Jump to content


Photo

Feedback


852 replies to this topic

#1 Demivrgvs

Demivrgvs

    The Laughing Man

  • Modders
  • 5005 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Italy

Posted 02 May 2009 - 04:18 AM

Feel free to create your own topic on any aspect of SR, but if you don't want to, or simply have only a few things to ask/suggest, this is the topic for you.

Let us know what you think of Spell Revisions and how it could be improved.

Edited by Demivrgvs, 02 May 2009 - 07:58 AM.


#2 Demivrgvs

Demivrgvs

    The Laughing Man

  • Modders
  • 5005 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Italy

Posted 02 May 2009 - 04:21 AM

Spook
Description has not been changed from the original game.

Sleep
Wow. You've boosted this spell by quite alot. Considering how the Lvl 1 spells already have 2 really good "save or else" scalable spells in Color Spray & Grease, I think this is just to much. Maybe go back to a HD cap of 4 or 5, and give a save bonus for those of higher HD? Or just don't effect above HD 5. It's only supposed to be a stop gap spell until the later lvl spells.


Color Spray
See Sleep. These spells really don't need to scale up to the caster current level. Since the current effect is AT LEAST a 1 round stun on a failed save, that's fantastic for a 1st lvl spell. Also, the current color spray is SO much better than Lvl1 "blindness" & "Spook", since it has a area effect & basically has better effects. Finnally, in game play I think that Stun > confused > blind. It also makes for a more logical progression for the spell. So Maybe change it to:

l< HD 4 - stunned for 5 rounds

l< HD 7 - confused & blinded 3 rounds

l>= HD 7 - blinded 2 rounds


All effects are culm. So a HD1 foe, failing a save, is stunned for 5 rounds, then confused & blinded for 3 rounds, then blinded 2 rounds.

Spell still effects friend or foe.
That's still a REALLY powerful lvl 1 spell. At worse, it's mass blindness spell at lvl1.



#3 Demivrgvs

Demivrgvs

    The Laughing Man

  • Modders
  • 5005 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Italy

Posted 02 May 2009 - 07:00 AM

Color Spray
This spell is particularly tricky to handle, and it's current status is due to the fact that I simply implemented its PnP version and then replaced 'unconsciousness' effect with 'confusion' (as players suggested) to slightly "nerf" it.

This spell seems to rock (and probably does) but it also has two quite noticeable weaknesses:
- it shines only against opponents weaker than the caster
- it's not party friendly
The latter being a quite noticable thing if you keep in mind its shape coned AoE isn't so good to handle either.

I'm not sure this spell is "SO much better" two spells you've mentioned:
- vs. Blindness: first of all I should say I had to nerf my original work on this one (it previously lasted forever, and it was removable only with a Cure Disease). Having allowed Dispel Magic to "cure" it, and reduced its duration to 8 hours its advantages over Color Spray are surely less than expected but can still be an asset in some situations. Color Spray's 'blindness' lasts only 5 rounds and works only against foes quite weaker than the caster, while Blindness spell allows you to effectively get rid of a foe, even incredibly more powerful than the caster, and for the entire duration of the encounter.
- vs. Spook: this spell advantage is quite noticeable imo, the penalty to its save (up to -4) really makes a difference against powerful opponents.

I'm not saying these three spells are equally powerful, I'm just trying to make a full comparison in case any other player wants to step in and discuss this matter with us.


Sleep
I'm not sure if you know I've also added a new feature that makes sleeping opponents wake up if hurt, that's supposed to severely nerf this spell, as in vanilla a sleeping opponent was as good as dead (you could beat him to death as much as you wish without waking him up).

Regarding the eventual HD cap...I do hate them. What's the point in having a spell which become completely useless as soon as you reach a certain level? You say that " it's only supposed to be a stop gap spell until the later lvl spells", but I strongly disagree with this "philosophy", and most SR users probably do as well as long as the spell is not unbalanced.

Edited by Demivrgvs, 02 May 2009 - 08:06 AM.


#4 Guest_Guest_Klye_*_*

Guest_Guest_Klye_*_*
  • Guests

Posted 02 May 2009 - 11:17 AM

Color Spray
This spell is particularly tricky to handle, and it's current status is due to the fact that I simply implemented its PnP version and then replaced 'unconsciousness' effect with 'confusion' (as players suggested) to slightly "nerf" it.

This spell seems to rock (and probably does) but it also has two quite noticeable weaknesses:
- it shines only against opponents weaker than the caster
- it's not party friendly
The latter being a quite noticable thing if you keep in mind its shape coned AoE isn't so good to handle either.


Well, as I haven't used this spell yet, I'll see how it goes. But, the tactical use of the spell won't be THAT difficult. And as most encounters are against equal or lower Lvl monsters, especially with low number parties, the spell limitations don't sound that bad. Hey, it's a LVL 1 spell which gives mass blindness, stun and confusion for 5+ rounds. That's more than enough time to mop up the enemy.


Sleep
I'm not sure if you know I've also added a new feature that makes sleeping opponents wake up if hurt, that's supposed to severely nerf this spell, as in vanilla a sleeping opponent was as good as dead (you could beat him to death as much as you wish without waking him up).


Gack. I didn't know about this. I really have to pay more attention during the install process.

Regarding the eventual HD cap...I do hate them. What's the point in having a spell which become completely useless as soon as you reach a certain level? You say that " it's only supposed to be a stop gap spell until the later lvl spells", but I strongly disagree with this "philosophy", and most SR users probably do as well as long as the spell is not unbalanced.


[Look out - you are about to enter an "ad adsurbum" argument. Watch your head and keep a smile. It's all tongue in cheek.]

Once, I felt as you did. By god, sleep is sleep. It should be possible to effect anyone. There not should be HD/level based limits.

But then, why not apply this same argument to the rest of the spells? Fireball, Magic Missle, etc - all now scalable to 20lvl. And WHY, dear spirits, should I have to wait 2 levels for my vampire hand spell to gain an extra 1d6? And it should scale... well... as long as I want and at each lvl. And why stop there? The 20lvl cap is arbitrary, and so it should....no must ... go the way of the do - do.

But that would be crazy. We Sorcerers/Wizards would be become all powerful. So, I considered the alternative. There must be a reason these lvl 1 spells don't scale forever and be equally useful against whatever opponent I face.

In the end, I decided the fault lie with my assumptions/expections. These lvl1 spells are great against the pre 10HD creatures. Some are specifically designed to have a SMALL chance of working even at high levels. But why force them to do more? If I face a foe, I'll use a spell that's right for the situation.

[/end ad adsurbum]

Short form of above --- If a fighter faces a foe which requires + 1 weapons to hit, he doesn't cry "By the light, I think my normal sword should have a chance to hit!". He just takes out the weapon he needs for the situation. Or runs away, the coward.

But, this is just a (small) difference of opinion. I welcome any discussion, but it's really not a big deal.

#5 Guest_Guest_Klye_*_*

Guest_Guest_Klye_*_*
  • Guests

Posted 02 May 2009 - 11:23 AM

Teleport Field

Hey, can you change this spell a bit? I *think* it randomly teleports all enemies within the area effect to some random place within the same area. It would be ALOT more useful it if it always teleported the enemy OUT of the area. This way, the mage would get some physical protection. Or the mage could use it to -almost- block a narrow corridor.

Once again though, I'm thinking about the vanilla version. I just recall thinking it wasn't all that effective.

#6 Icendoan

Icendoan

    King of Parsing Errors

  • Modders
  • 1704 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The hall of 1000 posts!

Posted 02 May 2009 - 12:32 PM

It can be very effective, especially vs melee, in vanilla, simply because they don't have much time to both reach you and get a hit in.

If you are lucky, you can kill people with DBF and Skull Traps and let them port into them.

Icen
Mods in development: Keeping Yoshimo
Posted Image

#7 Demivrgvs

Demivrgvs

    The Laughing Man

  • Modders
  • 5005 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Italy

Posted 02 May 2009 - 03:17 PM

Color Spray

Well, as I haven't used this spell yet, I'll see how it goes. But, the tactical use of the spell won't be THAT difficult. And as most encounters are against equal or lower Lvl monsters, especially with low number parties, the spell limitations don't sound that bad. Hey, it's a LVL 1 spell which gives mass blindness, stun and confusion for 5+ rounds. That's more than enough time to mop up the enemy.

I'm not so sure opponents usually are of lower level than your party, especially with SCS installed, anyway blindness lasts "only" 3 rounds not 5, and stun lasts only 6 seconds (I fear by "5+" you might have thought that in total you have up to 9 rounds duration, but they are overlapped).

Anyway, I haven't received "complains" about this spell till we decided to replace 'unconsciousness' with 'confusion'. Try it in-game and let me know, if it still seems too powerful we'll find a way to nerf it.

Hit Dice cap (e.g. Sleep)

Regarding the eventual HD cap...I do hate them. What's the point in having a spell which become completely useless as soon as you reach a certain level? You say that " it's only supposed to be a stop gap spell until the later lvl spells", but I strongly disagree with this "philosophy", and most SR users probably do as well as long as the spell is not unbalanced.

... Once, I felt as you did. By god, sleep is sleep. It should be possible to effect anyone. There not should be HD/level based limits.

But then, why not apply this same argument to the rest of the spells? Fireball, Magic Missle, etc - all now scalable to 20lvl. And WHY, dear spirits, should I have to wait 2 levels for my vampire hand spell to gain an extra 1d6? And it should scale... well... as long as I want and at each lvl. And why stop there? The 20lvl cap is arbitrary, and so it should....no must ... go the way of the do - do.

But that would be crazy. We Sorcerers/Wizards would be become all powerful. So, I considered the alternative. There must be a reason these lvl 1 spells don't scale forever and be equally useful against whatever opponent I face. ...

Yeah, but you're talking about two different things imo. A cap at xth level in terms of damage/save penalty/... is one thing, a cap which makes the spell effectively useless is another thing. Thus I do think there's nothing wrong about a damage cap at 10th level for a Fireball, but having Sleep completely useless against any creature with more than 5HD seems "wrong" to me (and almost 99% of the creatures in BG2 have more than 5HD). If we don't want to call it "wrong", at least I'm sure I can call it a "waste", as there's very little point for such a spell to exist, especially in a game like BG.

Teleport Field

Hey, can you change this spell a bit? I *think* it randomly teleports all enemies within the area effect to some random place within the same area. It would be ALOT more useful it if it always teleported the enemy OUT of the area. This way, the mage would get some physical protection. Or the mage could use it to -almost- block a narrow corridor.

Interesting...I don't think I can do such a thing without messing around with different effects (the original "teleport field" effect is hardcoded), and I'm not sure it would make much difference as it's main usefulness would remain almost unchanged. As Ice suggests it's almost only purpose is to block melee opponents (SCS makes good use of it if I'm not wrong), and it does it extremely well imo, especially if you have multiple fields at the same time.

#8 Guest_Guest_Klye_*_*

Guest_Guest_Klye_*_*
  • Guests

Posted 02 May 2009 - 05:43 PM

Teleport Field

Hey, can you change this spell a bit? I *think* it randomly teleports all enemies within the area effect to some random place within the same area. It would be ALOT more useful it if it always teleported the enemy OUT of the area. This way, the mage would get some physical protection. Or the mage could use it to -almost- block a narrow corridor.

Interesting...I don't think I can do such a thing without messing around with different effects (the original "teleport field" effect is hardcoded), and I'm not sure it would make much difference as it's main usefulness would remain almost unchanged. As Ice suggests it's almost only purpose is to block melee opponents (SCS makes good use of it if I'm not wrong), and it does it extremely well imo, especially if you have multiple fields at the same time.


Well, I remember my vanilla experience with it. It was the chess board combat. I was a solo sorc. I thought, I'll try this Teleport spell, after all, alot of these foes use straight hth.

It worked well for about 1 second. Then creatures would teleport close enough to me that they had time to run over and attack me. Quickly, I found myself swarmed, pummeled, and dead dead dead within moments. I thought, that was just a fluke. After all, this spell is designed for this very situtation. But each time I loaded up the game and tried the same strategy, I got the exact same results. Sometimes in less time. I wanted to bring this up because this was the vanilla version, so it was no save allowed.

Your version grants a save. And telling me that casting this spell twice makes it effective just means the current version is only half a spell. So, considering my experience, I'm not expecting it'll do much better.

But, on a side note, can you prevent casting the same spell twice in an area? For example, can the spell script detect that the spell is already in progress, dispel the old one and cast the new?

#9 Demivrgvs

Demivrgvs

    The Laughing Man

  • Modders
  • 5005 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Italy

Posted 03 May 2009 - 12:59 AM

Teleport Field

Well, I remember my vanilla experience with it. It was the chess board combat. I was a solo sorc. I thought, I'll try this Teleport spell, after all, alot of these foes use straight hth.

It worked well for about 1 second. Then creatures would teleport close enough to me that they had time to run over and attack me. Quickly, I found myself swarmed, pummeled, and dead dead dead within moments. I thought, that was just a fluke. After all, this spell is designed for this very situtation. But each time I loaded up the game and tried the same strategy, I got the exact same results. Sometimes in less time. I wanted to bring this up because this was the vanilla version, so it was no save allowed.

Your version grants a save. And telling me that casting this spell twice makes it effective just means the current version is only half a spell. So, considering my experience, I'm not expecting it'll do much better.

Judging the real effectiveness of many spells usually is more difficult than it appears. Teleport Field for example never got my attention before seeing it used by Tactics liches, and it even left me amazed when I realized that multiple TF could make a spellcaster almost unreachable by "tanks".

To understand the true spell effectiveness we must take into account possible combinations, one outstanding issue is vanilla's Robe of Vecna which makes a reasonable spell like Improved Alacrity utterly overpowered imo, and in this case a possible combination simply is multiple TF. You're right, a single TF won't make the caster unassailable by melee opponents, but it's ok imo, as it's only a 4th level spell with good duration and a big friendly AoE, and without a save multiple TF were considered by many players too powerful/annoying.

Anyway, just to throw in some suggestions we may spice things up...for example disadvantaging ranged attacks within the TF as well, after all how an archer is supposed to perfectly shot at his opponents while his own position is suddenly completely changed?! This would probably be achievable by either increasing caster AC vs. missile or reducing targets thac0 with missile weapons. Is it a bad idea?

But, on a side note, can you prevent casting the same spell twice in an area? For example, can the spell script detect that the spell is already in progress, dispel the old one and cast the new?

I don't like this concept, unless there's a really good explanation for preventing two AoE spells from co-existing.

Edited by Demivrgvs, 03 May 2009 - 01:02 AM.


#10 Guest_Guest_Klye_*_*

Guest_Guest_Klye_*_*
  • Guests

Posted 03 May 2009 - 09:42 AM

Teleport Field
Judging the real effectiveness of many spells usually is more difficult than it appears. Teleport Field for example never got my attention before seeing it used by Tactics liches, and it even left me amazed when I realized that multiple TF could make a spellcaster almost unreachable by "tanks".

To understand the true spell effectiveness we must take into account possible combinations, one outstanding issue is vanilla's Robe of Vecna which makes a reasonable spell like Improved Alacrity utterly overpowered imo, and in this case a possible combination simply is multiple TF. You're right, a single TF won't make the caster unassailable by melee opponents, but it's ok imo, as it's only a 4th level spell with good duration and a big friendly AoE, and without a save multiple TF were considered by many players too powerful/annoying.


So, you compare TF's base line effect for a lvl 8 sorc, which as I just demonstrated doesn't work, against a lich with potentially instant cast pre buff scripts or a very high level sorc with a epic level skill & the best robe in the game can do?

You are also comparing Monster(this side has TF) Vs Player combat against a Player(this side has TF) vs Monster comabt. Against that Lich, where were the mobs attacking him? I just showed that against mobs, the spell just doesn't work. I was surrounded by enemies and consistently beaten down. And, this is when the spell didn't grant a save.

My lvl 8 sorc can't waste spell choices on a spell that I need to spend two - three rounds recasting it to give me reasonable (not unbeatable) Hth protection.

The author of the Tactics mod probably noticed that TF just doesn't work, so threw a few more down to compensate for it.

Anyway, just to throw in some suggestions we may spice things up...for example disadvantaging ranged attacks within the TF as well, after all how an archer is supposed to perfectly shot at his opponents while his own position is suddenly completely changed?! This would probably be achievable by either increasing caster AC vs. missile or reducing targets thac0 with missile weapons. Is it a bad idea?

Running with your idea and completely suspending disbelief. Maybe TF would effect the arrows in flight as they enter the TF field. What should happen to these missiles? NO idea. To be consistent with the spell maybe they are randomly teleported, so just travel back out of the TF field in a random direction. So, I guess giving the caster (all friendlies?) a significant AC boost vs missiles would be way to implement the effect.



But, on a side note, can you prevent casting the same spell twice in an area? For example, can the spell script detect that the spell is already in progress, dispel the old one and cast the new?

I don't like this concept, unless there's a really good explanation for preventing two AoE spells from co-existing.

Precedent has been set by plenty of other spells. Consider:
  • AI effecting spells - Sleep, Horror, Slow, Emotion: HopeLessness, etc. Once they effect you, you can't become more asleep, paniced, depressed etc.
  • personal range spells - Mirror Image, invisibility, etc . These usually erase the old spell, or really just reset the timer. After all, you can't become MORE invisible.

And It's EXACTLY the stacking ability of some spells that get people upset. Consider Spell immunity as a case on this point. Or could you imagine if Fire shield was stackible with itself?!? (It's not is it?) You all are rightfully upset with just the two versions stacking with each other.

There are two sources of cheesiness in AOE stationary spells. The AI just doesn't deal with them well (*just run out of the stupid thing!*), and that you can stack them.

I say, an acid cloud is an acid cloud. You didn't make it more acidic. For example, if you mix two jugs of HCL- you get more HCL, not super HCL.
I say, a grease spot is a grease spot. You didn't make it more slippery.
I say, a teleport field is a teleport field. You didn't make it more.... teleport(y?).

In fact, the only effect recasting these things twice should be they cover more area.

And, did you know how ANNOYING it is to be a caster inside one of those fields? Targetting monsters that keep hopping around is not fun & tends to lose spells and rounds.

Anyway, besides your possible addition, maybe do the following :

1) Keep the save vs spells(?) on the TF - Keep the relative save (-2/-3 ?) that you use for all 4lvl spells.
2) Make those who fail a save teleport OUT of the field. They shouldn't be able to teleport near me, run over and attack me in the same round AFTER they failed their save.
3) Make the spell non stackible/ besides.

Finally, while it's doesn't effect friends, it's not exactly friendly except to those who use missiles. If you want to put a crimp on the power of the spell, make it effect everyone but the caster.

#11 Demivrgvs

Demivrgvs

    The Laughing Man

  • Modders
  • 5005 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Italy

Posted 03 May 2009 - 02:10 PM

Teleport Field

So, you compare TF's base line effect for a lvl 8 sorc, which as I just demonstrated doesn't work, against a lich with potentially instant cast pre buff scripts or a very high level sorc with a epic level skill & the best robe in the game can do?

I'm simply considering wht this spell can do, and if this spell can be put in a contingency I have to take it into account, yes. The Robe of Vecna was actually used only as example of another instance (not a direct comparison) where a combination turns a quite balanced spell into an utterly overpowered one, and it obviously was an extreme example!

You are also comparing Monster(this side has TF) Vs Player combat against a Player(this side has TF) vs Monster comabt.

And why shouldn't I consider both sides?! There are tons of instances where a spell is clearly more useful in the hands of the player, why should we always make sure the players get the most from everything?

I just showed that against mobs, the spell just doesn't work. I was surrounded by enemies and consistently beaten down. And, this is when the spell didn't grant a save.

My lvl 8 sorc can't waste spell choices on a spell that I need to spend two - three rounds recasting it to give me reasonable (not unbeatable) Hth protection.

If you were surround by too many enemies a single TF won't protect you, yes, because at least a few of them probably end up being teleported near the caster...but if the opposing group have only a few dedicated tanks, than it will probably screw their attack attempts.

Anyway I do understand your position, and I'll think about it. I'd like to hear more players on this matter as they were the ones who suggested me to add the save to this spell in the first place.

Anyway, just to throw in some suggestions we may spice things up...for example disadvantaging ranged attacks within the TF as well, after all how an archer is supposed to perfectly shot at his opponents while his own position is suddenly completely changed?! This would probably be achievable by either increasing caster AC vs. missile or reducing targets thac0 with missile weapons. Is it a bad idea?

Running with your idea and completely suspending disbelief. Maybe TF would effect the arrows in flight as they enter the TF field. What should happen to these missiles? NO idea. To be consistent with the spell maybe they are randomly teleported, so just travel back out of the TF field in a random direction. So, I guess giving the caster (all friendlies?) a significant AC boost vs missiles would be way to implement the effect.

Yeah...something like that, but I'd implement such change only if most players agree with it.

AoE stationary/stackable spells


But, on a side note, can you prevent casting the same spell twice in an area? For example, can the spell script detect that the spell is already in progress, dispel the old one and cast the new?

I don't like this concept, unless there's a really good explanation for preventing two AoE spells from co-existing.

There are two sources of cheesiness in AOE stationary spells. The AI just doesn't deal with them well (*just run out of the stupid thing!*), and that you can stack them.

I say, an acid cloud is an acid cloud. You didn't make it more acidic. For example, if you mix two jugs of HCL- you get more HCL, not super HCL.
I say, a grease spot is a grease spot. You didn't make it more slippery.
I say, a teleport field is a teleport field. You didn't make it more.... teleport(y?).

In fact, the only effect recasting these things twice should be they cover more area.

Well...SCS's AI surely handles this issue much better than vanilla's AI. Regarding multiple AoE spells co-existing:
- two Acid Clouds may increase the acidic vapor density
- two Grease spells may actually create a higher amount of slippery substance
- two Ice Storms means there are more hailstones battering the area
and so on...

#12 Guest_Guest_KLye_*_*

Guest_Guest_KLye_*_*
  • Guests

Posted 03 May 2009 - 06:06 PM

Teleport Field
If you were surround by too many enemies a single TF won't protect you, yes, because at least a few of them probably end up being teleported near the caster...but if the opposing group have only a few dedicated tanks, than it will probably screw their attack attempts.

Anyway I do understand your position, and I'll think about it. I'd like to hear more players on this matter as they were the ones who suggested me to add the save to this spell in the first place.


Oh, I don't mind the save. I think it's the right thing to do. It just annoys me that the *&!*'s teleport right next to me. So, that guy who used to be far away gets a free ride next to me, and the one next to me is not teleported far enough away to be useful. The last case - foe teleported far enough away - just doesn't happen enough for my taste.

Now the spell will require the cheesy 2+ (or more?) recastings to do what it should in the first place.

#13 Icendoan

Icendoan

    King of Parsing Errors

  • Modders
  • 1704 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The hall of 1000 posts!

Posted 04 May 2009 - 01:38 AM

Well, you run out of the teleport field, and watch them being ported about trying to get to you, without putting yourself at the risk you just highlighted.

Icen
Mods in development: Keeping Yoshimo
Posted Image

#14 Guest_Guest_Klye_*_*

Guest_Guest_Klye_*_*
  • Guests

Posted 04 May 2009 - 05:59 PM

On a completely different note, could you add the stats/ resistences/ abilities to the spell description of Polymorph self and or Shapeshift (I think its the lvl 9 spell)? I know you have it here, but it would be much better if I could just look at it in game.

#15 Guest_Guest_Klye_*_*

Guest_Guest_Klye_*_*
  • Guests

Posted 04 May 2009 - 07:58 PM

The changes you've made to Polymorph Self now makes it worth taking. The things fun, and not overpowered in the least.

I feel greedy. I like the over all spell, but would like to see one or two small changes.

Winter wolf - give it it's breath attack instead of it's claws (possible? legal? to overpowered?)
Mustard Slime - maybe remove it's "Attacks count as +2 weapons" The thing is already awesome. This way, the orge or the Flind has something special about them.

I love both the Flind & Orge shapes. But, I'd give up one of them if the replacement shape has some kind of healing ability or could paralyze (like a carrion crawler or it's souped up version. How cool would that be?)



Reply to this topic



  


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users