Dakk

 

newest version of IR going to include some new ideas for items, or is it bugfixes?

Knowing how Demi functions, it will probably include 100+ newly revised items as well

 

Well, Acid works as an Earth element proxy, and Lightning is obviously connected with Air.

 

but vanilla Protection from the Elements had it, and we do have a ProAcid spell too, thus it makes sense imo.

 

No, it didn't.

Amazing work!

I've uploaded a new build.

 

V4 - Beta 7 (8 October 2014)

- Resist Fire/Cold "replaced" by Resist Elements (25% res vs. all elements)

IMHO, while SR and DR are not conceptually in-compatible, I think DR just plain messes up the clean, smooth and (extensively) play-tested changes of SR. SR is much more up-to-date and documented, and I think you'll just end up with a headache if you try to combine both mods.

- how (or if) does the beta work with divine remix? I can see it changes some of the divine spells.

SR does a lot more than change "some of the divine spells"

See:

Divine Spells [V3]

SR V4 (planned changes) [changes to the V3 spells, and the spell system]

New Divine Spells for V4

 

I believe that the current phrasing has internal consistency. I.e. proficiencies for Warriors are "one pip every 3 levels", which works exactly like APR for monks above. Same for spell effects ("1D6 for every 4 levels") and so on.

 

Oh I see. Thanks, didn't realize that.

 

No problem It is a somewhat confusing terminology, but then again AC and THAC0 isn't the most straight forward concept either

 

 

 

Can make 2 unarmed attacks per round. An additional 1/2 attack is gained every 3 levels, up to 5 attacks at level 18

 

Small suggestion: Update this description to say "starting at level 3." Since all chars start at level 1, I assumed that the monk won't be getting the apr bonus till level 1+3 = 4, whereas it actually happens at level 3. This just makes the description clearer to newbies.

 

I believe that the current phrasing has internal consistency. I.e. proficiencies for Warriors are "one pip every 3 levels", which works exactly like APR for monks above. Same for spell effects ("1D6 for every 4 levels") and so on.

 

This seems to be a fantastic initiative, and I would like to help with testing. Please let me know how I can help (where to download files, which specific spells to test if any, and time limit if any). Thanks!

[T]he only real thing I regret is not having new bams/icons for implementing the planned new spells.

 

Didn't we (the xR collective ) have this awesome person who made bams? With the mushroom avatar..? Anywho, there's nothing that can be scrounged from IWD(II)?

 

One more from today's session - Insect type spells bypass MR. No more are druids limited to summoning against magic resistant Drow hordes, now they have a strong card against them.

 

Yes! Innate resist all you want sneaky drow, but feel the pain of a million flea bites

 

I think a Pro Petrification scroll is available at Nashkel Fair area, but only one. There are a few at BG city as well. Probably more with some added content (UB and similar).

It's Stone to Flesh scroll, and should be used on Branwen. Unless you install a pflahra of mods that can add things I don't know/remember.

 

There's one in Candlekeep too, IIRC. With BG1NPC Project there's also another way of getting a Stone to Flesh.

Swap Farsight and Clairvoyance, move area reveal to Farsight.

If both can't be level 3, this is indeed the perfect move.

 

 

Clairvoyance

Mmm..."reveal area map" doesn't really fit its current concept imo, don't you agree?

 

What if I add that effect to Farsight? That way by casting it you first reveal the general outline of the whole map and then more easily pick the correct spot you want to fully "spy".

 

This makes a lot of sense to me. It is of course a bit more problematic for BG 1, but I still think it would be a good compromise.

 

I pretty much dislike to not be able to remove 100% of the fog of war and being able to do this only using Farsight makes it more than problematic for BG1 but like everybody else said, it does make full sense so thumbs up, Demi.

 

I'm of the same opinion as Salk here; having FOW-removal on Farsight makes sense - but is negative for BG1. But it's a clever idea, and I'm good with it!

With that said - does Farsight really deserve to be a level 4 spell? It's really more a convenience-spell than anything other, and lvl 4 have some extremely powerful and necessary spells (thereby relegating convenience-spells way down the memorizing queue). The convenience-factor is also compounded by the fact that for many (most?) people the maps hold few secrets. Browsing through lvl 3 and lvl 4 arcane spells Farsight IMHO looks much more at home @ lvl 3.

Directly targeting shimmering mages is way better. I'm still a little confused about the details of your new system though, and what illusions are broken by which spells, and how non detection interacts with that. Is there a definitive source for this? Something like this, but for illusions and divination: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?key=0AoLScCUe7V__dE1RaEhCbm5na0VlakQwYVMxOFJVc1E&usp=sharing

 

Oooh fancy. We should get kreso on that, ASAP

 

Clairvoyance

While I think the buffs to the spells are a great idea, and fine addition to the otherwise rather lackluster Divination spell group, I think you should reconsider disabling the old ability.

 

I always thought it was very cool and practical to be able to see all of the area, and I have missed it during SR 3.1. Why did you remove it in the first place?

I don't remember anymore, but I probably remove that feature because it was kinda overlapping with Farsight and I wanted the latter, more expensive spell to stand out more.

 

But there would still be a pretty huge difference between the two spells.

Clairvoyance would only show the terrain, where Farsight would remove the fog of war over a specific area. I don't really see the overlap.

 

For us crazy remove-all-fog-OCD-completionists Clairvoyance was a godsend... It wouldn't really be a problem with Cv keeping the old ability too, would it?

As janoha puts it, Farsight is real-time spying, Cv is just terrain reveal.

 

If Blindness was replaced with FC, with naming intact, then SCS would use FC, correct?

If SCS use FC as it uses Blindness, would it work out?

Yes and yes.

 

I approve of this message

Aye, you make a compelling case. And on the merits I agree with you! FC is way more fair regarding PC vs AI. My main objection is the point you yourself raise in the beginning: SCS (AI) usage.

If Blindness was replaced with FC, with naming intact, then SCS would use FC, correct?

If SCS use FC as it uses Blindness, would it work out?

EDIT: I love the beta

Don't worry, this is probably the right place to discuss the beta instead, I can always use the first post to gather all the change-logs. Btw, all those daring changes and you are only nitpicking a small thing about trap-like spells?

 

Skull Trap

You do have a point, but from my experience a 10 feet AoE is a bit inconsistent. We risk to create a situation where you have to "lead" the intended target directly on top of the trap to make it activate.

Haha, yes! That's how I roll, don't you remember I'm totally fine with all changes, or better yet I really like them!

Blindness/Fog Cloud

The only change I'm not sure about is Blindness -> Fog Cloud. Blindness is such a iconic PnP (and Bg1 classic) spell it feels weird to eliminate it.

Skull Trap

Hmm, I suppose you have a point.

Just wanted to say the beta is proceeding well.

 

V4 - Beta 3 (July 22th 2014)

- Skull Trap dmg dice reverted from d4 to d6 but capped at 10d6 (SCS did the same to balance its own 3x triggers)

Have you considered changing the trigger range from 15 to 10 (detonation still obviously 20). It makes more sense as a trap, and also slightly better as a trap as more baddies will be lured into range before it goes boom. Now it will damage enemies in the 15-20 range, while it would have a better effective range if it detonated later (i.e. when the first enemy is somewhat closer).

For chucking directly into a fight on top of enemy it makes no difference.

EDIT: Sorry, maybe I should have posted this in feedback or somewhere that doesn't clutter this thread. Feel free to move it.

I love secret doings!

 

But is 10% enough to make a difference? 20% phys. res sounds MUCH better than 10% all res.

 

Supposedly this is meant to stack with IR's armor resistance bonus.

 

Then it's more interesting. As I said above I'm theorygaming here and kreso bases his opinion on gameplay. With the caveat that kreso is a powergamer (in the positive sense that he's an accomplished player) and errs on the side of more difficulty, a change sounds reasonable.

But is 10% enough to make a difference? 20% phys. res sounds MUCH better than 10% all res.

So 20% phys. res. -> 10% all res, and longer duration? I'm ok with whichever, but I'm not sure at what caster level the changed version is supposed to shine/make a difference? Feel free to enlighten me

Aight, thnx for the answer

Well, I'd need to know a couple of things first, such as:

- is this possible outside of BGEE using ToBEx?

As the title (edited by me) suggests, this is purely EE stuff. Which doesn't mean we shouldn't work on it, right?

I understand this is possible to mod as-is in EE, but is there any word if TobEx can allow this in original?

It's not set in stone yet and we are facing a terrible dilemma, BG2EE does not support it. I was hoping to give it for granted and design a bunch of weapons around it, now I have instead to make sure those items are fine even without it (aka provide two different versions of those items).

Say what!? I thought the engine was only improved and allowing more things to be externalised? This is a bit disheartening. I suppose BG1EE doesn't support it either?