Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

Verification:
Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image

Type the letters shown in the picture:
What color is grass?:
What is the seventh word in this sentence?:
What is five minus two (use the full word)?:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview


Topic Summary

Posted by: SixOfSpades
« on: June 15, 2006, 09:19:20 PM »

I'm fairly sure the engine's default behaviour is that you ignore your own MR but not other people's
Well, I'll be jiggered! You're right. Well, if you can make the behavior consistent across all spells (CLW cast by somebody else gets blocked, then so does Defensive Harmony), then I have no problem with it. True, there'll still be that gapin inconsistency between BG1 and BG2, but I appear to be outvoted on that issue, so I won't press the point.
Posted by: Echon
« on: June 15, 2006, 11:24:45 AM »

I'm not quite sure what you're thinking. I'm fairly sure the engine's default behaviour is that you ignore your own MR[...]

Yes, I also believe this is how it works.

-Echon
Posted by: SimDing0™
« on: June 15, 2006, 09:39:51 AM »

Can you suggest a way of letting the engine tell the difference between a Cure Light Wounds that you cast on yourself, and a CLW cast on you by someone else?
I'm not quite sure what you're thinking. I'm fairly sure the engine's default behaviour is that you ignore your own MR but not other people's; so Cure Light Wounds can fail if Yeslick casts it on Viconia, but not if she casts it on herself. Or are you asking whether we can alter this behaviour, in which case the answer is "the way you're hoping for, yes, but I doubt we could make people subject to their own MR if for some reason we wanted to".
Posted by: SixOfSpades
« on: June 14, 2006, 08:41:49 PM »

The current system is that you can cast spells on yourself, and use potions, but somebody else casting spells on you is subject to MR.
Can you suggest a way of letting the engine tell the difference between a Cure Light Wounds that you cast on yourself, and a CLW cast on you by someone else? And personally, I would class drinking a potion as being equivalent to a spell cast by an outside source.

Quote
... the last thing I want is for BG1 to turn into a ToB affair where victory depends on how much crap you can gain immunity to.
Understood, but I should point out that BG1 is a Fighter's game, not a Mage's. In my experience, Magic Resistance hardly matters: Read the boards and see how many people suggest dealing with, for example, the Sirines, by "giving Viconia the Cloak of Balduran or a Potion of Magic Blocking and having them waste their spells." No, it's usually things like "Shoot them and disrupt their casting," or "have somebody drink a Potion of Clarity," or "Backstab them with the Boots of Speed," or something.
Posted by: SimDing0™
« on: June 14, 2006, 02:35:40 AM »

One centers on whether Magic Resistance is something innate and involuntary, a sphere of influence in which all magic fails to exist, or something that can be raised and lowered to block harmful effects while allowing the beneficial enchantments to pass through. No matter which, there's one great big whopping inconsistency about blocking spells, (though not all spells, I noticed Defensive Hamony works just fine) but not potions. Me, I say it should be all or nothing--if a creature's 100% MR means that Cure Light Wounds fails on them, then a Healing Potion should fail as well. And a Restoration spell. And a Raise Dead spell. And they can't cast any spells of their own, either. I do not expect to see any big fans of this system.
The current system is that you can cast spells on yourself--Mirror Image never fails, for example, and I'd be upset if it did, yes--and use potions, but somebody else casting spells on you is subject to MR. I believe the principle here is solid: it makes you think twice about simply loading people with immunity items, and the last thing I want is for BG1 to turn into a ToB affair where victory depends on how much crap you can gain immunity to. Viconia + Cloak of Balduran is, what, 75% MR? Being able to gain this much is lame within the BG1 setting anyway. Let's not heighten it by removing the drawback.

Quote
The other way is centered on which version of the D&D rules we want to work with. I assume BG1 is 2.0 and BG2 is 2.5, with some aspects borrowed from 3.0? Something like that. Regardless, it seems laughably old-fashioned to cling to a ruleset which the game's own originators have long since abandoned, particularly if we're going to be consistent with BG2. Do you really foresee Magic Resistance blocking friendly spells in BG1 / ToSC, but not blocking them in Tutu?
I favour the addition of an option to Tutu to restore BG1's handling of MR.
Posted by: SixOfSpades
« on: June 13, 2006, 10:16:38 PM »

Regarding Magic Resistance: There are 2 ways of looking at it, each with their own internal debates.

One centers on whether Magic Resistance is something innate and involuntary, a sphere of influence in which all magic fails to exist, or something that can be raised and lowered to block harmful effects while allowing the beneficial enchantments to pass through. No matter which, there's one great big whopping inconsistency about blocking spells, (though not all spells, I noticed Defensive Hamony works just fine) but not potions. Me, I say it should be all or nothing--if a creature's 100% MR means that Cure Light Wounds fails on them, then a Healing Potion should fail as well. And a Restoration spell. And a Raise Dead spell. And they can't cast any spells of their own, either. I do not expect to see any big fans of this system.

The other way is centered on which version of the D&D rules we want to work with. I assume BG1 is 2.0 and BG2 is 2.5, with some aspects borrowed from 3.0? Something like that. Regardless, it seems laughably old-fashioned to cling to a ruleset which the game's own originators have long since abandoned, particularly if we're going to be consistent with BG2. Do you really foresee Magic Resistance blocking friendly spells in BG1 / ToSC, but not blocking them in Tutu?

. . . . . . .

About the Tome of Gainful Exercise / melee ApR thing, I'm stumped. I know it's not a mod conflict, as the only mod installed was UB, and I know it wasn't a one-time thing, because it's reproducible. I've got no clue as to what the heck caused it, all I know is that my ApR went up, with the very same weapon, without gaining a level, or anything more unusual than the Tome of STR and a Tome of WIS. Beats me.
Posted by: devSin
« on: June 13, 2006, 03:58:58 PM »

The effects all save vs. death by default, yes.

Whoops. Looks like you, and Six, are right. I forgot to pay attention to whether I using the FotD install or the normal install. I have some gaze attack saves to correct now.

-Echon
Yeah, I had to ignore overrides when looking, since I have no idea how I change things anymore (I know I delete the hold effect, but who knows what else). I usually wouldn't bother, but y'all found me in a good mood, I guess.
Posted by: Echon
« on: June 13, 2006, 03:41:46 PM »

The effects all save vs. death by default, yes.

Whoops. Looks like you, and Six, are right. I forgot to pay attention to whether I using the FotD install or the normal install. I have some gaze attack saves to correct now.

-Echon
Posted by: devSin
« on: June 13, 2006, 03:34:32 PM »

With the Helm, Cloak, and Ring, it's possible to get Kagain's Save vs. Death down to 0 or 1, while his Save vs. Petrify/Polymorph is about 4 or 5. Now send him wandering around the Basilisk map: He can stare them in the eye until the cows come home and not feel a thing, and every time he does so, the text box will say that he's made his Save vs. Death. Save vs. Petrify/Polymorph is never mentioned. And of course, no anti-Petrification spells or scrolls are required.
The effects all save vs. death by default, yes. As an interesting note, the hold effect does nothing, and will stay on the CRE file forever (one for each time you got hit and didn't save or get petrified).


I believe the Manual of Gainful Exercise has an undocumented +1 bonus to ApR, with a duration of 3 days or so. Only problem is, it only affected Desmond's melee ApR. I archived the Save, but I still don't understand precisely what happened, or why.
This must have been a mod conflict, or just some random quirk. The tome only raises Strength by 1 permanently; it has no other worthwhile effects.
Posted by: devSin
« on: June 13, 2006, 03:28:49 PM »

Yes, the biography of Viconia should be corrected as friendly spells should bypass resistance...
As long as I have any say whatsoever, there will be no changes to the behavior of magic resistance in UB, sorry.

Didn't mean tp say that UB should take care of this...I think it's more a Fixpack problem.  ;) However I am curious about why you'd not want such a change since the bypass magic resistance for friendly spells is a well known AD&D rule...
It had been discussed to death in its heyday, and it was absolutely intentional. The designers felt is was the right decision, and the game was designed to account for the decision.

I think Dudleyville changes this for all the spells, so you can install those spell changes if you'd enjoy the different behavior more.
Posted by: Echon
« on: June 13, 2006, 02:25:18 PM »

With the Helm, Cloak, and Ring, it's possible to get Kagain's Save vs. Death down to 0 or 1, while his Save vs. Petrify/Polymorph is about 4 or 5. Now send him wandering around the Basilisk map: He can stare them in the eye until the cows come home and not feel a thing, and every time he does so, the text box will say that he's made his Save vs. Death. Save vs. Petrify/Polymorph is never mentioned. And of course, no anti-Petrification spells or scrolls are required.

Nevermind.

Quote
I believe the Manual of Gainful Exercise has an undocumented +1 bonus to ApR, with a duration of 3 days or so. Only problem is, it only affected Desmond's melee ApR. I archived the Save, but I still don't understand precisely what happened, or why.

It is certainly undocumented. There is nothing there beyond the Strength +1 effect.

-Echon
Posted by: SixOfSpades
« on: June 13, 2006, 01:19:46 PM »

Basilisk gaze checks Save vs. Death rather than Save vs. Petrification

The Petrification effect requires a save vs. petrification/polymorph. There is also a Lightning Effects effect and a Hold Creature effect, these require a save vs. death/poison. No, I do not have any idea why they want two different saves.
With the Helm, Cloak, and Ring, it's possible to get Kagain's Save vs. Death down to 0 or 1, while his Save vs. Petrify/Polymorph is about 4 or 5. Now send him wandering around the Basilisk map: He can stare them in the eye until the cows come home and not feel a thing, and every time he does so, the text box will say that he's made his Save vs. Death. Save vs. Petrify/Polymorph is never mentioned. And of course, no anti-Petrification spells or scrolls are required.


Quote
Quote
STR affects melee ApR
Could you describe this in greater detail? I am wondering how it is even possible.
I believe the Manual of Gainful Exercise has an undocumented +1 bonus to ApR, with a duration of 3 days or so. Only problem is, it only affected Desmond's melee ApR. I archived the Save, but I still don't understand precisely what happened, or why.
Posted by: icelus
« on: June 13, 2006, 11:57:10 AM »

I think it's a case where a D&D rule doesn't really make sense...
Posted by: Salk
« on: June 13, 2006, 11:31:02 AM »

Yes, the biography of Viconia should be corrected as friendly spells should bypass resistance...
As long as I have any say whatsoever, there will be no changes to the behavior of magic resistance in UB, sorry.

Didn't mean tp say that UB should take care of this...I think it's more a Fixpack problem.  ;) However I am curious about why you'd not want such a change since the bypass magic resistance for friendly spells is a well known AD&D rule...
Posted by: devSin
« on: June 13, 2006, 06:28:42 AM »

Yes, the biography of Viconia should be corrected as friendly spells should bypass resistance...
As long as I have any say whatsoever, there will be no changes to the behavior of magic resistance in UB, sorry.