Dakk

I'm inclined to agree with Salk.

Skeleton Warriors

You know what, I think I'm going to nerf mr to 50%, even if I'm pretty sure it will be unpopular.

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?

Without consulting the Monster Manual I'm pretty sure the 2nd ed PnP Skellie Warrior have 90% MR - it would be a pretty substantial non-canon move reducing it to 50%... As I've come to trust your encyclopaedic knowledge of D&D Demi, I take it you know this but still thinks it's a good move (for game engine reasons?)?

 

I wouldn't mind moving the SW to a higher spell slot though.

Regarding the hostile-flag of non-damaging spells I'm still in favour of removing it Of course you could abuse it, but trying to stop intentional abuse should be lower priority within SR's scope compared to unintentional and unwanted side-effects.

 

The subtleties of a PnP game are lost with the coarse categorizations of BG, but I don't imagine many PnP games where bystanders would seek the party's deaths after being caught in non-damaging crossfire...

QFT

 

ADD:

This is something I've been meaning to ask you for some time but never got around to - Call Woodland Beings.

It's a 4th level divine spell, and the summon you receive can cast 4th level spells..? So instead of casting Animal Summoning I (lvl 4) I could just summon a nymph that can do this:

1° Cure Light Wounds (x2), Entangle (x2), Shillelagh, Doom

2° Barkskin, Charm Person or Animal (x2), Resist Fire and Cold, Slow Poison

3° Call Lightning, Hold Person or Animal, Summon Insects

4° Animal Summoning I

 

Intended?

New post to avoid Wall-of-Text.

 

Vampiric Touch has this line

Note that this spell may not be cast multiple times to radically increase the caster's hit points. The caster must wait for the first Vampiric Touch spell to run its course before casting another

- does the exact same thing apply to Larloch's Minor Drain ?

 

Contagion

The divine and arcane spell with the same name (confusing ) have different saving throw modifiers, saving throws (death/poison) and even casting time - intended?

 

Magical Stone

Duration 5 turns, but description states "each stone expires after one hour".

 

Blindness

Duration 8 hours, but description states "permanently blinds its target".

 

Luck

Duration 5 turns, but description states "lucky in everything that he does for the next hour".

 

Maybe I misunderstood something about time... Anyway - let me know if I annoy you!

1st lvl Invocation Spells

Let's start with Magic Missile vs Burning Hands. Magic Missile also has the advantage of using 'magic damage', while BH is fire-based, which is the most common resistance for monsters. The multi-hit property is a plus too, because each projectile makes its own check to bypass magic resistance, making MM the most effective spell-disrupting spell against targets with magic resistance, and also useful to tear down Mirror Image. MM is still almost always the better choice imo, because BH's AoE is quite small (you can easily hit 2-3 targets if they're close, but not much more) and its very short range makes the caster vulnerable. That being said, BH is the only 1st lvl damaging spell with AoE, and in the right hands can indeed cause more damage than MM, but it's "harder" to use.

You've totally convinced me about the merits of MM, it's fine details and thinking like this that's so gosh-damn impressive with SR!

 

If I've convinced you about the above things (let me know) then I can probably agree to make it progress more like MM and cap at 9th lvl (it may actually be a must have for BG1 balance). Deal?

In early BG1 it is even more suicidal than normal for a mage to get close enough to use burning hands due to the inferior protection spells and the 4-10 HP issue. The increased damage of BH compared to MM is rather nice because of the large risk involved. Anything that makes a mage think twice about filling the level one slots with only Magic Missile is good in my opinion. Maybe I'm overestimating Magic Missile, but I still think it trumps the other level 1 offensive spells due to magic damage and MI-annihilating alone.

I've been mulling the damage question for a while, and while I initially was inclined to slow down the damage increase/level, I'm now not so sure. It's much like Kalindor says, a BG1 mage trying to use BH will have to stand in the front rank (not party-friendly), and there he's a few critical hits from gibberlings, two bites from a wolf or a thump from an ogre away from death That being said, 5d4 @ lvl 5 is possibly too much, but 5d4 @ lvl 9 feels like too much a nerf given the above (I'd guess people would stack max MM's and 9d6 Fireballs instead). So unless you feel BH is unbalanced, I've convinced myself to actually leave it like it is.

 

...Shocking Grasp, Chill Touch, and Ghoul Touch

Shocking Grasp and similar "on-hit or wasted touch spells" are a pain to handle. I come to the conclusion that I don't like this kind of spell at all, and I'd remove all its instances. For V4 SG will lokk like one of the two following way:

1) electrical equivalent of Chill Touch, with stun as secondary effect

2) major overhaul, to make it work like Vampiric Touch (no hit roll required)

I detest the hit-or-wasted spells myself... I really like option 2, but then I feel that all "touch" spells should work like that - and that might be out of the scope Option 1 would really be fine.

 

And speaking of the latter solution, that's what I'm going to suggest for the Cause Wounds serie to make those spells at least a little appealing.

I love it. The three CW-spells + Harm also? It's an awesome improvement in consistency and efficiency.

 

Magically created weapons

If you ARE proficient with the weapon (i.e. Specialized or Master) - will you benefit from it?

Yes, that's exactly the improvement I've added over vanilla's behaviour.

Great!

 

Spiritual Hammer

No proficiencies apply then, only base THAC0?

Correct. I probably have to re-consider a little all these spells and make everything more consistent.

Well it's mostly consistent now, might have been worded more clearly (I take responsibility for that ) but it actually works like the description says!

 

Fire Seeds:

They have a +6 enchantment level, which I kind of like, but I seem to recall you saying "NO +6!!"

They still "suffer" from an old solution I used to make it bypass most "weapon immunities" because in theory these shouldn't be considered weapons by combat protections. Anyway, making them a sort of improved MMM is the best solution, and thus you're right, +4 enchantment should be enough (no creature is immune to +4 with PfMW or similar spells).

Good stuff.

Feedback

1.

Comparing Burning Hands, Magic Missile and Shocking Grasp, the first seems to come out strongly on top, and the last way behind.

BH: 1d4 --> 5d4 @ lvl 5; auto hit, area effect

MM: 1d4+1 --> 5d4+5 @ lvl 9; auto hit, long range

SG: 1d6 --> 5d6 @ lvl 9; roll to hit or wasted, touch range, can also stun

 

BH seems to win out both through the fast levelling of damage, but also the area effect. Though for the times when you have allies/neutrals in the area, MM would be the better option. But SG.. the damage is actually statistically the same as MM, but it's touch range and one-try hit-or-wasted (based on Mage THAC0, albeit with +4 bonus). The stun effect is a plus though. Any way to fine tune this? (see 2. also)

 

2.

Spells with melee touch attacks; there are 4 divine - that all expire on attempt (hit-or-wasted), 2 divine equivalents (Spiritual Hammer and Flame Blade) - that last 2 turns, and 3 arcane (Shocking Grasp, Chill Touch, and Ghoul Touch) - of those the latter two have a 1 turn duration and only SG is hit-or-wasted. Possibly give SG a duration?

 

3.

Phantom Blade:

The caster wields the phantom blade as if it was a long sword but he suffers no penalty for non-proficiency.

Shillelagh:

The character using the shillelagh wields it as if it was a club, but suffers no penalty for non-proficiency.

Flame Blade:

This blade-like ray is wielded as if it was a scimitar, but the character using it will suffer no penalty for non-proficiency.

Black Blade of Disaster:

The caster wields the blade as if it was a long sword but he suffers no penalty for non-proficiency, and brandishes it with a base THAC0 of 0.

All good, but if you ARE proficient with the weapon (i.e. Specialized or Master) - will you benefit from it?

 

4.

Spiritual Hammer:

The caster wields the spiritual hammer as if proficient with the weapon, at his normal THAC0.

No proficiencies apply then, only base THAC0?

 

5.

Fire Seeds:

They have a +6 enchantment level, which I kind of like, but I seem to recall you saying "NO +6!!"

What Ardanis said

Oh and just to clarify, I thought Earthquake dished out a no-res death? If I was mistaken my only gripe is what Ardanis outlines above. But I absolutely not equal NPC death = reload! I'd "happily" have my entire band killed, as long as CHARNAME gets out alive it's all good. I really don't reload if I can help it, sometimes I'd even rather restart

Earthquake

I'm not sure I understand what's the problem here...that it's hard to use this spell without risking to kill party members?

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.

I absolutely sympathize. The spell is somewhat "non-lethal" (well, for an earthquake;)) but it has the potential for non reversible NPC loss (=reload) if you don't stack up on the protection spells. If I understand Ardanis correctly, it should either be deadlier (so NOT buffing would be foolhardy) or have less permanent death potential. Right now it's "meh Earthquake, nobody ever dies from it" and then the giant miniature space-hamster goes buh-bye.

Anyway...replacing slip with entangle? Since when a layer of grease can entangle? In 3rd edition PnP, IWD and NWN it works just like I made it, but I do agree I have to reduce the effectiveness of the KO secondary effect.

My rationale is based on the understanding that the role of Grease should be more antimobility rather than disabling. Right now it's awesome at disabling (cast it directly at the opponent, everyone who fails a save is KO'ed immediately) and mediocre at antimobility (it's so small that opponents tend to be able to run across it completely before the round-tick checks for application of any effects). We want it to be not so disabling but better at antimobility. That's why I suggested Entangle, basically a "set movement rate to 0" such that there are no AC effects from being KO, and still can cast spells and use ranged weapons. But you're right that it makes no sense from a realism perspective.

 

Of course "grease" could have an "entangle" effect. Walk barefoot on a greased floor, or with smooth shoes on ice - if and when you fall you are effectively "entangled" as you struggle to get up. Or for that matter, you could be stuck in really sticky mud...