29 replies to this topic

[Miloch]

CamDawg, on Oct 18 2006, 04:44 AM, said:

Miloch, on Oct 18 2006, 08:03 AM, said:

2) She [Branwen] begins with a proficiency slot in sling, but apparently that isn't a weapon she is supposed to be able to put any slots in (it has no +/- next to it on the proficiency screen).

That's definitely an oversight; we'll need to fix this is a future release.

Was this fixed? I don't see it in the changelog.

NiGHTMARE, on Oct 18 2006, 04:26 AM, said:

3) Certain spells of the Healing and Necromancy spheres are considered 'evil', and cannot be cast by good or neutral aligned clerics. As well as Animate Dead, this also includes the Cause Wounds spells, Finger of Death, Slay Living, etc.

The 2e PHB says "Casting this spell is not a good act, and only evil priests use it frequently." That doesn't say good (and especially neutral) priests *can't* use it (if they have access to Necromancy). But I don't know if it's possible to restrict its use partially or penalize it somehow. And I can find nothing about restriction of the "Cause Wounds" spells, though maybe I'm not looking in the right places. At the very least, can we add the alignment restrictions to the spell descriptions?

I'm trying to kit or at least update spellbooks of various clerics to conform to these guidelines, but what I'm finding is that the good and neutral priests have far too many restrictions and not enough spells. I'm not sure if the game/PnP designers intended evil priests to be that much more powerful (maybe... who knows).

NiGHTMARE, on Oct 18 2006, 04:26 AM, said:

However, there are a number of spells only accessible to good aligned divine spellcasters. These currently include Alicorn Lance, Bolt of Glory, and False Dawn.

So the only new one (still of v5) is Alicorn Lance? Bolt of Glory and False Dawn were existing spells, right?

Also, could someone please detail this from the v5 changelog:

Quote

Removal of alignment-restricted divine spells is now more thorough to better account for alignment changes

I'm trying to find out what, exactly, the alignment restrictions are on spells and grepping the code and the readme and looking at the spell descriptions isn't helping me much.

[Zamael]

Why in the Nine Hells would Cyric grant any bit of power to an unholy son of his greatest enemy?

Just a thought.

[Chev]

Zamael, on Jun 2 2008, 02:56 AM, said:

Why in the Nine Hells would Cyric grant any bit of power to an unholy son of his greatest enemy?

Just a thought.

Because he is a crazed suicidal chaotic god of death?

[Zamael]

Chev, on Jun 2 2008, 04:56 AM, said:

Because he is a crazed suicidal chaotic god of death?

Fair enough.

Hey, if I play as his priest, will he say some different stuff when I encounter him at Throne of Bhaal? Because if he does, I'm gonna pick him just for that.

[Starcrunch]

Miloch, on Jun 9 2007, 07:26 PM, said:

Also, could someone please detail this from the v5 changelog:

Quote

Removal of alignment-restricted divine spells is now more thorough to better account for alignment changes

I'm trying to find out what, exactly, the alignment restrictions are on spells and grepping the code and the readme and looking at the spell descriptions isn't helping me much.

If anyone is still interested in this, here is what gets removed.
The spell_remove_evil macro removes the following at installation if it applies:
Holy Smite, False Dawn, Bolt of Glory, Holy Word, and Alicorn Lance

The spell_remove_good macro removes the following:
Animate Dead, Unholy Blight, Poison, Cause Serious Wounds, Cause Critical Wounds, Slay Living, Harm, Dolorous Decay, Finger of Death, Unholy Word, Beast Claw, Cause Light Wounds, Cause Medium Wounds, Cause Blindness or Deafness, Cause Disease, and Energy Drain

The spell_remove_neutral macro removes the following:
Animate Dead, Poison, Cause Serious Wounds, Cause Critical Wounds, Slay Living, Harm, False Dawn, Dolorous Decay, Bolt of Glory, Finger of Death, Alicorn Lance, Beast Claw, Cause Light Wounds, Cause Medium Wounds, Cause Blindness or Deafness, Cause Disease, and Energy Drain

The kits using spell_remove_evil:
Talos, Shar, Iyachtu Xvim(he's got some custom healing spells so the filter doesn't remove those), and Cyric

The kits using spell_remove_good:
Lathander, Selune, Ilmater, Sune, Corellon, and all ranger kits

The kits using spell_remove_neutral:
Helm and Tempus

The kits using none:
Kossuth, Oghma, and Oozemaster(Druid)

Note: Trueclass clerics do not have alignment restrictions applied by the above macros since they can have any alignment and this method only works if alignment is restricted and/or you know what the deity in question is like. There may be a script that does some filtering, I'll have a look and get back on this (it'll extend Baldur.BCS so it shouldn't be hard to find if it exists).

Edited by Starcrunch, 02 June 2008 - 10:11 AM.

[Miloch]

Starcrunch, on Jun 2 2008, 02:08 PM, said:

If anyone is still interested in this, here is what gets removed...

Thanks, that will be useful info for when I get a chance to look at this again. It looks like the good and neutral folks get the short end of that stick.

Here's another question: do you know of any PnP or other basis for these changes? I can see the reasoning for some of them, but others make me scratch my head. I still fail to see why a neutral character wouldn't be able to cast Animate Dead (assuming his/her deity wasn't totally opposed to the sphere) or any of those spells there, really.

[NiGHTMARE]

A passage from the 2nd Edition Player's Handbook that's often overlooked:

Quote

Healing spells are those that cure diseases, remove afflictions, or heal wounds. These spells cannot restore life or regrow lost limbs. Healing spells can be reversed to cause injury, but such use is restricted to evil priests. Protective and merciful deities are most likely to grant these spells, while nature deities may have lesser access to them.

Regarding the macros: IIRC, these are used to remove spells that are restricted by your character's deity's alignment, rather than your character's own alignment. For example, a true neutral priest of Shar can't cast Holy Smite, while a true neutral priest of Oghma can.

Restrictions for your character's own alignment are controlled by exclusion flags in the .spl files themselves (see this page on IESDP for details).

Edited by NiGHTMARE, 14 June 2008 - 11:48 AM.

[The Angry Druid]

Total mod newbie here, but NOT a D&D newbie, I just installed Tutu and am considering and reading various mods and trying to decide to install or not, and got to Divine Remix, and still haven't made up my mind.

I see a lot of good work here, both in mods and on the PnP. Clerics were too generic, something had to be done, so the Deity specific kits and spheres was a good idea. Still, I think it went too far. Frankly, the idea that a good priest can't cast a harm/cause wounds spell, or an evil priest a cure spell, is just silly, no matter in which rules version it originated.

The reason/situation would dictate the deities response: a red dragon is going to destroy the temple, but the priest can't cast harm? Or an essential companion is dying, which could ruin the deity's plans, so the evil cleric has to let them die? It's the situation that has to dictate, which is hard to do in a computer game scenario.

For me, the solution lies somewhere in between. Some spells may be too evil (Animate Dead), and some deities (Love, Healing) may indeed forbid harm type spells, but it shouldn't apply in a blanket. How about a reputation penalty for a harm spell on a good/neutral person like if they killed them, or something similar?

With regard to the specific spheres, I understand an effort has been made to comply to the PnP rules, but it seems to me the Druid Spheres are off, to such an extent that I wouldn't install. I got from the FAQ that they didn't have major access to summoning? Druids? This makes no sense (though I guess all their summoning spells could be classified plant, animal, or elemental). Also, I think Druids should have major access to Divination, Protection, and possibly Traveler as well. Druids are well known to be patient, gathering info, and waiting a long time to exact revenge (see 2nd Edition class description). Divination is essential for reconnaissance, spying, info gathering, et al. And high level Druids are nomadic (Traveler). Protection is still the main function of Druid (of the Balance and the Grove). Got to have major access there. I think a good effort to be true to the PnP is necessary, but unbending devotion may carry it a bit too far.

Still, if I did install the mod, it would probably be after I played through a couple times with the various clerics (Branwen, Viccy, Aerie, Anomen) as Trueclass clerics first.

One last thing, I remember in BG2 a dialog between Mazzy and Keldorn (or Anomen) about Helm's Hall being only open to initiation to Humans, no halflings allowed. Yet the Helm kit doesn't have a human only restriction that I see, it should. This would also help get us closer to 9.

Sorry for the negative comments, I must say, there is a lot of interesting work here and much good thought. I'd love to see more pantheon specific kits. Of all the kits I've seen, this one has taken up by far the most of my time, and will probably add the most variety to the game.

Edited by The Angry Druid, 02 August 2008 - 09:31 PM.

[Miloch]

Druids in general 2e do not get any access to Summoning, and neither do any of the specific druid kits of the Faerunian nature deities (Chauntea, Eldath, Mielikki, Silvanus). The druids' "summoning" spells are usually in the Animal (or possibly Plant or Elemental) spheres rather than Summoning. It doesn't mean they can't summon; rather, it's more of an arbitrary division between druid and cleric spells.

I feel much the same way about reversed healing spells etc., as you can see above. As I said, some make sense and some don't. Perhaps there's a better way to implement them than just banning them; maybe by reputation penalties as you suggest.

I would recommend this mod, but yes, it is also worthwhile playing the unmodded clerics first.

[sozcaps]

I've been playing around with your mod here, and I just have to get some things off my chest. I don't see enough critique --constructive or otherwise-- so now I'm going to give it. So I have to be perfectly honest and state that I really don't like Divine Remix as it is today. I am an avid IE player, and have been playing exstensively with and without mods as long as the next nostalgic CRPC gamer out there.

I'm saying this to let you know that I'm not trying to shoot anyone down or to flame. I like your work, and I truly appreciate what all the modders out there have done for our little cozy CRPG community. I think the Divine Remix has alot of potential, but might need some surgery to truly stand out. Note that I have not tested the ranger or druid kits, so I am strictly airing my opinion on the CLERIC KITS. I simply sharing my thoughts, not inviting anyone to debate, discuss, or flame. Here's my opinion:

Spheres:

The sphere system doesn't work. I appreciate you using old school PnP material to add flavor to the game, but compared to PnP, BG2 does not yield enough spells for it. Being so strict on adhering to the the sphere system is a nerf, and it doesn't add anything new to the game. Quite the contrary, it leaves some clerics with half (or even less) the available spells they used to have. I feel like I have to roll at least two clerics in my parties now, to compensate for what I used to perform with one.

If there were spells added in return, (new ones, or adopted arcane spells) it might not feel like such a kick in the teeth to the poor newly rolled clerics who've sacrificed alot of tools and strategic use for a homogenized weapon and a couple abilities (which I see as toys). Abilities that some other party member very likely already has access to.

I surmise that you feel that it didn't make sense for the the vanilla clerics to not have a sphere system to begin with, but the fact is they do have those spells - and the entire game was balanced according to that. Which makes me wonder, did you believe that the clerics were too powerful in to begin with?.

So to sum it up, I don't think sphere work because the amount of spells in the game leaves some spheres tremendously more attractive than others, yet regardless of sphere access, all clerics have been watered down now, causing severe imbalance. Lastly, I don't think it is a good idea to create new kits just for the sake of having kits.


Kits:

I was at first pleased to see so many kits, but as I read them through, a few thoughts crossed my mind. Did you create all these kits because you had enough cause to do so, or because you could? Other then the Painbearer of Ilmater's impressive ability to turn into a rock solid juggernaut of a tank (love it) -- but I don't see any abilities that make the other kits unique in any way. I still end up feeling I'm sacrificing something in return for toys and a yoghurt weapon with short expiration date.

I understand that there is alot of work involved with creating new spells, abilities and even items, but I feel it would be more rewarding to have 3 kits with thoroughly different strengths and weaknesses rather than spitting out kits just because the fans ask for a kit for each and every diety in the Forgotten Realms. A few kits with a quest or two that might yield a magical item, seems to grant more uniqueness and replayability than being granted a couple abilities all the way from level 1 to 50. Abilities most of which we already know, and so don't add new styles of play.

I was hoping this mod had spell, abilities, heck even HLAs that were new or perhaps forgotten, unused content already in the game (like those Bhaalspawn abilities that never made it to ToB). I was hoping for things that made me eager to try out all the kits, because they all truly had something of their own to bring to the table, but I was disappointed.

That was my rant. I hope I've added something to the great think-tank for the next version of DI. Loyal fan, but not fanboy, out.

[jon-eli]

sozcaps, on Feb 22 2009, 03:39 AM, said:

The sphere system doesn't work. [...] compared to PnP, BG2 does not yield enough spells for it. Being so strict on adhering to the the sphere system is a nerf, and it doesn't add anything new to the game. [...] I feel like I have to roll at least two clerics in my parties now, to compensate for what I used to perform with one.

This reminds me of the wizardly spell-schools in BG1. Certain specialist mages were given two opposition schools, whereas others were given only one. Dudleyfix decided that they needed to be brought into consistency, but that two opposition schools for each would be draconian, as BG1 only implement a small fraction of the PnP spell book. In the context of a fixpack, I agree with the logic. But Divine Remix is decidedly more of a flavour enchancement than anything else, and some people don't mind when things are nerfed... they view it as a tactical challenge, rather than a burden. Horses for courses, I s'pose.

sozcaps, on Feb 22 2009, 03:39 AM, said:

[...] a homogenized weapon and a couple abilities (which I see as toys). Abilities that some other party member very likely already has access to.

To my mind, this is the principal failing of Divine Remix. It's too formulaic. The kits do not vary uniquely, they vary according to a template (spell x once per day, at level n, that mimics spell y; magical weapon x that does n damage, and has enchantment y that improves slightly every m levels).

sozcaps, on Feb 22 2009, 03:39 AM, said:

[...] I don't think sphere[s] work because the amount of spells in the game leaves some spheres tremendously more attractive than others [...]

This is the same problem that has existed with conjurers vs. every-other-specialist-mage for the span of the entire series, and is the reason why you don't see many people playing enchanters. I don't understand why this lesson wasn't learned from the vanilla game, and avoided with grace in mods like this one.

But that's about all I've got to say.