751 replies to this topic

[Demivrgvs]

Polymorph Self

Guest_Klye_*, on May 5 2009, 05:58 AM, said:

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?)

Winter Wolf: yeah, I've thought about it when I was working on it. It isn't its main attack though, but a separate special attack, and in theory Polymorph Self shouldn't grant such abilities. I'll think about it.

Mustard Jelly: I don't remember right now why I chose +2 enchantment. I can probably agree with you on this matter, especially because, as you say yourself, this form is really 'awesome' with so many immunities and a powerful ranged attack.

Suggested New forms: I actually thought about implementing a Troll form, but I fear a "cheap" regeneration would be too exploitable, especially considering how much this spell lasts. Regarding a Carrion Crawler form...well, I'm not too fond of such creature and I'm not sure if it can be considered as useful as the other forms, but perhaps it's not required to have equally powerful forms as long as each of it is interesting and doesn't completely outshine the others.

Guest_Klye_*, on May 5 2009, 03:59 AM, said:

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.

You're right. There's a limit to the amount of text for a spell description, but if it can be done I think I should do it.

[Icendoan]

Carrion Crawlers (on hit) have a save vs death or be stunned.

Icen

[Demivrgvs]

Klye, I've moved your last post and answered to it here.

Icendoan, on May 6 2009, 08:17 AM, said:

Carrion Crawlers (on hit) have a save vs death or be stunned.

I know, should I assume you'd like this form?

[Salk]

Demivrgvs, on May 5 2009, 02:15 PM, said:

Guest_Klye_*, on May 5 2009, 03:59 AM, said:

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.

You're right. There's a limit to the amount of text for a spell description, but if it can be done I think I should do it.

It's a good idea.

And yes, not all the forms need to be equally powerful. If the new form is interesting and funny, people might want to have it anyway.

The rebalancing is a noble goal but can't be taken too literally else we'd end up forgetting that this is a goal to tend to and not a mandatory requirement for which it's okay to sacrifice other important aspects of the game.

[DrAzTiK]

Here some feedback, bugs etc...

sunfire : maybe it's just in my game but i still have the vanilla version. (no penality for saving trow)

secret word : description indicates this spell remove globe of invulnerability.

enchanted weapon level 4 : create only one bullet +3. (usefull spell now)

scroll of khelben : range is short when using this spell by quick slot ( a bit boring for my low level party)

divine traps : It seems there is no limit to set fire trap level 2 (druid) and glyph of warding level 3. I have set plenty of them in beholder lair lol.

If you allow me, I would like to give my opinon about :

defensive harmony : I personnaly find radius a bit short ( imo ennemy are especially penalized )
Doom : I don't find this spell very appealing now.


ty ^^

Edited by DrAzTiK, 09 May 2009 - 10:10 AM.

[Demivrgvs]

DrAzTiK, on May 9 2009, 08:10 PM, said:

sunfire : maybe it's just in my game but i still have the vanilla version. (no penality for saving trow)

secret word : description indicates this spell remove globe of invulnerability.

enchanted weapon level 4 : create only one bullet +3. (usefull spell now)

scroll of khelben : range is short when using this spell by quick slot ( a bit boring for my low level party)

divine traps : It seems there is no limit to set fire trap level 2 (druid) and glyph of warding level 3. I have set plenty of them in beholder lair lol.

defensive harmony : I personnaly find radius a bit short ( imo ennemy are especially penalized )

Doom : I don't find this spell very appealing now.

Sunfire : very strange, after checking I do have both the penalty to saves and the small tweak to avoid the hurt animation on caster. Can someone confirm this?

Secret word : I'll fix the description thanks.

Enchanted Weapon : I already fixed it internally together with a few more small fixes, I may release a new hotfix within the day.

Scroll of Khelben : I'll look into it.

Divine Traps : isn't it always been so? I think Skull Trap too, but I may be wrong.

Defensive Harmony : I may raise it to 15' if it seems the AI is wasting this spell. DavidW should now it better than me.

Doom : I think you're understimating it. Once it connects every other subsequent spell is much more effective, and -2 to hit and damage is quite noticeable too imo. Furthermore the spell save isn't too easy to resist, and casting time is almost instantaneous.

[DrAzTiK]

For traps, the problem is not the infinity amount but more the fact that it is possible with SP to place them one near other one.

For exemple, In vanilla, it is impossible to set a skull trap proximate to another skull trap. ( If you do it, the first skull trap blow up, there is somethink like a 5 or 10 radius minimal spacing to avoid it, I think it's same for divine traps)

[Demivrgvs]

Spiritual Hammer

mercurier, on May 17 2009, 07:16 AM, said:

shammr.itm, shammr2.itm, shammr3.itm, shammr5.itm all have a range of 25, but shammr4.itm has a range of 20

Kudos for spotting such a small thing! Thanks, will fix.

Invisible Stalker

Quote

In my game neutral invisible stalkers are always under my control, cases can be found in Chamber of Air in Durag's Tower and home of the magi who asks you for Baldran's Helm in BG.

It's a known issue reported by BGT players yes, sorry for not having fixed this before. I'll create two different Stalker .cre files to fix this, one for the summoning spell and one for BG1 encounters.

[mercurier]

Me again

spwi106: Blindness: though school changed to necromancy, the description remained to be "School: Illusion".

[Demivrgvs]

mercurier, on May 23 2009, 07:11 PM, said:

Me again

spwi106: Blindness: though school changed to necromancy, the description remained to be "School: Illusion".

I've just checked the .tra file in the hotfix and the description correctly says necromancy. Are you sure you're using it?

[mercurier]

Demivrgvs, on May 23 2009, 10:28 AM, said:

mercurier, on May 23 2009, 07:11 PM, said:

Me again

spwi106: Blindness: though school changed to necromancy, the description remained to be "School: Illusion".

I've just checked the .tra file in the hotfix and the description correctly says necromancy. Are you sure you're using it?

Sorry I didn't notice it...the pinned hotfix (outdated for v2.9) was just too shining

EDIT:
I've downloaded the hotfix for SR2.9 and took a look into it. The .tra file changed a lot, however, not all spells were updated to their description (e.g. disintegrate still deals fixed 100 damage). Maybe they will be finished in SR3?

Additionaly, I wonder whether drastic changes to some *key* spells such as Spell Shiel (totally reworked) and Dispel/Remove Magic (school changed back to Abjuration, now affected by SI) would hinder the efficiency of enemy AI

At last, for Spell Shield. In vanilla game it is the UNIQUE spell that protect the caster from ALL spell protection breakers (ruby ray, Khelben, pierce shield, etc.). Spell Shield + SI:Abj would effectively force enemy magi to spend two more spell before they can strip your fully-buffed magi nude with a successfull DM. Also I think its new version is too powerful, 'cause it functions very similar to potion of magic shielding, which can be as rare as green PFM scrolls. After all, I personally prefer the vanilla version

Edited by mercurier, 23 May 2009 - 10:20 PM.

[Demivrgvs]

mercurier, on May 24 2009, 02:44 AM, said:

Demivrgvs, on May 23 2009, 10:28 AM, said:

mercurier, on May 23 2009, 07:11 PM, said:

Me again

spwi106: Blindness: though school changed to necromancy, the description remained to be "School: Illusion".

I've just checked the .tra file in the hotfix and the description correctly says necromancy. Are you sure you're using it?

Sorry I didn't notice it...the pinned hotfix (outdated for v2.9) was just too shining

That's why we need a V3.

Quote

EDIT:
I've downloaded the hotfix for SR2.9 and took a look into it. The .tra file changed a lot, however, not all spells were updated to their description (e.g. disintegrate still deals fixed 100 damage). Maybe they will be finished in SR3?

Again, very strange, the spell is indeed updated in my game. Anyway, if something like this is reported I'll make sure it doesn't happen in V3.

Quote

Additionaly, I wonder whether drastic changes to some *key* spells such as Spell Shiel (totally reworked) and Dispel/Remove Magic (school changed back to Abjuration, now affected by SI) would hinder the efficiency of enemy AI

When I implement such drastical changes we generally discuss it a lot before I do.

Dispel/Remove Magic have been restored as per Vanilla (mainly because DavidW convinced me to do it), and thus it's not considered a change of mine anymore.

Vanilla's Spell Shield hardcoded effect is bugged, SCSII AI don't use this spell because it's broken, and using it in some cases end up being very cheesy. If I could fix the spell to work as intended without bugs I would have done it, but I can't.

Quote

At last, for Spell Shield. In vanilla game it is the UNIQUE spell that protect the caster from ALL spell protection breakers (ruby ray, Khelben, pierce shield, etc.). Spell Shield + SI:Abj would effectively force enemy magi to spend two more spell before they can strip your fully-buffed magi nude with a successfull DM. Also I think its new version is too powerful, 'cause it functions very similar to potion of magic shielding, which can be as rare as green PFM scrolls. After all, I personally prefer the vanilla version

In V3 Spell Shield won't be available at 5th level. Due to spell number limit per spell level (I've added few 5th level spells) I ned to remove one spell, and this one is clearly the more problematic because the original was broken and the revised could be considered too powerful. I'll take about it asap, but my solution would be to keep it more or less as it is in 2.9 and move it to a higher spell level slot.

Edited by Demivrgvs, 23 May 2009 - 11:16 PM.

[mercurier]

Demivrgvs, on May 23 2009, 11:12 PM, said:

Again, very strange, the spell is indeed updated in my game. Anyway, if something like this is reported I'll make sure it doesn't happen in V3.

I am very sorry that I've messed SR2 and SR2.9 up Actually both Blindness and Disintegrade have no problem... Thanks for your great patience!

Demivrgvs, on May 23 2009, 11:12 PM, said:

Vanilla's Spell Shield hardcoded effect is bugged, SCSII AI don't use this spell because it's broken, and using it in some cases end up being very cheesy. If I could fix the spell to work as intended without bugs I would have done it, but I can't.

You are right, at least a brand new spell shield is better than a old buggy one

Quote

In V3 Spell Shield won't be available at 5th level. Due to spell number limit per spell level (I've added few 5th level spells) I ned to remove one spell, and this one is clearly the more problematic because the original was broken and the revised could be considered too powerful. I'll take about it asap, but my solution would be to keep it more or less as it is in 2.9 and move it to a higher spell level slot.

Yes, I think its power deserves a spell slot much higher than lvl5. BTW, since it acts much like a counterpart of Mantle, would tuning its duration down to 4 rounds be a good idea?

Edited by mercurier, 24 May 2009 - 12:52 AM.