Jump to content

Ardanis

Modders
  • Posts

    2,787
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Ardanis

  1. Quoting David, "vanilla AI is sufficiently stupid for all these changes to just roll over it". The was no demon to begin with, as there was no Fireball. They are not independent entities and do not appear by themselves, but only if and when a wizard wishes so. Both are the offensive product of said wizard's spellcasting, that party has to deal with one way or another. Resisting a spell requires protective buffs, dispels and healing potions, sometimes even raising dead, depending on the type. It is not for free and consumes resources just as fine. Spell slots contribute to caster's total XP worth. If he had no spells available at all, he would be 500 XP at most, as a mediocre fighter with no skill.
  2. The XP value represents the overall amount of challenge a creature may pose in a fight. Basically, you get XP for surviving Fireballs, dispelling protectons, etc., not for landing a killing blow. Similar to how AC is not a chance to avoid an attack, as some novice players think, but an summary chance to not being dealt a damaging blow, either through evasion or damage reduction. So if there a single lich in a dungeon, I would expect a 20k XP worth of challenge in there. In what form it may come - Abi-Dalzims or fiends - doesn't really matter, because the DnD is a game system with simplified rules, not a reality simulator. That's what I'm saying. The process is different (fireballs or demons), the end result is the same. PS In case it's not obvious - I'm advocating the position that granting XP for killed summons is not justified within game rules.
  3. You're as stubborn as ever It IS a spell in a sense that a wizard has to waste one of his spell slots in order to summon it from the Abyss. There's an enemy lich worthy of 20k XP. It can toss at PC three 8th level spells. Now, in the 1st scenario the lich covers itself with Improved Mantle, shoots Incendiary Cloud, shoot Abi-Dalzim. Pretty tough for 10th level party, right? I think anyone who managed to withstand the Cloud and Abi, for they were unable to interrupt them due to Mantle, surely deserves those 20k XP. 2nd scenario, lich summons three glabresu (let's assume they're of vanilla's strength, since SCS/SR does boost them significantly), and that's all. Party manages to kill those three vanilla-weak demons, gets XP for them, then turns to lich. The only thing a lich can do is to watch as it's being sliced in pieces, because it has no spells to fight with. Is this easy kill worth 20k XP? Never. In BG however, in the second case party would rightfully gain XP for killing summons, and also those 20k that lich is no longer worth of. I think you get the general idea.
  4. And? Another critter is an 8th spell of the main one. PS Otherwise the caster should yield less XP, because he only summoned a demon and then stood idly watching the fight.
  5. You have a point, but priests in ADnD were given only 7 levels of spells for a reason. They're far more capable in melee and also can turn undead, and wizards counter it by having access to higher levels of magic (which imo is logical - they are, after all, are based on stereotypical sorcerers from fantasy novels). Critical Strike It's reasonable... but has it not been in many games since ancient times that summons do not grant XP or loot? And if they do - if they're treated equally to 'real' combatants - then party shouldn't receive XP for whatever summon kills, etc.Personally I'd prefer to remain true to historically developed concept and treat summons as if they were a form of magical manifestation, not real flesh and blood. I think it is hardcoded issue. A player on russian boards recently encountered a bug where four active party-aligned summons had stuck somewhere he couldn't find them and thus inhibited any further summoning. I've suggested to install the XP cap removal as a form of cure, and game only permitted to summon a single creature per cast (Summon Monster X conjure several things), despite them no longer being marked as 'summons'. PS Regarding Gate, I'd let priests to pick it as a HLA.
  6. Definitely yes. I once run into poisoned Harper random encounter, and the mage thug used 10' Invis, concealing the guy as well. And it being just at the start of the game, I also had no dispel anywhere.
  7. (Improved) Mantle Maybe double their AC bonus? First thing, imo +1 saves equals +2 AC, not +1, as there're far more ways to improve the to hit chance, unlike saves penalties. Second, it still comes back to not being able to tell beforehands if monster hits as +2 or as +5. If you cast antiweapon, you probably mean to ensure you'll be safe, not to find yourself struck the next round. Current Mantles' AC bonus allows to avoid the worst case scenario to some extent, but imo insufficiently, while +6/+8 bonus is actually a serious thing already by itself, which can alter spells' concept from 'immunity with some bonus AC' to 'AC with bonus immunity', and with this in mind I think we can safely assume that their worst flaw IS fixed at last. Absolute Immunity As the name implies, it's better off as immunity to everything, not just weapons. Although I believe it was suggested already before.
  8. David actually gave a very good hint about short-lasting RI being unsuitable for high level combat. First, you'd probably go with Stoneskin and PFMW anyway to defend against melee, and protection from single-target spells is often covered by more universal spell and specific protection. As such, RI wouldn't add as much as it could at lower levels. Thus, perhaps just leave as a low-level thing? With fixed duration of 5-6 rounds? It will allow F/Ms to engage powerful opponents right away from the start, and will also help against greater golems and such, against whom you'd probably wouldn't wish to waste expensive PFMWs.
  9. Skeleton Warriors Imo 90 MR is the one reason to use them. As for their effectiveness against beholders, it's not as much of a slaughter but rather one-on-one fight. SCS beholders also use telekinesis alot, which is quite effective against SWs. And you can always unload a couple of Chaos spells, following slaughter will be much more sighty then with SWs. If they go to 6th level, I absolutely wish them to keep 90 MR. Reflected Image 3+1/4 = 8? 2+1/5=6?
  10. Skeleton Warriors That's okay, I'll just raise it back to 90% locally But I recall you've mentioned to exclude the Warrior from 3rd spell compeltely and move it to 5th spell? @Jarno: 1) Please, stop discussing coding techniques here already. 2) You do know what HitDice stands for? It's the amount of levels in Monster class. Planetars use Fighter/Cleric class for technical reasons, because the engine can't handle DnD mechanics.
  11. AoE spells causing neutral characters to go hostile First, I'd reconsider following Anvil's route that strictly, and second, can't you use Nature's Beauty solution?
  12. Earthquake The chance to kill, however small, always means that even 1000 hp PC is a subject to it. Therefore, unless we find a way to remove gameover-if-pc-dies feature (which we should not), PC must Death Ward himeslf if the spell is about to be cast. Otherwise it's a reload on failured %. Unlike the save, % is completely beyond player's control. And casting DW against low-chance IK is like casting 6th level PfME against a lowsy MM. Not rational at all, but becomes necessary due to BG2 special game over condition. To tell the truth, the instant death is what I dislike the most in a great variety of games, so it might be just my habit to see it an enemy. What you say about high damage isn't much different, although it looks to be more fair. What to do with it now, you guys decide for yourself
  13. Earthquake It may well be my personal bias but I think a spell should not insta-kill 'sometimes'. Either often enough to recognize it as a true death type spell and therefore treat it accordingly or never. Because unlike other curable debilitating effects (confusion, charm, hold, etc.) death is irreversible when it affects PC or, as in the example above, NPCs.Against opponents it may be fine to kill some once in a while (even if I personally don't like to kill enemies 'unintentionally' ), but when it is used against party and/or has no party-friendly flag it means a player has to treat it as a full power WotB - which Earthquake is not - otherwise they must take a gamble and reload when they lose. Symbol of Death Perhaps no save penalty for 60+ then? Or small AoE, 10'? I would vote to change it to something else, but that would mean even more confusion for AI (it already mistakes Symbol of Disease for a Symbol of Fear).
  14. Earthquake Well, reducing death effect further will probably render it completely impractical to rely upon, and consequently even more frustrating when it does manage to kill an ally. That's why I suggested Hold, as the next closest effect type. Actually, I'd very much want to see an Imprisonment-like effect, curable via Freedom, but impris equals death and it's lesser brother maze can be resisted by Enrage (which makes as much sense as Death Ward protecting from falling into fissures). I don't mind at all it affecting allies, although what you say about self-immunity is very interesting. Symbol of Death, Power Word Kill Damage resistance, not magic. Since killing effect was unaffectable by Pro Energy spells. Save at 60+ is fine (hmm, and what about PW:Stun allowing 90+s a save or be stunned for 1 round?), so let's keep it Symbol too then? Affecting only >60s is rather useless. Even more so if Tweakpack's Maximum HP for NPCs is installed.
  15. Earthquake I do understand the reasoning behind it killing things outright. But yesterday I was doing Vithal's quest in Underdark and fought SCS's upgraded earth guardian (who casts Earthquake among the other). On the first try PC died and I had to reload. On the next another man died, with no way to trace the source. On the third - invisible Vithal died. I took the SPL apart and decided I don't like it much. First, it probably is much more annoying than useful, especially if we consider no party friendliness. Second, immunity to instant death doesn't suggest a creature can't fall few meters down the earth. Hold effect, with extra damage added, seems more in place here - like Implosion, whose animation you've used for the killing effect. Whether or not Free Action should block it, I don't know. I'm 50/50 on it. If you do agree to change it to Hold, then I would suggest to slightly augment other effects as well, since Hold probably will end up being weaker than insta-kill. Energy Blades Decrease ApR to 5. This is primarily to eliminate the double movement speed caused by blades' Improved Haste effect. Symbol of Death, Power Word Kill It's been brought up before, and iirc repeatedly. Reduce current HP by 60, so no resistance can block the effect. Breach Desc needs to mention it also dispels druid's Storm Shield.
  16. Elemental Prince Description typo - Chan is not prince, she's princess. Storm of Vengeance The only advantage it has over Fire Storm is party friendliness. The latter deals more damage, lasts longer, and even allows for some PF as well. I couldn't find AD&D 2 reference to it. So, maybe increase duration by 1 round and radius to 40'-60'? And add the deafening effect. Btw, I think it's possible to create the delayed AoE, thus fully matching the PnP description. I'm short of time a bit atm to investigate it further, but when v4 will be in more active development I should have been finished with other projects. Shroud of Flame Are you sure we need another fire-based spell, especially on 5th level? Sunfire and Vitrolic Sphere, as a damage-over-time spell, would make it non-unique.
  17. Afaik BG2 makes no use of the old proficiency system.
  18. Greater Malison I'm kinda neutral here, but let's try it out. Cure Disease What about immunity to disease, much like Neutralize Poison does? I do recall we had a talk about Pro Poison scroll and various sources of blindness/deafness, them somehow not working out well (I have all logs saved, if you don't remember details either), so these may be better off not included. Chaos/Confusion Six rounds is fine imo. I wish these two spells were more different though. Death Spell A week or so ago I was battling Jonny in Spellhold. After he had departed several murderer have wandered in, invisible backstabbing 7th level guys. A scroll of Death Spell has worked perfectly there. But that's the only case I can remember to ever use it against 'living' opponents. Banishment is fine, I think I've even agreed with it before. Yes, Sir Imp, you are.
  19. Spirit Armor & Tenser's Transformation I meant a wizard fighting in melee, substituting a fighter. I trust you won't argue that a fighter will have an edge in melee nonetheless. Mage can perform averagely if situation demands, yes, but he goes nowhere close to GWW with ~30 damage per hit. That was my point, I surely wasn't attempting to start another round of 'steel vs spell' debate
  20. Spirit Armor & Tenser's Transformation Well, I did mention the reduced duration for compensation, didn't I? And, as I've said, priests can cast Divine Power + Righteous Fury without suffering any drawbacks, and that on top of their heavy armor and weapons. Weren't you among those advocating for RP approach to resting? Doing it once per dungeon at most, or better yet once per day in some inn? And, again, fighter doesn't need to rest at all, unlike a wizard he's always ready for melee combat. Long story short, if you're trying to say that a wizard can possibly compete with 40th level Sarevok, I fear you are wrong Because the engine allows for the max of 11?
  21. Spirit Armor & Tenser's Transformation The same as always, to block off grunts while wizards are busy with a boss? Ghost Armor The +3 vs spells bonus is assuming that Spirit grants +3 vs death, Clairvoyance - +3 vs Breath and Blur - +1 vs all. Three spells with a large bonus to every save type, and one with a small bonus to them all. Since you have a reason not to change Blur then I imagine Ghost could have +1 to all. Because as of now, it's hardly worth a slot two levels higher than Mage Armor occupies. It only provides +1 more AC and some stealth bonus, while the duration is much shorter. Flame Arrow Pardon, it was rather a modding question than a suggestion. I had all these bug reports/feedback accumulating slowly in the txt, some might have used a better catergorization. PS Fighter vs wizard Indeed it is I've mentioned - when I was to deal with Edwin's CW I had no choice but to dress F/M in half of his memorization allowance and go whack two golems while the rest of party were hiding on a floor beneath. I'd say it merely is an alternative to loading full memo with MIs, Stoneskins and PFMWs. Both the average duration and amount of slots required are quite close to each other. Besides, unlike fighter's equpment arcane protections can be dispelled.
  22. Spirit Armor AC bonus is mediocre for it's level (haven't even got fullplate's bonus vs slashing/piercing), +2 to saves possess no unique feel, backlash is pathetic and is being saved against at the casting of spell, so if you don't see 'Target - Save vs Spells' message then you know it will hurt ten turns later. I propose making it +3 full plate armor (-2 AC) with +3 bonus to saves vs death. Increase damage from 2d4 to 6d6, do it at the moment of expiration (via 177) and at SR's standart penalty for 4th level spell (-2 or -3? I forgot where we've settled). Enchant Weapon brings forth a +3 weapon for a full day, so why can't the same level spell create for 10 turns a +3 armor, which also pretty often stings for ~20 damage? Needs to convince David to use this spell again, fighters gonna have serious trouble striking a mage under this. Having playtested it some, I'm quite fond of the result. Backlash is not lethal, but can no longer be smirked at. And with SCS's AI preferring wizards over others, it finally lets me play F/M without having to load all slots with MI and Stoneskin (can't afford PFMW yet), something I was berating David for time ago. If you think -2 AC is overpowered then reduce the duration from 10 turns to 5 rounds per level. Barkskin Change from '1 + 1/3 lvl' to '1 + 1/4 lvl'? Jaheira will need few more levels to provide the full bonus. And iirc rangers stop at 9th caster level, so they won't get to max this spell out. Yet, a cosmetical change it remains at most. Blur Desc says 'penalty to attackers', not 'bonus to AC'. Perhaps it should be split into 'AC vs type' bonuses then? Since normal AC gets capped at -20. Also, maybe change save bonus (+3 to vs spell) back to +1 to all? And give the 'vs spell' to either Armor or Ghost Armor? I think the latter, because it doesn't look great as of now, whereas the former has very long duration and is a 1st level spell. Clairvoyance Desc says +3 bonus, but it gives +2. We've talked something about changing it from '+2 for 1 turn', what was that? Imo should be either '+3 for 1 turn' or '+2 for 2 turns'. I think I was against +3 back then, but now I feel the first is better It too probably should be split into 'AC vs type', as the insight bonus iirc is supposed to stack with everything else (?), plus it's short duration doesn't allow for serious abuse. Ghost Armor Give it +3 vs spells, see Blur. What about additional 5%-15% to stealth? And I'd consider removing the glow, it's an eyesore if used frequently. Acid Fog Change damage from 10 to 2d8 or similar. Self explanatory. Lightning Bolt Revert back to old graphics! For example, use 'lightblt.pro' - it doesn't bounce, although for a reason unknown isn't registered in ids, so needs to be ADD_PROJECTILE'd first. Flame Arrow Was there any particular reason to split it into consecutive 146s? When I began working on Lightning Bolts trap I at first was going to try this solution, but after it didn't work (SPLs were fired from the caster, not the ground spot), I was forced to find another way. Which had nicely revealed itself in a form of multicharged projectile (like clouds). The only problem was the PRO firing like a chaingun instead of the set number, but after a quick study I set the 4th bit (no overlap) true and it started behaving as it was meant to. It still requires as many files (SPL and several PROs) as Galactygon's solution (several SPLs and PRO), however, but at least it's simplier and fewer SPLs to load when working in DLTCEP or WeiDU. Farsight Set the duration to 5 turns, for both arcane and divine version. I for one do use it on occasion, usually in beholder lair in Underdark - after rigging the place with unholy amount of traps and provoking eyeballs onto minefields Tenser's Transformation If it disables spellcasting I will NOT use it no matter what, ApR bonus or not. It is not that much greater than priest's combat self-boosts, and it occupies a 6th level slot which already is higher than priest analogues. If you're still inclined to find it overpowered then cut the duration in two, but do not block spells/innates. Conjure Elemental The arcane version. I don't like at all the failure chance, be it 5%, 15% or 95%.
  23. Having seen with a glimpse what you've written, may I suggest using tag?
  24. WHY. IN. GODDAMN. HELLS. THERE. WAS. NO. SUCH. MOD. FOR. NWN2. WHEN. I. HAVE. PLAYED. IT? I've been seriously tempted to mess with scritps and cut down that arrogant peasant nasher jerk pig for so many times! I mean to say, great way to go Well, okay, BG2 isn't NWN2 and I don't feel like leaving sis alone there, but the mere existance of alternative motivation, if bottlenecking in the end all the same, reflected in game's reaction to player's decisions, is a day of joy already. PS It's sure good to play once in year at most, some good stuff usually comes out for the next try.
  25. IIRC it is - to keep balance, as otherwise people would have it active the time.
×
×
  • Create New...