Luke

Yeah, probably ( @subtledoctor do your ambient helper effects start with op146...? Asking because in my tests op326 does not trigger SpellCastOnMe()... Easy repro case: edit the Magic Missile scroll so that it makes use of op326 in place of op146 and use it against a Hakeashar. You will notice the creature does not get healed...)

@polytope I noted the following fact: if a SPL file is cast via op326, then it does not trigger SpellCastOnMe(). This is certainly something to take into account in order to avoid false positives...

Yeah, guess you are right... My concern was about mod-added content, such as a single-target fighter kit ability, which should not probably cure such creatures... Guess such kit abilities should probably use op248/249 (see Called Shot) in order to avoid curing these creatures...

So, I'm not sure if this is fixpack material or not, but just in case... As modders know, there are several undroppable items in these games that are supposed to act as "creature skins", i.e.: they provide all sort of immunities (passive traits) a creature should have (well, to be precise, sometimes such immunities are directly attached to the CRE file, but ok...). My question is: are they correct? That is to say: do they provide the intended immunities or too much / too few immunities...? As confirmed by other forumites who know the lore (much) better than me, AD&D 2nd edition is not very informative about that... As a result, such things are up to individual Dungeon Master interpretations and campaign settings... which in turn means that such undroppable items are probably correct... which in turn means there is not a template for each creature type to stick with... However, there is certainly something odd... I mean, letting aside special cases such as boss creatures and plot-armored creatures (that are normally immune to everything), let us start with the following: Elementals, Salamanders and Genies are vulnerable to everything (Backstab, Entangle, Web, Grease, Petrification, Panic, Deafness, Berserk, Silence, Feeblemind, Stun, Charm, Confusion, Sleep, Blindness, Hold, Paralysis, Polymorph, Poison, Disease ...) Intended...? Probably not...? In IWD:EE, they are at least immune to cure/cause wounds spells and Disease spells, which makes sense me thinks... But I suspect they should get something more...? For instance at least Salamanders should get Sleep, Charm and Hold immunity... Dragons ("dragring.itm") are basically immune to everything except Polymorph and Feeblemind. Intended...? Guess so, since they are boss / very high level creatures, though I'm not 100% sure... Let us say that the immunity to Slow seems out of place, unless that is part of them being boss creatures...? The Monstrous Manual (at least the one I found on the net) only speaks about immunity to normal missiles... I know the games are not meant to be 100% faithful to the source material, but just to point it out Plants are generally are vulnerable to everything (Backstab, Entangle, Web, Grease, Petrification, Panic, Deafness, Berserk, Silence, Feeblemind, Stun, Charm, Confusion, Sleep, Blindness, Hold, Paralysis, Polymorph, Poison, Disease ...) Intended...? Probably not intended since when SoD was released, they added a new undroppable skin ("bdplant.itm") which provides immunity to Backstab, Stun, Petrification, Sleep, Hold, Paralysis, Polymorph, Poison, Disease ... Demonic creatures vary between games. Intended...? Which is the correct variant...? We have "ringdemn.itm" that provides the following immunities: Poison, Charm, Feeblemindedness, Confusion, Polymorph, normal weapons, Panic (BG2:EE and IWD:EE only) We have "bddtrai.itm" (SoD) that provides the following immunities: Panic, Stun, Poison, Charm, Sleep, Confusion, normal weapons Wyverns ("ring97.itm") are immune to (Entangle, Web, Grease, Hold, Paralysis, Slow) I think we can all agree that immunity to Paralysis is a relic from the past when op157 (Web) was a cosmetic-only opcode, thus it should be removed... As far as Hold and Slow are concerned, they seem to be out of place...?

@CamDawg Now that I think of it, there is probably another issue with these creatures... "The hakeashar is completely immune to magic, and magic will actually heal it." As of now, this block returns true for all spells, including innate and spell-like abilities such as 'BLACKGUARD_ABSORB_HEALTH' and 'SUN_SOUL_SUN_SOULRAY'... Intended...? Fixing this would require a bit of spell restructuring (i.e. something like patching all SPPR and SPWI files by adding an op326 effect as first effect casting 'CLERIC_CURE_LIGHT_WOUNDS'...?) Is this out of scope...?

Are you saying the auto-pause bug also affects casting from opcode...? I thought it only triggered when the player casts a spell...

The only odd thing is that not all trolls are equipped with REG1HP2... Some of them still rely upon scripts (see f.i. CDTROLL1.CRE and CDTROLL1.BCS...) Intended...? They probably forgot to update them... Also because such scripts are partially broken (cdtroll2.cre does not exist as a game resource...)

Yes, the trigger condition is slightly different (i.e. HPPercentLT 25)... However, it is still checked once per round (once per 2 rounds if slowed), so you might want to patch it as well... Unless I'm missing something, in IWD:EE the falling-down mechanism still relies upon scripts...?

Besides wild surge, I think it's also relevant for level drain...?

Fine. Guess another possible solution would be that of replacing op232 with op272 (p1=1, p2=3, i.e. once per second / once per 2 seconds if slowed)... In any case, I think this tweak is suitable for inclusion in the fixpack... Before I forget: in SoD there are certain wolves that also have this falling-down mechanics. As a result, you might want to patch them as well...

Just out of curiosity: does "TookDamage()" still trigger immediately if the troll in question is slowed...? As I said before, the worst case scenario is when the troll in question is slowed (i.e. two rounds)

Here is a more sophisticated version of spell_to_innate. It makes sure all nested subspells (if any) are of type "innate" and can make the specified innate ability uninterruptible (while casting).

What do you mean exactly here...?

Done.

Yes, op337 should work fine... It just cannot remove permanent (timing=9) effects...

Fine, I'll rewrite my code then...

@CamDawg Are you still against the idea of using COPY_EXISTING_REGEXP...? If that is the case, then I need to recode my pending pull requests...

Nevermind, it does not really matter... As Polytope said, op162 is meant to remove both op109 and op175 (as per spell description...)

Follow-up question: as you surely know (and as stated earlier in this thread), if something provides immunity to op109, then it also provides immunity to op175 (and viceversa). If that is indeed incorrect, then why does op162 (Cure Paralysis) remove both op109 and op175? That is to say: should we have two separate removal opcodes, one specifically for op109 and another one specifically for op175...? Now that I think of it, it would be better to edit the special field of op162 so that it can remove op109 if, say, BIT0 is set, and op175 if BIT1 is set...

As far as scripting is concerned, EEex has a new script trigger that can return true if the specified object is immune to a certain opcode (namely "EEex_IsImmuneToOpcode()"). Such a trigger should at least partially mitigate the need of using splstates... However, splstates might still be useful to provide feedback for the player (the so called "Uneffected by effects from" string...)

Yes, it should (asking @Bubb for confirmation...)

Actually, this might be incorrect... I asked ChatGPT (lol) about that, and it depicted hold monsters as "a spell that affects a creature's physical movements by magically paralyzing them. It doesn't directly target the mind, but rather the body." OK, nevermind, ChatGPT also states that the "Hold Monsters" spell is considered a mind-affecting spell. Mind-affecting spells are spells that target a creature's mind, influencing their thoughts, emotions, or mental faculties. "Hold Monsters" falls under this category because it affects the physical actions and movements of creatures by magically paralyzing them. The fact that it is an Enchantment spell is kinda misleading...

Yes, I think we can all agree on that. Yes, I (partially) agree. Let's say that if you decide to implement this feature, then there's no need to strip the immunity to 175 from RING95.itm and the like... Also, Hold Monsters and the like (which use op175) do seem to belong to the so called mind-affecting sphere, so I think it is correct for Undead (among others) to be immune to op175...

@Galactygon As far as this topic is concerned, is it correct that 1) opcode #109 should only be used by creatures/items that can naturally cause paralysis (f.i. liches, ghasts, carrion crawlers, etc...)? 2) opcode #175 should only be used by spells/items that are supposed to impose a mental control (f.i. all spells/items flagged as primary_type=4|ENCHANTER)? 3) opcode #185 should only be used for special cases such as Otiluke, Bigby, Hold Undead, ... ?

Indeed. Well, It can be worked around with GiveItemCreate() and multiple response blocks... The only issue is that it is a bit inelegant... Will add it to my to-fix list...