Luke Posted November 30, 2023 Share Posted November 30, 2023 (edited) Wizard spells: Ice Knife op333 should be flagged as power=1 (so that it can be properly deflected/reflected/trapped) shouldn't the AoE radius of the subspell cast by op333 ("dw-ickns.pro") be 80 (16 * 5) instead of 96...? Stonefist At least on EE games, op45 can naturally display the Stunned icon, there is no need to apply a separate op142... At least on EE games, op7 should support param2=255 (Character Color)... As a result, you might want to apply a single op7 instead of 7 different op7 (one for each color location...) Combustion op321 should be flagged as power=2 (so that it can be properly deflected/reflected/trapped) why are you using an instantaneous projectile instead of projectile=1|None in the main spl file...? I don't think this is an issue, but just unusual...? the subspell cast by op146 ("spwi2a1b") is displaying the magnetized icon... Guess you wanted to display something else, like a recolored Shroud of Flame icon...? Turn Pebble if EEex is installed, please consider the idea of setting BIT23 (savingthrow field) of op39 to 1, so as to bypass CLERIC_CHAOTIC_COMMANDS and friends (I mean, they are not supposed to block it...) If EEex is not installed, you *might* want to abuse the bugged op182 to bypass the immunity... Telekinesis all preset_target effects should be flagged as power=5 (instead of 6...?) unless I'm missing something, there is no check for "The spell is ineffective against any creature of ogre size or larger..." unless I'm missing something, op109 is only meant to temporariliy disable the creature during wing buffet... If that's the case, then you might want to opt for op185...? Telekinetic Storm all effects should be flagged as power=8 Stormbolts only the damage opcode checks for Magic Resistance. Intended...? The Stun effect is not dispellable. Intended...? the spell is not compatible with the Seven Eyes spell. In short, if the targeted creature is protected by EYEMAGE, then it will absorb both the Damage opcode and the Stun opcode, which is not intended... As a result, you might want to break the spell into subspells, one applying op12 and another one applying op45 and its ancillary effects... Alternatively, just make one subspell for op45 and move op12 at the end of the effect stack... [iwdee] op139 in the subspell is displaying "Grisella's Dale Ale" instead of "Stunned"... At least on EE games, op45 can naturally display the Stunned icon, there is no need to apply a separate op142... Veridon's Icy Ray the Damage opcode in the main spl file bypasses Mirror Image. Intended...? Asking because the spell is single target, not AoE... Spell description states "... slows the creature for 10 rounds...", but it actually stuns it for 1 round...? Edited November 30, 2023 by Luke Quote Link to comment
Luke Posted November 30, 2023 Author Share Posted November 30, 2023 (edited) Priest spells: Faerie Fire At least on EE games, op7 and op9 should support param2=255 (Character Color)... As a result, you might want to apply a single opcode instead of 7 different opcodes (one for each color location...) Spell Projectile should probably be 1|None instead of 0|Default op321 and op318 are referencing a non-existing resource, i.e. "FAER_PLC"... Strength of Stone At least on EE games, op176 should use param2=5 (Multiplicative stacking percentage modifier), so as not to override Grease, Entangle and friends... As of now, if the priest is entangled and casts this spell, then it can move even if entangled... Protection From Good 10' Radius Projectile Radius is actually 16 (256=16*16), not 10... Fiendish Warding At least on EE games, the subspell cast by op201 when it terminates prematurely (i.e., when it can no longer absorb spells) should be "sppr7a0b"... Just leave the resref field of op201 blank, it will be cast automatically when the effect self-terminates... The subspell should of course apply an op321 effect targeting its parent, along with a feedback sound effect (you can take "spwi701" and "spwi701b" as templates...) Edited November 30, 2023 by Luke Quote Link to comment
DavidW Posted November 30, 2023 Share Posted November 30, 2023 super-helpful, thanks. (I'm not assuming EEEx, though.) Quote Link to comment
DavidW Posted November 30, 2023 Share Posted November 30, 2023 Oh, the reason I'm using an instantaneous projectile is that it plays more nicely with Timestop. (I do this as a general patch in v35, in fact.) If you use projectile=none, a spell comes in instantly, even in Timestop. If you use an instantaneous projectile, it resolves immediately after the Timestop ends. Quote Link to comment
Luke Posted November 30, 2023 Author Share Posted November 30, 2023 2 hours ago, DavidW said: (I'm not assuming EEEx, though.) Well, should be relatively easy to support it... And by the way, I also provided an alternative if EEex is not installed... Again, since that opcode does not work as expected, why not abusing it...? 2 hours ago, DavidW said: Oh, the reason I'm using an instantaneous projectile is that it plays more nicely with Timestop. (I do this as a general patch in v35, in fact.) If you use projectile=none, a spell comes in instantly, even in Timestop. If you use an instantaneous projectile, it resolves immediately after the Timestop ends. Right. I'm wondering if this patch should also be part of the fixpack... Probably not, there would be too many resources to check... Quote Link to comment
Galactygon Posted December 1, 2023 Share Posted December 1, 2023 15 hours ago, Luke said: Right. I'm wondering if this patch should also be part of the fixpack... Probably not, there would be too many resources to check... Not a bad idea. Such an extensive change would need to be discussed first imo. Quote Link to comment
DavidW Posted December 3, 2023 Share Posted December 3, 2023 OK, going through these - if I don't mention a suggestion, I've implemented it. Ice knife Power=0 for the 333 is intentional - I want the secondary explosion to happen even if the target is immune to 1st level spells Stonefist Yes, I could do all the colors at once, but I'm not sure I see any active advantage in changing it Turn Pebble to Boulder I'd rather not assume EEEx or abuse a bug, at least not at this stage Stormbolts I'm happy to interpret the stunning effect as a side effect of the electrical damage and so as blocked by Eye of the Mage Veridon's Icy Ray It's intentional that it bypasses MI, on balance grounds: it's a single-target 9th level spell, it shouldn't be blocked by a 2nd level illusion. My interpretation is that it's quite a wide ray. (arguably this should be documented but not on this update cycle) I honestly can't remember whether I intended the ray to slow or stun. I've reverted to stun for now. Quote Link to comment
DavidW Posted December 3, 2023 Share Posted December 3, 2023 Onto the divine spells (again, I've implemented anything I don't explicitly mention): Faerie Fire I again don't really mind using multiple opcodes for color. It makes back-conversion to oBG2 easier, for one thing. Protection from Good 10-foot radius The projectile is the same one used by the Protection from Evil spell, so I'd rather be consistent there. Thanks again for such a careful set of comments. Quote Link to comment
Galactygon Posted December 3, 2023 Share Posted December 3, 2023 19 minutes ago, DavidW said: Ice knife Power=0 for the 333 is intentional - I want the secondary explosion to happen even if the target is immune to 1st level spells If the target has Spell Turning then the explosion will not be turned while the projectile (and rest of the effects) will be. Mordenkainen's Force Missiles and IWD Chain Lightning also have this conundrum (opcode 102 on primary target will stop the chain /area of effect). So far I haven't found a way to bypass this sort of behavior (selectively ignore opcode 102 while still respecting turnings/reflections) without some other drawbacks unless @Luke or @kjeron have found another way. Quote Link to comment
DavidW Posted December 3, 2023 Share Posted December 3, 2023 Interesting point. OK, that's persuasive. Quote Link to comment
Galactygon Posted December 3, 2023 Share Posted December 3, 2023 (edited) The only spell where it's worth tinkering with different power values is Breach (first dummy effect uses power = 5, rest use power = 7 or 8 ) if the intention is to have it bypass Lich/Rakshasa immunities + GoI but still be turnable by Spell Turning. Msectype will need to be something other than MAGICATTACK which is hardcoded to bypass turnings/deflections/traps. AFAIK the game uses the power level of the first turnable/deflectable effect to determine how much to decrement the levels remaining in turning/deflection/trap effects. The rest of the effects that use a higher power level are still turned (since Spell Turning/Trap reacts to power=1-9) but are not used for calculation. Luckily, there's no spell/ability in the game that turns/deflects/traps level 5 spells but not level 7-8 spells, so this trick can be used for once. Edited December 3, 2023 by Galactygon Quote Link to comment
Luke Posted December 3, 2023 Author Share Posted December 3, 2023 (edited) 40 minutes ago, Galactygon said: So far I haven't found a way to bypass this sort of behavior (selectively ignore opcode 102 while still respecting turnings/reflections) If I'm not wrong, non-decrementing reflection opcodes (f.i. op202) work like that with respect to op146*p2=2 / op326 / op333, i.e.: the subspell cast by those opcodes gets reflected and at the same time affects the primary target. Prior to v2.6, that was also true for decrementing reflection opcodes (such as op200...) So this behavior was flagged as a bug and got fixed for the decrementing reflection opcodes but not for the non-decrementing ones... Edited December 3, 2023 by Luke Quote Link to comment
Galactygon Posted December 3, 2023 Share Posted December 3, 2023 4 minutes ago, Luke said: Prior to v2.6, that was also true for decrementing reflection opcodes (such as op200...) So this behavior was flagged as a bug and got fixed for the decrementing reflection opcodes but not for the non-decrementing ones... Quote Link to comment
Luke Posted December 3, 2023 Author Share Posted December 3, 2023 52 minutes ago, Galactygon said: Yeah, it's a mess... Also because it was me that brought this up to your attention... I mean, probably the pre v2.6 behavior is desirable only if the subspell's projectile is AoE (Vitriolic Sphere, Mordenkainen's Force Missiles, Shroud of Flame, etc...), whereas the new v2.6 behavior should only apply if the subspell's projectile is single target...? Quote Link to comment
Galactygon Posted December 4, 2023 Share Posted December 4, 2023 333s, 326s, 146 p2=2 should behave just like any other opcode in terms of turning/deflection/trap so it's a bug in 2.6.6 if they do not work in nondecrementing reflections/deflections. Force Missiles, Vitriolic Spheres, initial casting of Shrouds of Flame, and even the initial leg of IWD Chain Lightning should be completely reflected/deflected/trapped which would have knock-on effects onto secondary targets. Force Missiles and Vitriolic Spheres with their explosions should be completely reflected/deflected/trapped if the initial target is protected which should protect additional targets adjacent to the initial target. Once a Chain Lightning or Shroud of Flame has hit the initial target, subsequent legs should ignore/bypass any reflections, deflections, and traps because those effects are applied via an area of effect projectile. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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.