunity Field... so I'll just:

COPY_EXISTING ~spwi590.spl~ ~override~
PATCH_IF (SOURCE_SIZE > 0x113) THEN BEGIN      
LPF ~ADD_SPELL_EFFECT~ INT_VAR opcode = 321 target = 1 parameter1 = 0 parameter2 = 0 timing = 1 resist_dispel = 2 probability1 = 100 STR_VAR resource = EVAL "spwi611" END END

 

Share this post


Link to post
On 6/19/2020 at 4:25 PM, DavidW said:

The more interesting question would be: how *could* a mage, using the unmodded spell system, deal with II+SI:Div? And there I agree, they can't, basically. Add SI:Abj and the logical circle pretty much closes. I realized that very early in the evolution of SCS; Wes Weimer realised it too, which is why every single Tactics mage of level 16+ uses II+Si:Abj+Si:Div in their Spell Trigger.

Yes, I can see that SCS is designed to "fix" this in the most elegant and least intrusive way it can.

Share this post


Link to post

Just a quick update: I experimented with the cloak of non-detection (using IR + SR + SCS). So, it seems to work as in vanilla: It prevents the Thief stealth from being dispelled, so in that sense acts as a perma non-detection for stealthing thieves.

However, it does not act as non-detection for mage invisibility. My sorcerer char's (normal) invisibility was dispelled by true sight while wearing the cloak. On the other hand, the spell non-detection works as expected, and the sorcerer with non-detection + invisibility could not be detected.

So, it seems the item description of the cloak is - as in vanilla - not correct, since it implies non-detection for all those who wear it. But is apparently only for stealth.

Share this post


Link to post
50 minutes ago, crackwise said:

Just a quick update: I experimented with the cloak of non-detection (using IR + SR + SCS). So, it seems to work as in vanilla: It prevents the Thief stealth from being dispelled, so in that sense acts as a perma non-detection for stealthing thieves.

However, it does not act as non-detection for mage invisibility. My sorcerer char's (normal) invisibility was dispelled by true sight while wearing the cloak. On the other hand, the spell non-detection works as expected, and the sorcerer with non-detection + invisibility could not be detected.

So, it seems the item description of the cloak is - as in vanilla - not correct, since it implies non-detection for all those who wear it. But is apparently only for stealth.

Yeah, you're right. Here's the cloak in IR:

DLTCEP_MgHgZqsQ0L.png

Simply the Non-Detection effect, which prevents stealth-ed characters from being dispelled. Here's the cloak in IRR:

DLTCEP_wS5Aq8U8AM.png

I like my version better, :p.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Bartimaeus said:

I like my version better

Not to keep beating a busted drum, but you could, you know, mention stuff like this so that people trying to update IR SR could have information relevant to doing so. There are multiple threads created for that purpose.

This “nyah nyah, mine is better!” is not a good look.

EDIT - also, your version won’t protect against mod-added anti-invisibility spells? It could probably be done better.

Edited by subtledoctor

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, subtledoctor said:

Not to keep beating a busted drum, but you could, you know, mention stuff like this so that people trying to update IR SR could have information relevant to doing so. There are multiple threads created for that purpose.

This “nyah nyah, mine is better!” is not a good look.

EDIT - also, your version won’t protect against mod-added anti-invisibility spells? It could probably be done better.

The point I've made a million times that makes it impossible: I didn't even know IR's version didn't do that, and was working on the assumption that it did. I don't play with IR or SR and I haven't for years, I play with IRR and SRR and that's what I'm familiar with. There are a lot of other IR and SR players, yourself included, that stand a much greater chance of noticing these things than someone who doesn't. At some point in the distant past, I used Cloak of Non-Detection and noticed that it didn't function as per SR's Non-Detection and changed it...but that was the distant past, it's hardly my fault nobody else has apparently used and tested this cloak's properties and noticed it wasn't working as per the SR spell for over half a decade. Additionally, many of IR's spell-like effects/abilities do not clone from SR - that could very well be authorial intent, and therefore it's not necessarily a no-brainer fix that I changed it to do so, but instead a design change that I opted to do. There is a reason I have repeatedly and adamantly stated "these two versions of the mod are irreconcilable for various reasons". Now would you kindly not psychoanalyze any off-the-cuff quips, thank you.

No doubt it could be done better - I simply made it do as SR's Non-Detection did, so you're just saying that SR's Non-Detection could be done better...which it could, but equivalence was what I was going for.

Edited by Bartimaeus

Share this post


Link to post
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...