Wizard slayers & ranged attacks

[CamDawg]

...from a discussion over at SP.

 

From the Wizard Slayer kit description:

 

- For each successful hit on an opponent, 10% cumulative spell failure penalty is applied.

 

This miscast effect is only applied with melee attacks, not ranged. Bug or intentional?

[berelinde]

If it says it in the kit description, but does not appear in the game, I'd call that a bug.

 

If it appeared in the game, but not in the kit description, I'd call it an added feature.

 

So it's a bug.

[pro5]

I wouldn't change it (meaning: just update the description).

[Salk]

My guess is that the devs have decided to go only for melee for game balance. A Wizard Slayer with ranged attacks causing 10% cumulative spell failure might both look too powerful and make the archer class less appetitive...

 

But personally I believe there are no reasons for not granting Wizard Slayer their bonus with ranged attacks unless one of us finds a logical reason to justify it. What would a Wizard Slayer specifically do in Melee that causes a 10% spell failure on successfull hit if not inflict a physical damage ?

[Gorilym]

While it may have been intentional to preserve game balance, such an explanation doesn't really make sense to me as the wizard slayer is a decidedly underpowered kit in the vanilla game IMO. Even if the 10% cum. spell failure was applied to all attacks, an archer would still be a better ranged combatant and the other fighter kits better at melee. Having the effect actually match the description would go some way towards making the wizard slayer a better... wizard slayer.

 

So, I think it's a bug.

[Smoketest]

Most of BG2's kits are taken from various publications; I can't remember if I saw Wizard Slayer the other night (or the kit it may be inspired from), but then I wasn't looking specifically for that information. (I did see Barbarian as I was scanning.) I think the Complete Fighter book has several such 'kits'. I would use that as a determining factor, but again I'm one who prefers to implement pnp rules in a game that claims to be based on said rules.

 

If the Wizard Slayer requires physical contact with the target in order to drain their magic resistance, then I'd say ranged attacks shouldn't work. I'd say the same thing if someone asked why a vampire couldn't level drain someone while using a bow. It's the touch that matters.

[Salk]

Smoketest,

 

your theory might be sensible if a Wizard Slayer had non weapon melee attacks but we both know that it's never so.

 

There might be no touch but the weapon's inflicting damage. Vampires bite...

[Smoketest]

Smoketest,

 

your theory might be sensible if a Wizard Slayer had non weapon melee attacks but we both know that it's never so.

 

There might be no touch but the weapon's inflicting damage. Vampires bite...

I was thinking the Wizard Slayer's anti-magic might travel through his weapon so the stricken opponent would become 'touched', which is why I used that word. I should probably try to be more indepth/clear, since most people can't seem to see what I'm saying behind the words I type, and thus 90% of my posts are misread.

[Azazello]

I should probably try to be more indepth/clear...

Yes please.

 

There's one other member here who I would love to write the same thing. Just waiting...

 

...since most people can't seem to see what I'm saying behind the words I type, and thus 90% of my posts are misread.

[Salk]

Smoketest,

 

your view on how the "antimagic" travels from the body to "energize" a melee weapon could be adapted accordingly to suit ranged attacks too (with arrows/bolts/stones "positively" charged before being shot...)

 

But I find all this a bit far-fetched in both your version and this one...

[Drew]

I don't think this needs to be a divisive issue. It seems like textbook OBC material to me.

[SimDing0]

There might be no touch but the weapon's inflicting damage. Vampires bite...

I actually think I recall reading in some PnP handbook or other that they can level drain you if they touch your armour, but yes, that's stupid and in BG2 terms I think we can assume they're getting a bite in.

[Gorilym]

I don't think this needs to be a divisive issue. It seems like textbook OBC material to me.

 

Yeah, it's hardly an outright bugfix, but I think it might make a good OBC component.

[CamDawg]

But it needs fixing, one way or the other. Either the description needs to be clarified to melee-only to match the ability, or the ability needs to include ranged attacks to match the description.

[Gorilym]

OK, how about changing the description to read melee-only as part of the core fixes, and change the ability to include ranged attacks as an OBC component (reverting the description change, naturally)?