164 replies to this topic

[Littiz]

UAI is removed for thieves but not for bards, so anything that lowers its cheesy factor is still welcomed.

Actually I really like Bruce's suggestions, we should try something for V2.

[Userunfriendly]

http://www.shsforums...?showtopic=2527

[T.G.Maestro]

An interesting thread UU, I've been thinking on its posts for a while back then. There is a small chance that some of its listed effects will be in the planned Spell Revisions component of v2/v3.

nobody would use a weak +3 weapon. you cant hit a gibberling with it.

Ouch. The most powergaming sentence of the year 2004!

[Userunfriendly]

An interesting thread UU, I've been thinking on its posts for a while back then. There is a small chance that some of its listed effects will be in the planned Spell Revisions component of v2/v3.

nobody would use a weak +3 weapon. you cant hit a gibberling with it.

Ouch. The most powergaming sentence of the year 2004!

yay!!!

ignitable stinky clouds, i hope???

and really, who bothers carrying around +3 weapons in the game, really???

after chapter 2, people ditch them...

i'd like to see vorpal sword become +4 at the end of soa...

one neglected weapon is the rod of lordly might...i'd like all 3 weapons become +4...then people would actually use it...

except for a few special effect weapons like celestial fury, and equalizer, for off hand,people do indeed ditch most +3 weapons...

[Userunfriendly]

sytze is going to kill me...

but archer called shot penalty to saves STACKS!!!!!!!!!!!!

makes tactics mod fighter archer class dual (or naughty naughty sk hack multi) to mage incredibly evil...

spell trigger lower resistance...

called shot...

twang!
twang!
twang!
twang!
twang!

feeblemind=drooling firkraag...

cast polymorph other...

feebleminded, squirrel...

pc: ok, aerie, hit him with the big hammer!!!
aerie: faster than chikkitta fastpaws!!!

[T.G.Maestro]

except for a few special effect weapons like celestial fury, and equalizer, for off hand,people do indeed ditch most +3 weapons...

A shame, if you ask me.

archer called shot penalty to saves STACKS!

Rebalancing kits and kit innates should probably go for v3. We have more than a dozen planned components for v2, and we would like to come out with it before the end of May. Still, all ideas and suggestions like this are noted, and we will decide which components to include (maybe with an open poll) into v2, right after v1 was launched.

[Galactygon]

What is the final v of refinements. I see v1,v2,v3...

[T.G.Maestro]

What is the final v of refinements. I see v1,v2,v3...

There is no such thing like final version for Refinements. In each edition we offer new optional components of refined/rebalanced material, plus some new components, like kits.
We will continue this as long as there is something to be "refined"

[Kish]

and really, who bothers carrying around +3 weapons in the game, really???

Anyone without one of the mods that adds an inundation of overpowered +4, +5, and +12 one-handers.

The Flail of Ages (+3 in SoA) and Celestial Fury (+3, don't even think about mentioning Item Upgrade) are arguably the two most powerful weapons in SoA.

[Userunfriendly]

fblade.itm

flameblade spell...if you look at the spell description, its mentioned as being non magical...yet its flagged as being magical by near infinity..

i've edited it to be non magical...kevin was going to include in next fixpack despite the horrible cheesy abuse of it, but we all know he went awol...

you guys want to flag it non magical???

[T.G.Maestro]

Anyone without one of the mods that adds an inundation of overpowered +4, +5, and +12 one-handers.

The Flail of Ages (+3 in SoA) and Celestial Fury (+3, don't even think about mentioning Item Upgrade) are arguably the two most powerful weapons in SoA.

I agree entirely.

flameblade spell...if you look at the spell description, its mentioned as being non magical...yet its flagged as being magical by near infinity..

I think it should be considered magical. How would you define a blade engulfed in flames?

[Userunfriendly]

Flame Blade (Evocation)
Level: 2
Sphere: Elemental (Fire)
Range: 0
Duration: 4 rounds + 1 round/2 levels
Casting Time: 4
Area of Effect: Special
Saving Throw: None

With this spell, the caster causes a blazing ray of red-hot fire to spring forth from his hand. This blade-like ray is wielded as if it were a sword that the caster already knows how to use, hence there are no bonuses or penalties. If the caster successfully hits with the flame blade in melee combat, the creature struck suffers 1d4 points of slashing damage, plus an additional 1d2 + 4 points of fire damage (i.e., 6-10 points). If the creature is protected from fire, the damage inflicted is reduced by 2 (i.e., 4-8 points). Fire dwellers and those using fire as an innate attack form suffer only slashing damage from the spell (i.e., 1-4 points). However, it is not a magical weapon in the normal sense of the term, so creatures struck only by magical weapons are not harmed by it.

[T.G.Maestro]

I know what the description says, still it doesn't make any sense to me: again, just how would you define a "Blazing sword-like ray of red-hot fire that springs out of your hand"?

It is everything but non-magical.

[Caedwyr]

It could be argued that the process that creates it is magical, but its properties once in existance are non magical. For example, one could conjure a burning branch into their hand. The process of creating the branch would be magical, but the attacks itself would be non-magical. In the case of the Flame Blade the magical properties are what allow the "Blazing sword-like ray of red-hot fire that springs out of your hand" to be wielded, but the containment magics don't do anything to magically assist the attack. One can imagine magical energy that is used to keep a flame at the end of a staff lit and in the same spot, but for all intents and purpose the flame is basically the same thing as any old flame at the end of a torch.


To summerize, I'd conclude from the spell description that the blade is magically created and contained, but the magic does not enhance the properties of the sword, and the flames are non-magical in nature. I'd think that a magical flame would be harder to douse, whereas the Flame Blade cannot be used under water.


[non-bs mode longwinded explaination]
Lets go with the description, and let the flame blade be non-magical because it would promote the use of the spell and reward those who read the spell descriptions and consider the consequences of what is described. I can't really see how it would unbalance the game, and it would mean that the rather cheesy unlimited scrolls of Protection from magical weapons that show up in many tactical mods, would have a weakness.
[/non-bs mode longwinded explaination]

[T.G.Maestro]

Good points Caedwyr. I'd advise you to take a look at my "Spell revisions" thread in the general forums. I guess you'd have an opinion there as well.

Back to topic: we can always make this spell/blade non-magical in v2 (Spell/Item revision components).

[Userunfriendly]

I can't really see how it would unbalance the game, and it would mean that the rather cheesy unlimited scrolls of Protection from magical weapons that show up in many tactical mods, would have a weakness.

urm...i actually have a file i've edited with near infinity in my override...

and after doing some evil naughty tests, have found this...

it punches right past protection from magic weapons...

it goes right thru stoneskin and iron skin since its elemental damage...

its almost unbalancing...

[Caedwyr]

I can't really see how it would unbalance the game, and it would mean that the rather cheesy unlimited scrolls of Protection from magical weapons that show up in many tactical mods, would have a weakness.

urm...i actually have a file i've edited with near infinity in my override...

and after doing some evil naughty tests, have found this...

it punches right past protection from magic weapons...

it goes right thru stoneskin and iron skin since its elemental damage...

its almost unbalancing...

I was aware that it would bypass stoneskin & Protection from Magic Weapons. Of course this is only really a major issue if you consider those two spells to be very balanced. Unfortunately in the case of PfMW it seems that in far too many mods with a tactical component, it seems that enemy mages or multiclass characters being able to cast unlimited scrolls of PfMW seems to be the norm. I wouldn't really mind having this abuse of abilties countered slightly by allowing a way to get around the ability. In the case of liches, demi-liches, red dragons, and several of the other powerful enemies of BGII, the spell should still not have much if any affect. Also, it would encourage the use of the mantle-type spells since they seem to be neglected in favour of the all-powerful PfMW. I don't really see this spell as unbalancing for the original game, just more challenging for some of the cheesy (cheating) encounters that have shown up in several mods.

About the testing you did. Did all of the damage bypass Stoneskin & Ironskin, or only the fire damage?

[CamDawg]

^^
Even with magically-created weapons, stoneskin still deflects any physical damage (in this case, the slashing damage). It should just be the fire damage that's getting through.

BTW it appears the fire and slashing damage is inconsistent with the description--a bug in BG2, say it ain't so! It actually causes 1d2 + 4 slashing and 1d4 fire damage.

[Userunfriendly]

http://forums.camagn...p?showtopic=308

i really really like this idea...

what do you think guys, doable or not???

[T.G.Maestro]

i really really like this idea...

what do you think guys, doable or not???

I'm not sure if this is doable at all, but I've been thinking to do something like that for ages. I always thought it would fir bards much more than their current spell system. In addition, I'd like to add a few more changes:
- they'd receive illusion, light, sound based spells only, but from a greater repertoire than mages or sorcs (5-10 different (old, changed, or new) spells/ spell levels would be available for them, up to 6th level).
- I'm not sure about giving them the ability to learn MAGE spells from scrolls...