cameltoe Posted December 25, 2006 Share Posted December 25, 2006 Ok... I protected my sorc with Spell Immunity: Evocation but at least following spells were able to hurt him: - Fireball - Cloudkill - Deathfog Unless I read the spell descriptions wrong fifty times in a row, all of those three are described as evocation spells. Am I missing something here? Version of the game: BG2 with TOB installed, patched with latest official TOB patch Mods: Tested with and without BG2 fixpack. No other mods. Link to comment
Luiz Posted December 26, 2006 Share Posted December 26, 2006 I believe, though I'm not absolutely certain, that Spell Immunity:{x} will only protect against spells targeted at the character, not area-effect spells such as you've listed. Someone smarter than me in the ways of the game engine should be able to confirm this. Link to comment
Nythrun Posted December 26, 2006 Share Posted December 26, 2006 There're a few area of effect spells that will punch through spell protections of this kind (mostly, casters are not protected from their own spells). This is slightly less straightforward than spell-level-immunity stuff, though - because Spell Immunity states that it protects against all spells of a given school and it's never provided any "protection" from self only buffs or a good many other harmless spells either. The only real fix would be adding a whole dumb pile of specific spell immunities to each spell-immunity-subspell (there are forty-two transmutation spells off of the wizard and cleric lists alone!). It's not difficult to change, it's just questionable whether or not the consistent fix is worth it, I think. Link to comment
cameltoe Posted December 26, 2006 Author Share Posted December 26, 2006 Yea I guess you're right.... I really thought I found a cheap way to protect my sorc from bunch of spells without any hassle. I guess it was too good to be true. I'll just stick to 'protect from fire/acid/whatever' spells before blasting/gassing places. The spell description should still warn 'won't protect from area effect damage spells'. Link to comment
Ardanis Posted December 29, 2006 Share Posted December 29, 2006 Such fix IS worth it. It's one of the most notable things in my to-be-fixed-for-my-next-game list. Especailly since that immunities ARE bugged - they do protect from hostile area affecting spells. So, if you're going to fix that it'll be good. Link to comment
Nythrun Posted December 29, 2006 Share Posted December 29, 2006 It'd have to be stress-tested: I've never had any luck picking out the threshold of active effects where the game starts to slow to a damaging degree (by which I mean variables don't always get set and menu-based spells like Spell Immunity don't always complete). It seems to vary, a lot, and moreso with items than spells. Ascension Irenicus would probably be an acceptible acid test - I've no time for it this week, but I ought to next week, if someone else hasn't checked first The way spell immunity works now isn't ideal; we just have to be careful we don't knead worse bugs into the fixings. Road to hell and all that. Link to comment
Salk Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 I must say I second Ardanis fully here about this. The protection from a school of magic shouldn't make a difference between AOE and non AOE spells. I am no modder so I don't want to put the burden on anybody, especially on Nythrun who is already working so hard (thanks!). Just wanted to say my 2 cents... Link to comment
devSin Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 I hate these spells; they already horribly break everything, so we may as well break them some more. The engine can handle appropriately massive effect lists; there shouldn't be that many spells to add, however (only cloud- and trap-projectile spells of the appropriate school). Link to comment
Nythrun Posted December 31, 2006 Share Posted December 31, 2006 All spells of this school will not be able to harm or aid the caster for the duration of this spell. This includes all spells from this school, including any priest spells that might benefit the caster. In the case of evocation, it's only fifty-five spells off of the wizard and cleric lists: SPPR206.SPL // Flame Blade SPPR207.SPL // Good Berries SPPR213.SPL // Spiritual Hammer SPPR214.SPL // Draw Upon Holy Might SPPR412.SPL // Holy Power SPPR503.SPL // Flame Strike SPPR603.SPL // Blade Barrier SPPR603D.SPL // Blade Barrier SPPR609.SPL // False Dawn SPPR612.SPL // Bolt of Glory SPPR614.SPL // Sol's Searing Orb SPPR698.SPL // Blade Barrier SPPR698D.SPL // Blade Barrier SPPR705.SPL // Fire Storm SPPR707.SPL // Sunray SPPR725.SPL // Globe of Blades SPPR725D.SPL // Globe of Blades SPPR730.SPL // Aura of Flaming Death SPPR730D.SPL // Aura of Flaming Death SPPR951D.SPL // Fire Shield (Blue) SPPR952D.SPL // Fire Shield (Red) SPWI112.SPL // Magic Missile SPWI114.SPL // Shield SPWI118.SPL // Chromatic Orb SPWI213.SPL // Stinking Cloud SPWI215.SPL // Web SPWI217.SPL // Agannazar's Scorcher SPWI304.SPL // FireBall SPWI308.SPL // Lightning Bolt SPWI325.SPL // Melf's Minute Meteors SPWI403.SPL // Fire Shield (Blue) SPWI403D.SPL // Fire Shield (Blue) SPWI404.SPL // Ice Storm SPWI418.SPL // Fire Shield (Red) SPWI418D.SPL // Fire Shield (Red) SPWI420.SPL // Minor Sequencer SPWI420D.SPL // Minor Spell Sequencer SPWI502.SPL // Cloud Kill SPWI503.SPL // Cone of Cold SPWI518.SPL // Phantom Blade SPWI523.SPL // Sunfire SPWI614.SPL // Death Fog SPWI615.SPL // Chain Lightning SPWI617.SPL // Contingency SPWI710.SPL // Spell Sequencer SPWI712.SPL // Delayed Blast Fireball SPWI716.SPL // Mordenkainen's Sword SPWI809.SPL // Spell Trigger SPWI810.SPL // Incendiary Cloud SPWI818.SPL // Bigby's Clenched Fist SPWI908.SPL // Chain Contingency SPWI911.SPL // Meteor Swarm SPWI915.SPL // Black Blade of Disaster SPWI918.SPL // Bigby's Crushing Hand SPWI925.SPL // Comet Comet is skippable (Fixpack makes it schoolless), Fireshield/Blade Barrier subspells are skippable, Ice Storm is skippable (unless I'm misremembering, but it didn't bypass caster immunity when I tested the spell level immunity stuff), and there's several single target spells that would only have to be prevented in case of the bounce opcodes. Immunity Invocation is actually used a bit in the game's mage scripts, and of course they happily fire off their faux-contingencies and such without ever checking to see if they've a spell immunity active, so there's something to consider there too (need detectable spells plz!) - cowenf01.bcs, cowenf02.bcs, dragbrow.bcs, mage14a.bcs, mage14b.bcs, mage14m.bcs, mage14t.bcs, mage16a.bcs, mage16b.bcs, mage16m.bcs. Goes without saying that this will muss Tactics and its ilk. Link to comment
devSin Posted December 31, 2006 Share Posted December 31, 2006 I retract my previous note of apathy in favor of one stronger. Y'all can do this if you want, but I'm going to make fun of you later if you do. Link to comment
Guest Guest Posted December 31, 2006 Share Posted December 31, 2006 Wouldn't go so far as to call it risable. Won't be using it in either case, though Link to comment
Guest Nythrun@work Posted January 2, 2007 Share Posted January 2, 2007 So I'm the only one who gets a noticable > half second of lag from from equipping something simple like this, then? COPY_EXISTING ~amul04.itm~ ~override~ READ_LONG 0x6a "eo" READ_SHORT 0x70 "gc" FOR ("i" = 0x0; "i" < 0x200; "i" += 0x1) BEGIN INSERT_BYTES "eo" 0x30 WRITE_SHORT ("eo" + 0x00) 0x6 WRITE_BYTE ("eo" + 0x02) 0x1 WRITE_LONG ("eo" + 0x04) 0x12 WRITE_LONG ("eo" + 0x08) 0x1 WRITE_BYTE ("eo" + 0x0c) 0x2 WRITE_BYTE ("eo" + 0x12) 0x64 SET "gc" += 0x01 END INSERT_BYTES ("eo" + ("gc" * 0x30)) 0x30 WRITE_SHORT ("eo" + 0x00) 0x8e WRITE_BYTE ("eo" + 0x02) 0x1 WRITE_LONG ("eo" + 0x08) 0x3 WRITE_BYTE ("eo" + 0x0c) 0x2 WRITE_BYTE ("eo" + 0x12) 0x64 WRITE_BYTE ("eo" + 0x0d) 0x3 WRITE_SHORT 0x70 ("gc" + 0x1) BUT_ONLY Link to comment
devSin Posted January 2, 2007 Share Posted January 2, 2007 The engine has to parse that from the item file every time. Yuck. It's all in memory with attached effects, and the engine is pretty good at it. Link to comment
Guest Guest_Nythrun_* Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 Was expecting this one to end up in no action, frankly - there's nothing here to archive Link to comment
CamDawg Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 Oh, heh, CamDawg pushed the wrong button--I meant to file this in pending. I'm hoping something will come of it eventually, despite devSin's threats of imminent taunting. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.