Way too many creatures are immune to 175

[DavidW]

(I'm assuming a general framework for thinking about opcodes 109, 175 and 185 which I laid out here.)

The classic games are *very* sparing about granting creatures immunity to opcode 175. In BG1 it's *exclusively* for spells and items that grant Hold protection. BG2 extends it to some boss monsters (for whom hold effects can break scripting) and to dragons, beholders and kuo-toa (the last two don't make sense to me and I'll probably remove it in SCS but I'm not sure I can justify that in a fixpack).

The EEs extend 175 very profligately. I haven't worked out their precise algorithm but I suspect that pretty much anything immune to 109 is now immune to 175. (Undead are immune to it, for instance.) That goes against the design architecture of original BG1, where 175 uses IDS targeting to avoid affecting certain sorts of creatures, and I don't see any good reason for it (note that the FP doesn't do it). The in-game effects aren't *all* that serious, but it does mean that Hold Monster doesn't affect many creatures (e.g. undead) that it used to affect, contrary to what happened in the classic games.

It's possible there's some logic here that I'm missing (I'd welcome Cam's inside insight) but I strongly suspect that Beamdog had just lost track of what the intended logic of 109/175 was and thought they were just being careful.

I suggest we strip out the extra 175s except where there's a clearly good reason and return to classic behavior.

[CamDawg]

Yes, this is an old BG2FP holdover and I'm in favor of rolling the majority of these back.