12 replies to this topic

[urdjur]

Under SR v. 3.1 and SCS I+II:

Does Spell Immunity: Abjuration stop Breach? I've gathered that SR's Pierce Shield (VIII) bypasses it and brings it down in the process (if it is the highest spell protection) but I don't know if Breach counts as a magical attack in the same way. If it does, I also wonder if there is another spell that I might have overlooked apart from (Minor) Spell Turning/Deflection/Trap that can stop a creature that sees invisible as an innate ability (such as a lich) from hitting you with a Breach.

Also wondering if SR's familiars strike as normal (unenchanted) weapons throughout SoA and ToB? In case it differs between familiar, I'm particularly interested in the rabbit (I need it to kill magic golems in my solo poverty [no items] run).

[Demivrgvs]

I need to be at home to be 100% sure because the whole SI:Abj vs antimagic atacks is something that has changed so many times that I can't remember. In theory SI:Abj should block all of them, but it has been decided (sadly) to keep a more vanilla-like system, thus pretty much all spell removals bypass it.

Btw, SR's Spell Shield (aka 8th lvl Greater Globe of Invulnerability) makes the caster immune to all spells up to 5th lvl, Breach included (note: the AI will detect it as a Spell Deflection).

Again don't remember off-hand, but there's a doc within SR's mod folder where you can find complete description of each and every familiar (ToB versions included). Let me know if you can't find it.

[urdjur]

Thanks, I'd appreciate it if you could look into it when you find the time. I had an "almost stable" installation of BGII+ToB+Ascension+SR+SCS2 a while back on my Mac, but couldn't sort out the last few problems. Now I can't find the old folders and I'd like to have this info before I take the plunge and start tinkering with a new installation (which will probably involve the added complexity of WineSkin, BootCamp etc.) Anyway, it'd be great if you could confirm the familiar strikes-as bonuses.

Demivrgvs, on 30 January 2012 - 07:06 AM, said:

In theory SI:Abj should block all of them, but it has been decided (sadly) to keep a more vanilla-like system, thus pretty much all spell removals bypass it.

Btw, SR's Spell Shield (aka 8th lvl Greater Globe of Invulnerability) makes the caster immune to all spells up to 5th lvl, Breach included (note: the AI will detect it as a Spell Deflection).

Ah yes, Spell Shield would also work (if SI: Abjuration doesn't stop it already) - that's true. I think blocking Dispel/Remove Magic (and possibly Breach + offensive stuff like Imprisonment) is plenty powerful for SI: Abjuration. If it stopped everything, Ruby Ray of Reversal would become mandatory, but of course, even that should then be thwarted by SI: Alteration. This would simply transpose all the brokenness of vanilla's Invisibility + SI: Divination + SI: Abjuration to the same set-up with SI: Alteration thrown in, working exactly the same under SCS/SR (the AI matters not if you're immune to everything regardless of what spells are cast). Wizards would become invincible (even more so than they already are), except against creatures that see invisible as a non-spell effect. Waiting out protections would be the only way to defeat their defenses.

[Quester]

Demivrgvs, on 30 January 2012 - 07:06 AM, said:

there's a doc within SR's mod folder where you can find complete description of each and every familiar (ToB versions included). Let me know if you can't find it.

As far as I can see, this doesn't specify what type of enchantment they hit with, if any. Unless I'm looking in the wrong place.

[urdjur]

Thanks for checking Quester. Anybody else know what familiars hit as? If SR doesn't change this explicitly, perhaps it's the same as in the vanilla game, in case that helps.

Also, another question concerning Phantom Blade. From the SR description:

Quote

The sword deals 1d12+4 points of magic damage to its victims, and an additional 10 points of damage against undead creatures. Due to its ethereal nature, strength bonuses do not apply, but attacks with the phantom blade are considered melee touch attacks, and thus gain a +4 bonus to hit. Furthermore, a successful strike temporarily scrambles magic, causing any spells the target casts in the next round to fail (save vs. spell at a -4 penalty negates). The blade is considered to be of +4 enchantment when determining what it can hit, but it cannot harm inorganic things because it has no solid existence.

Is the created blade treates as a physical weapon, much like Melf's Minute Meteors, or as a magic damaging attack like Ghoul Touch except it doesn't discharge? If it strikes as a +4 weapon, is it [slashing]? If it's magic damage, will Magic Resistance apply and liches be immune to it (by virtue of it being below spell level 6)?

[Demivrgvs]

Familiars

urdjur, on 02 February 2012 - 05:06 AM, said:

Anybody else know what familiars hit as?

Sorry I thought it was documented in that doc, I'll look into it myself then, and hopefully I'll remember to let you know asap this time around.

Phantom Blade

Quote

Is the created blade treates as a physical weapon, much like Melf's Minute Meteors, or as a magic damaging attack like Ghoul Touch except it doesn't discharge? If it strikes as a +4 weapon, is it [slashing]? If it's magic damage, will Magic Resistance apply and liches be immune to it (by virtue of it being below spell level 6)?

I'm not sure I get the difference between MMM and Ghoul Touch, they both count as weapons with a documente "enchantment lvl" to determine what they can hit, and Ghoul Touch doesn't discharge (MMM does - sort of, as it creates a limited amount of meteors).

That being said, as the description says, PB counts as a +4 weapon, thus it can hurt liches unless protected by PfMW (they are immune to non-magic weapons only),. It inflicts magic damage instead of physical, and it bypasses magic resistance because that is the established behaviour within BG (weapons, and any of their "on hit" magical properties always bypasses magic resistance).

[Ardanis]

I think the question was - should PB, being a 5th level spell, bypass lich's immunity to <6 spells? I would say yes, because low-level summons can hurt liches just fine.

[urdjur]

Thanks for the replies. Yes, as Ardanis put it - I was wondering if Phantom Blade was implemented more as a temporary weapon than a spell. I did not realize Ghoul Touch functioned as one too. So the only difference between MMM and Ghoul Touch/Phantom Blade is the damage type? PB would bypass physical resistances, but not resistance to magic damage, whereas MMM wouldn't, but would count as a blunt weapon against bone golems for instance.

Looking forward to the findings on familiars and thanks for the reply re: breach in the scs thread! (in case anybody's wondering, yes SI: Abj. blocks Breach).

[Demivrgvs]

urdjur, on 02 February 2012 - 12:18 PM, said:

Thanks for the replies. Yes, as Ardanis put it - I was wondering if Phantom Blade was implemented more as a temporary weapon than a spell.

I know, and I thought my reply was answering that doubt too, as I told the magically created weapon acts as an actual weapon (not a spell) thus bypassing magic resistance and spell protections (e.g. liches immunities, GoI, Spell Deflection, and so on).

Quote

I did not realize Ghoul Touch functioned as one too. So the only difference between MMM and Ghoul Touch/Phantom Blade is the damage type? PB would bypass physical resistances, but not resistance to magic damage, whereas MMM wouldn't, but would count as a blunt weapon against bone golems for instance.

Pretty much, but just that I'm here i'd like to remind you MMM does "missile dmg + fire dmg", it doesn't inflict any blunt dmg.

Quote

Looking forward to the findings on familiars

I checked this early morning: familiar's physical attacks count as a non-magical weapon, even in their improved ToB versions. I do need to find some time to work on familiars.

[urdjur]

Demivrgvs, on 03 February 2012 - 01:58 AM, said:

I checked this early morning: familiar's physical attacks count as a non-magical weapon, even in their improved ToB versions. I do need to find some time to work on familiars.

But this is great news! That means I will have a non-magical weapon at hand for defeating magic golems while keeping my no-items restriction. IMO, familiars shouldn't hit as enchanted weapons (at least not the "animal" ones). Thanks for checking!

[Ba'alzamon]

Seems like a good place to ask this question:
Are 1PP wings actualy included with SR avatar changes? I read "updates...to take advantage of 1PP Attachable Wings" in multiple places. But nowhere have I seen it state that it actually comes WITH the wings. I even checked the acknowledgements to see if Erephine (1PP author?). Everything indicates it is NOT included. Should I install it seperately? Before or after SR? Male version too? Seems like too many unanswered questions that route, so maybe it IS included? Heh. Thanks.

[Ba'alzamon]

Also, if SR has the 1PP flaming swords, IR specifically says to install that component after IR. I was about to do SR then IR, but is that okay? If it must be the other way around it should say somewhere.

[Demivrgvs]

Ba'alzamon, on 25 February 2012 - 12:42 AM, said:

Are 1PP wings actualy included with SR avatar changes? I read "updates...to take advantage of 1PP Attachable Wings" in multiple places. But nowhere have I seen it state that it actually comes WITH the wings. I even checked the acknowledgements to see if Erephine (1PP author?). Everything indicates it is NOT included. Should I install it seperately? Before or after SR? Male version too? Seems like too many unanswered questions that route, so maybe it IS included? Heh. Thanks.

Yes they are included. Revisions mods tend to be independent and thus I always include everything needed (files, tweaks, hacks, and so on).

P.S I do acknowledge Erephine! From the readme: "Special thanks to Erephine for creating and letting me use that wonderful 1PP material!" I would be mad to not thank her!

Ba'alzamon, on 25 February 2012 - 11:16 AM, said:

Also, if SR has the 1PP flaming swords, IR specifically says to install that component after IR. I was about to do SR then IR, but is that okay? If it must be the other way around it should say somewhere.

I think we're only asking to install IR's flaming sword optional component after SR (and after item adding mods) because Ardanis made that component patch every existing flaming sword in the installed game to add a stealth penalty.

Install order between IR and SR main components isn't an issue at all, but we're often suggesting to install patching components (e.g. shields stats revision) as late as possible during installs because those components are coded to also affect files that may be added or altered by different mods.