Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Bartimaeus

  1. Under your proposed system, it would not get rid of Barkskin, as Barkskin is a combat protection. Breach lists these spells as being specific/combat protections: The specific protection spells dispelled by Breach are: Resist Fear, Resist Elements, Death Ward, Free Action, Protection from Acid, Protection from Cold, Protection from Electricity, Protection from Fire, Chaotic Commands, Protection from Magic Energy, Protection from the Elements, Mind Blank, and Protection from Energy. The combat protection spells dispelled by Breach are: Mage Armor, Shield, Armor of Faith, Barkskin, Protection from Missiles, Spirit Armor, Stoneskin, Protection from Normal Weapons, Protection from Magical Weapons, Physical Mirror, Prismatic Mantle, and Absolute Immunity. Now that you mention it, the "lesser Breach" Dispel/Remove Magic option in SRR does not get caught by Spell Deflection et al., which means it would pierce through spell protections in situations where Breach wouldn't, which doesn't seem right. There is a separate option to enable Dispel/Remove Magic being affected by spell protections in general, but it does now strike me as that you could have one but not the other if you wanted. That particular oddity got yoinked out of SRR pretty early on - never made much sense to me to have just a couple of antimagic spells that would remove Dispelling Screen, especially when Dispelling Screen is such an incredibly specific protection with limited use as it is. Good luck with your tests. I still have a feeling that this still prove itself to be a bit too strong against enemy spellcasters, since it will essentially act as a cheap Breach that removes their most critical combat protection (and heck, you don't even need to have Detect Invisibility/True Seeing on the mage casting Dispel/Remove Magic), but it's worth trying out.
  2. Got you. The ignore list feature is helpful, especially since you can block @s with it...and if you use uBlock Origin (the best adblock on Firefox/Chrome), you can also add the following filters to un-person someone entirely: www.gibberlings3.net##.ipsType_light.ipsComment_ignored.ipsComment www.gibberlings3.net##[id^="ips_uid"]:has-text(Bartimaeus) www.gibberlings3.net##.ipsContained.ipsType_blendLinks.ipsType_medium.ipsType_reset:contains(Bartimaeus):upward(2) www.gibberlings3.net##.ipsType_blendLinks.ipsDataItem_withPhoto.ipsDataItem_lastPoster > li:contains(Bartimaeus):upward(1) www.gibberlings3.net##.ipsType_blendLinks.ipsType_light.ipsType_reset.ipsDataItem_meta:contains(Bartimaeus):upward(2) www.gibberlings3.net##.ipsDataItem_withPhoto.ipsDataItem_lastPoster > .ipsType_blendLinks.ipsType_light:has-text(Bartimaeus):upward(1) www.gibberlings3.net##.ipsResponsive_hidePhone.ipsColumn_medium.ipsColumn.cAuthorPane.ipsComment_author > .ipsType_break.ipsType_blendLinks.cAuthorPane_author.ipsType_sectionHead > strong > .ipsType_break:has-text(Bartimaeus):upward(4) ...Except replace my name with your chosen person of dis-interest in each line besides the first, of course, .
  3. I have no clue who you are, as I have never frequented the Beamdog forums, but I feel as though I am detecting some amount of irony here.
  4. As in, you want combat and specific protections to not be affected by Dispel/Remove Magic? Yes, it is pretty easy, and without affecting the mechanics of Breach - those spells would simply have to be marked as non-dispellable. It would result in only SR's Breach and Pierce Shield being able to break combat protections, and it would most likely inadvertently weaken SCS AI by a bit, since it has no way of knowing Remove Magic has changed like that.
  5. Yeah, there are a number of Silver Swords, but for the purpose of BG and IR, I think it makes sense to treat it as a major artifact (...especially given that the githyanki themselves seem to as well at a number of occasions). Maybe it's a particularly notable silver sword, I'm not sure.
  6. I guess I have trouble defining what an artifact even is to begin with here. To me, there are "minor" and "major" artifacts - stuff like The Flail of Ages, Ravager, or Crom Faeyr would be "major", while stuff like Shazzelim, Werebane, and Flame of the North would be "minor", and stuff like Lifestealer(?), Harbinger, and Heartseeker would be somewhere in between, but the lines can be pretty blurry. Unique items with unique lore and powers are pretty much artifacts of some kind, in my mind - I guess with my line of thinking, you're really just looking for what I would consider "major artifacts". I guess my list for that would be: K'logarath Axe of the Unyielding MAYBE the improved Mace of Disruption but probably not due to its original status as a mass produced weapon (...but it is improved, so I guess you could make an argument) The Flail of Ages Club of Detonation Storm Star MAYBE Ice Star (it would be the only qualifying Morning Star if so...I guess I also make this one a little stronger than the IR version to try and make it more of a proper "ultimate morning star", so I might be biased) Iron Bow of Gesen Darkfire Bow Taralash Dagger of the Star The Wave Ravager Crom Faeyr Runehammer Big Metal Rod (lol) Erinne Sling Ixil's Nail/Spike Staff of the Magi Staff of the Ram MAYBE Daystar MAYBE the Equalizer Short Sword of Mask Angurvadal Foebane Purifier Spectral Brand Hindo's Doom MAYBE but probably not Soul Reaver Carsomyr Silver Sword (also only +3 in the original game, if you can believe it) Gram the Sword of Grief Unholy Reaver Firetooth I think that'd be the list for me. I don't know anything about BG2EE items. In SoA, this list would give you Iron Bow of Gesen, The Wave, Crom Faeyr, Staff of the Magi, Carsomyr, and The Silver Sword for sure, with potentially Daystar, Soul Reaver, The Equalizer, and The Mace of Disruption to potentially include as well.
  7. Crom Faeyr, Carsomyr, improved Mace of Disruption, Klogarath?, Ice Star?, Iron Bow of Gesen, Lifestealer?, Blackmist, Rod of Smiting?, Staff of the Woodlands?, Daystar?, The Equalizer? At least some of those, I guess. And maybe all of the upgradeable ToB weapons that go to +5? I don't know, kind of hard to make some of these decisions on a whim.
  8. Following IR's lead, I pretty strictly tie bonuses to the enchantment level with the exceptions of, once again following IR's lead, Bane weapons (which suffer generic -2 THAC0/-2 damage in exchange for specific +3 THAC0/+5 damage) and a few others that have special "size" modifiers (e.g. Oversized gives -1 THAC0, +2 damage for one-handed weapons, double those numbers for two-handed weapons), so to raise the enchantment level would be to also raise the damage and THAC0. Plus, Weapons Changes gets all confused if the bonuses don't match unless you create specific exceptions. I don't have any particular strong feelings about the whole "x enchantment can hit" system...but it's also never been that much of a problem for me in the actual game, either. I guess if you want lower +x weapons to be effective against all enemies, why not just set everything magical to +5 and make it a "non-magical weapons vs. magical weapons" system? Mace of Disruption is +4 even when upgraded, Psion's Blade* is only +3, Carsomyr is only +4. Staff of the Magi, as far as I'm aware, is the only +5 weapon in SoA in IR, even accounting for Watcher's Keep weapons (which I wasn't even thinking of initially when I said that, but I still think it's true). *IIRC, IR moves this to the Underdark, which is probably the only reasonable explanation for such a serious nerf. Even still, +3 is...severe. I cannot, as this has never been an issue for me so I'm not really aware of which ones that would even be. There are enough +4 weapons in IR that it's not an issue - if they're not set to +3 by a separate mod on the basis of them being +4 instead. As for SR's spell weapons, I'm not a hundred percent sure - presumably with the intent of allowing something like Phantom Blade to be used against those immune monsters, while not letting Melf's Minute Meteors to do so. That seems like the only logical assumption. How unfair, given that he can't defend himself!
  9. That's actually true...plus, hammers aren't exactly the strongest of weapon categories to begin with. Hmm. Well, I'm glad I unnerfed it somewhat then, at least. Maybe a consideration for more in the future... Ah...still kind of weird to me. Actually kind of even weirder, because now the bonuses don't match with the enchantment value. What's the intended idea of this system?
  10. Protection from Magical Weapons is all magical weapons regardless of enchantment level in vanilla BG2, while Absolute Immunity is indeed only up to +5. Weird. In normal SR, both Protection from Magical Weapons and Absolute Immunity go up to +6 but no further; in SRR, it's up to +9 but not +10. So you may be right that IR was designed so that even if you were not using SR, no weapons would pierce Absolute Immunity.
  11. What component of SCS specifically did this? I installed the general better AI, smarter mages, and improved fiends after SRR and didn't notice anything amiss with DEMGLASU.cre. (e): Actually, not true - in the .cre file itself, it is 70/160, but when I actually summon it, it has the full 160. Was demglasu.cre actually injured after you summoned it?
  12. I didn't, IR did - it's been +4 for in IR for ages, and +4 weapons are plenty powerful, and then having it go up to +5 in ToB made sense to me. I think it's a general philosophy in IR to not have any weapons be better than +5, given that IR changed all such weapons to +5 instead, but I can't say for sure what the idea there was. I think the one that a couple of people have asked for before is actually Crom Faeyr...but I think it kind of balances out with some others, like The Silver Sword and The Equalizer, going up to +4 instead. Additionally, Crom Faeyr is already outrageously powerful and I unnerfed it to compared to normal IR (which gives it -1/2 ApR), so I'm a little loathe to make it even stronger.
  13. The only +5 weapon in SoA in either IR or IRR is the Staff of Power of the Magi. I don't know what that component is, but it certainly sounds very difficult to account for if it just takes all weapons with an enchantment level of +1-4 and changes them all to +3 - can't imagine using it, it'd be very weird to have everything inexplicably set to +3. Does this also apply to SR's Phantom Blade (+4) and Fire Seeds (+4)?
  14. Carsomyr is supposed to have Dispel Magic, not Reverse Magic. IIRC, Reverse Magic was something I added to it for a short while while I was trying to figure out some IR-specific Dispel Magic issues and that was the simplest solution at the time. Don't think it's otherwise ever had it in either IR or IRR. Current statistics description of Carsomyr +4: Special Abilities: Dispel Magic (3x per day) Equipped Abilities: Magic Resistance: +10% bonus Combat Abilities: Powerful Weapon: +2 bonus to damage Righteous: +3 bonus to damage against evil creatures Dispelling: removes all magical effects from the target (save vs. spell neg.) THAC0: +4 bonus Damage: 1D10 + 4 Damage Type: Slashing Weight: 10 Speed Factor: 6 Proficiency Type: Two-Handed Sword Type: Two-Handed Requires: 16 Strength
  15. @DavidW Here is the current situation of SR (not SRR - pretend this isn't the SRR thread for a moment): SPPR703, Gate in the vanilla game, is replaced with Summon Death Knight. This simply uses a Use Eff (177) with SPCACO.eff, and SR overrides the original version of SPCACO.eff to summon DVDEATHK.cre. DVKNIGHTK.cre is, of course, uniquely SR-added. SPWI707 is the exact same story as above, using the same .eff and therefore summons the same creature. SPWI807, Summon Fiend, uses a 177 with SPFIEND.eff. SR overrides the original version of SPFIEND.eff to summon DEMGLASU.cre. SR overrides the original version of DEMGLASU.cre with its own. SPWI905, Gate, uses a 177 with SPGATE.eff. SR overrides the original version of SPGATE.eff to summon DEMPITSU.cre. SR overrides the original version of DEMPITSU.cre with its own. I have not changed any of this for SRR (I don't use SR's fiends, I prefer atweaks', so I have little reason to modify them beyond some slight tweaking/maintenance), so it stands to reason that whatever's currently happening here should also be happening in SR as well, though I have admittedly not tested that. If it did before, I don't see any reason it shouldn't now, .
  16. Yeah, SR sets all antimagic spells (besides Breach) to have a power level of 0, so they do. Unfortunately does not exist in any form in either SR or SRR - I just did a complete search of all files in the SR archive for it via Notepad++, and it turns up nothing. How would the best way to resolve this be, would you say?
  17. That's very weird, I was pretty sure I made that specifically impossible by re-stringing every creature and weapon specifically for the sake of BG1EE. Let's see here...no, no, you're right, that does appear to happen. COPY ~spell_rev\spwi1##\famrab.itm~ ~override~ SAY NAME1 @8218 SAY UNIDENTIFIED_DESC @8036 The description is set correctly, the name...oh, blast, it's probably the fact that it says NAME1 instead of NAME2. I also see that the descriptions have double-set usabilities. Okay, thanks, will fix. (e): Fixed both of those, plus fixed another compatibility issue between IRR and SRR that could arise to do with making sure that Protection from Missiles, Physical Mirror, Gloves of Missile Snaring, and Reflection Shield protect against SRR/IRR-added projectiles.
  18. Whatever is the last component shown in the changelog is the one responsible for what is currently in your override. Likewise, if you go up an item in the changelog, then whatever is in the backup folder for that particular component is what the file looked like BEFORE said component made any changes to it (it's the backed-up version of the file in case of that component being uninstalled!). So if that is indeed SCS, it seems as though I would need to make a change there.
  19. Is there a difference between 9 and 0 here so long as the first effect is a 3?
  20. DEMGLASU.cre is used for the 8th level arcane "Summon Fiend" in SR/R. But if your version only has a mere 70 current HP and is seemingly weak, then at some point something overrode/edited the SR/R version, because I just checked the .cre file and that sucker should have 160 HP with 4 ApR and 2 base THAC0 and...yeah, you're gonna notice that real quick. Not sure what exactly, though - if it's SCS, then I guess I should probably give the SR version of it its own unique resource name. If you find that that's the case, please let me know. Maybe it'd be smart to do that anyways. (e): Yes, Summon Death Knight is supposed to be a 7th level arcane (and divine) spell. Fiends are intentionally a bit more powerful than comparative summoning spells for the fact that they are unpredictable and uncontrollable.
  21. There appears to be some sort of issue here, because there is no 7th level Summon Fiend for priests in SR/R - only Summon Death Knight. May I see your current weidu.log? Huh, yeah, you're right about being able to control the summoned fiends if you never unselect them, but ultimately a very minor issue.
  22. Anything that dispels is not magic resistable, whether it's Breach, Secret Word, or Dispel Magic. I think your logic make senses, and for that reason, it makes sense that those anti-magic spells work on liches. The only exception I think is Breach, but that's taken care of by SCS - everything else (e.g. Secret Word, Remove Magic, Spell Thrust) do function...though Remove Magic is very unlikely to work, of course.
  23. ...I wonder if this is another EE vs. non-EE thing. Okay, I'll actually test multiple games to make sure it works. Okay. BG2EE before installing IRR: BG2EE after installing IRR: BG1EE, on the other hand...it does exactly what you said it does. And now that I look at the two previous images, it seems to have removed other entries it wasn't supposed to? Huh. (e): Okay, ACTUALLY fixed this time, I think - tested on both BG1EE, BG2EE, and ToB, and there didn't seem to be any problems. Thanks!
  24. What happens in my game for these fiends is that they're summoned, they're controllable for a second or two, then they either decide to be hostile or friendly to you. If they become friendly to you, they say they'll follow you and will become uncontrollable but retain their green circle and follow you around and help...unless you do even the slightest of hostile actions, in which case they turn hostile. If they turn hostile immediately, they'll say something like "die!" and will be aligned with all general hostiles and immediately start attacking the party. I just tested 8th level Summon Fiend and 7th level Death Knight and that is how both of them worked. I feel like I've learned everything that you just said probably around 4-5 times throughout the years, but I never remember the details. I'll try to remember that you wrote it all down here if I need it again.
  • Create New...