235 replies to this topic

[T.G.Maestro]

I've been thinking on this for a while, since neither the unmodded game, nor Refinements managed to implement the role of these 10th level spells correctly. The unmodded game simply created a few 10th level spells, some of them were even weaker than some 9th levels ones, and tossed them into the 9th page of the mage spellbook. Refinements struggled heavily to correct this as much as possible: we added new HLA spells for most spell-schools, re-organized the tables, tried to manage the free slots/new spells in every possible selection. Still, there are problems with this system.
First, the current method is a mess - True Dweomers are clearly NOT 9th level spells, and handling them like such is a real pain. Not to mention the fact that the new 10th level spells are stored at the same place as 9th level ones, which means that this method makes it absolutely hard to organize/manage 9-10th level arcane magics - if we would ever decide to add new HLA spells to mages, we would be over the maximum learnable spell limit - quite uncomfortable solution if you ask me.
Yet if we would turn all mage HLA spells to innates (just as Galactygon does over at Lost Crossroads) that would extremely overpower the mage class compared to others.

I think I might have a possible solution for all this (but only for a later version of Refinements, maybe a patch or something).

My idea aims to bring the True Dweaomers as close to their PnP counterparts as possible while keeping up the balance between classes.
- First, I'd separate the current mage HLAs to 2 groups. The weaker abilities would be called 9th level spells (like Aegis, Create Flesh Golem or Energy Blades). These HLAs are way under the expected level of True Dweomers, they are even weaker than other 9th level spells in some aspects. Confusing these HLAs with the real True Dweomer level magic would be (and is) a great mistake in my eyes. So again, I'd turn some of our actual 10th level spells to 9th level in their description - these would be stored in the 9th level of the spellbook along with all the previous 9th level spells like Time Stop. Expect some new 9th level spells like Weird.
- Second step. I'd collect all True Dweomers into a separate group. Here is a list of the possible True Dweomer level (10th level) spells: Dragon's Breath, Improved Alacrity, Summon Planetar(s), Death Field (improved version), Mirrored Clones (improved version, longer duration), Rune of Immunity (improved version, longer duration), Mass Domination, and add several new ones like Barrier of Toth, Prismatic Globe, Dark Army, Tenser' Telling Blow, Crimson Wall of Lictilon, Greater Foresight, Ratecliffe's Deadly Finger, Whispers Malicious Elemental Gates, etc.) These REALLY powerful 10th level spells would be removed from the 9th page and collected in one single HLA, called True Dweomers. This would be an innate ability, just as these 10th level spells were intended. It would have massive prerequisites, so it would be very unlikely to receive access to them below 20th level. After one would choose this True Dweomers innate ability, he would gain access to ALL the possible 10th level spells listed above and would be able to cast ONE of them/per day (choosing from a list like that of Spell Immunity). This innate ability could be picked 4 times (the books say one cannot cast more than 4 True Dweomers/day, no matter how intelligent or experienced he/she is.). We could add an INT check for this ability, so only players with very high INT scores would be able to pick this ability 4 times - other would be restricted to 1-3 picks.

Of course, these are only sketches, so I'd like to hear your ideas/suggestions n this topic.

[Caedwyr]

I'd suggest staying away from making True Dweomers a distinct group. Instead I would use some of the ideas behind them as inspiration for new spells. I believe that making this change would be drifting too far from the original design. At that point, it stops being a refinement and becomes a spell system TC. Leave things like that to Galac & similiar mods.

That said, your proposed method does have merit, so I won't be completely unhappy with it if that is the route that is chosen I just think utililizing that approach complicates things unnessicarily.

[T.G.Maestro]

Quote

I believe that making this change would be drifting too far from the original design.

What design are you referring to? The original by the game books or the "original" by Bioware? Do you think the latter is a 'good' design? I think it has MANY problems - some of these were fixed by Refinements while others were not. Some of the problematic points -like the lack of free space for new spells- were made a bit worse. Sooner or later, but we will face difficulties because of these flaws.

Quote

At that point, it stops being a refinement and becomes a spell system TC

You're right, but if we admit that Bioware's concept was, lets say flawed, we might as well consider this "TC" a refinement, don't you think? At last it would bring the in-game implementation of True Dweomers closer to their true original design than ever.

Quote

I just think utililizing that approach complicates things unnessicarily.

It might complicate things, but the fact that every mod that would add bonus 9th level spells to the game is currently incompatible with Refinements is more than a complication by itself. We will have to solve that problem Caedwyr, I hope you understand what I mean.

[Schatten]

good idea.
are you able to cast all dweomers in pnp, too? isnt it better to be able to choose along the lvl ups what powers you are able to cast?

[T.G.Maestro]

Quote

good idea

I'm glad you like it Schatten!

Quote

isnt it better to be able to choose along the lvl ups what powers you are able to cast?

This would be a good idea too, the only (and major) problem with it are the limited slots of the HLA table - I cannot offer more than 24 HLAs. And while 24 would be enough for single classed wizards, multiclassed characters would encounter serious difficulties.

[Rathwellin the Bard]

I like this idea. It has some interesting permutations. If you want to restrict a certain True Dweomer so that you have to have ?component X? then you can without unduly restricting the HLA as a whole. If you want to add a special True Dweomer such that it can only be cast in a certain location you can. In both cases a new button could show up when you use the standard TD HLA. This would enable folks to make some truly interesting ?plot device? spells without unbalancing the game as a whole.

Questions

If you made this change would existing non-party NPCs & scripts be able to handle it? Would enemy mages still be able to use Dragons Breath, etc. if they had it or would you have to edit the cre files & scripts?

Certain armors & other things like shapeshifting disable spellcasting but don?t affect HLAs. Can you fix things so that the True Dweomer HLA is disabled in similar circumstances?

Why would Sorcerers be unable to cast True Dweomers? They can intuitively learn 9th level spells like Time Stop and Wish that many true mages never master. Why not True Dweomers? You could make the list of Sorcerer & Mage TDs slightly different but it seems to me that this would be fitting for both.

(You just knew that I would bring Sorcerers into this somehow didn?t you! )

[Baltrek]

I think it sounds like an excellent idea.

I do not agree with having a separate "HLA" for each spell, that you choose on level ups. when the original TD's came out, the real intent was so a mage could shape magic to his will around a desired effect, not to have "another spell he knew". Having the TD as an innate ability, then choosing the effect is much better.

The complaint I would have it that they should be even more powerful, but have very long casting times, and I like the idea someone mentioned about needing components. If you needed a rogue stone or king's tear every time you cast a spell, that would curtail their use as well. For some, they could be godly, but require things like dragon scales, lich skulls, even unique items like the Eye of Tyr.

[dorotea]

The concept of dweomers is excellent, the idea itself is exciting, but... I want to add a spoonful of cold water. Maybe BG-SoA-ToB is a wrong game for this? The game has a dynamic storyline, that is tied in to certain timeframe and concentrated around very streamlined plot. Even godling-mage I think would have hard time developing such potent and complex ability as 'make your own dweomer' in (two years ?) after they were 20 year old fugitive. I can accept 'innate' ability or HLA for 'epic level' character - a 'godspawn' but not dweomers. It cheapens the magic if you give it away so easily. The Refinement Mod so far has been doing very good in terms of smooth and believeable additions to the game- just dont overdo it - adding more and more powerful features is not always for the best.

But truly told - I have hard time imagining dweomers in any computer based game anyway, but maybe online ongoing NWN...

In any case it is just MHO, with a capital H.

[khay]

Hmm I personally think that it`s not only a good idea but a pretty original one as well -- which obviously couldn`t have popped out from any other head than the mad scientist, Maestro`s head. B)

Seeing that in order to create something truly as one would want it people have to go towards GemRB and that there`s no perfect way to include more spells/HLAs, Maestro`s system would be a welcome addition. One question, though: the wizard will only be able to cast those 10th level spells once per day, but TD can be picked up to 4 times -- does this imply that those very spells would be allowed to be casted up to 4 times/day?

[Schatten]

Baltrek, on Mar 29 2004, 05:58 PM, said:

The complaint I would have it that they should be even more powerful, but have very long casting times, and I like the idea someone mentioned about needing components.  If you needed a rogue stone or king's tear every time you cast a spell, that would curtail their use as well.  For some, they could be godly, but require things like dragon scales, lich skulls, even unique items like the Eye of Tyr.

i can live with the removel of an jewel but to use unique items is too much. you can cast it only once and that means the spell must be so powerfull that its not even funny anymore.

@dorotea: you cannot compare pnp and bg2 like you do. imagine how old and powerfull lvl 20+ npcs are in pnp and now look how fast you get the lvls and become a demigod . you kill dragons and liches with ease. imo this is a very good idea. hope tgm can put it in.

@ tgm: hmm.... perhaps it is possible to make a menu like spell immunity. and when you lvl up and want to improve your dweomer you get an additional power. this means you have to add a spell to the menu. (this means you have to erase the previous spell and put in a new one. so you have to make n spells [n is the number of powers {example: lvl 1 you get spell x, dweomer power a; lvl 2 you get spell x&y, dweomer power b; dweomer power a gets replaced with b. a consists of spell x and b of x and y. so you cannot choose which powers you get but you dont get all at once }]).
hmm.... i dont think anyone understands what i mean.

[Andyr]

Have you considered perhaps only letting people choose 1 True Dweomer spell?

Or perhaps you could make it so they can only be cast once. You could perhaps do that with an effect on the spell calling the RemoveSpell effect on itself.

[Galactygon]

T.G.Maestro, on Mar 29 2004, 09:17 AM, said:

Yet if we would turn all mage HLA spells to innates (just as Galactygon does over at Lost Crossroads) that would extremely overpower the mage class compared to others.

Well, they might be overpowered, BUT only if you reach level 30, which will be near impossible (even with soloing) in LC.

If there wouldn't be any engine hardcode limitations, I would rather implement them as normal 10th level spells. However given these limitations, innates are the best solution. IMHO It is much better than the flimsy, clumsy 10th level spells in 9th level spell slot.

-Galactygon

[T.G.Maestro]

Thanks for the constructive criticism and all the positive feedback people! Now lets see some answers:

Quote

If you made this change would existing non-party NPCs & scripts be able to handle it? Would enemy mages still be able to use Dragons Breath, etc. if they had it or would you have to edit the cre files & scripts?

Of course, they'll be able to use them as they did before - unless I change the spell file itself. An example: Vangoethe (the powerful Lich in Amkethran) casts Dragon's Breath at the start of the battle. Now, if I turn this spell into a REAL 10th level TD, but leave the spell as it is, he would use it without any problems. But if I change that spell to inflict, say: 30D10 Cold damage and change the spellname to TG#DRGB.spl, then I'll have to edit the scripts as well.
On a sidenote, both versions will be there in the future - some of the existing abilities and spells will be changed without renaming them (e.g. creating a brand new spell) while there will be completely new ones. Enemies will most likely use some of the new abilities as well, which will change the gameplay somewhat. Simply imagine a dying enemy sorcerer casting Energy Storm with his last breath...

Quote

Certain armors & other things like shapeshifting disable spellcasting but don?t affect HLAs. Can you fix things so that the True Dweomer HLA is disabled in similar circumstances?

Might be. Though I'd like to call your attention to the point that TDs are somewhat different than simple spells - remember, they cannot be memorized, and many times they require much more complicated and different casting procedures compared to that of mage spells. It might be possible that a TD can be casted in a full-plate, but its casting time is 1 day. And so on.

Quote

Why would Sorcerers be unable to cast True Dweomers? They can intuitively learn 9th level spells like Time Stop and Wish that many true mages never master

Your question is the answer - because they can MASTER 1-9th level spells, they can cast them much more efficently than mages - at the cost of wider and greater spell selection.

Quote

I do not agree with having a separate "HLA" for each spell, that you choose on level ups. when the original TD's came out, the real intent was so a mage could shape magic to his will around a desired effect, not to have "another spell he knew". Having the TD as an innate ability, then choosing the effect is much better

My words exactly.

Quote

Even godling-mage I think would have hard time developing such potent and complex ability as 'make your own dweomer' in (two years ?) after they were 20 year old fugitive.

Dorotea, I'd like to point you to the bare fact that the party members (including mages) already use a few TDs softly disguised as pure HLAs - Dragon's Breath or Improved Alacrity for example. In this modification I don't intend to add any new elements to the game, its sole purpose is to re-organize things and put them in a more fitting shape.

Quote

Hmm I personally think that it`s not only a good idea but a pretty original one as well

Quote

the wizard will only be able to cast those 10th level spells once per day, but TD can be picked up to 4 times -- does this imply that those very spells would be allowed to be casted up to 4 times/day?

The base innate HLA (True Dweomers) would be pickable max. 4 times. Every time one decides to cast a TD, the list of the possible TDs appear and the character can choose the desired effect. If he/she likes to use the same TD 3-4 times a day while leaving some others to oblivion, well, why not?

Quote

perhaps it is possible to make a menu like spell immunity. and when you lvl up and want to improve your dweomer you get an additional power

It is possible. Yet I don't like the idea to add a second progression, one with the TDs. I think allowing the caster to access the whole selection is better - remember, these are not "learned" spells/abilities!

[T.G.Maestro]

Quote

Well, they might be overpowered, BUT only if you reach level 30, which will be near impossible (even with soloing) in LC.

Actually Gal, the fact that you allow mages to keep ALL their 9th level spell slots while allowing access to ALL new HLAs as innates is pure overkill. Simply imagine: they will get twice as many spells as before - they will be able to cast all the previous ninth level spells while will be granted the option to cast REALLY powerful ones from the innate selection. I really don't want to argue with you, but that move will clearly boost mages to a not-that-realistic level compared to other classes.

[Littiz]

Quote

This would be a good idea too, the only (and major) problem with it are the limited slots of the HLA table - I cannot offer more than 24 HLAs. And while 24 would be enough for single classed wizards, multiclassed characters would encounter serious difficulties.

The real problem is that we couldn't have TDs chosen individually, since you'd have to change the contents of spell menu via script.
I mean, you'd have to check which (and how many!) spells the character has, and apply a proper menu each time. You'd have to prepare one for each possible combination of learned Dweomers.
I've been trapped in such a thing once (Use Scrolls), and the coded ended in something like over 1000 lines of script and over 500 of TP2 code... Once is enough!
So, the only possibility is as TGM suggests: fixed menu from start.

I kinda like the idea, yes.
But I also share Dorotea's opinion that it is a dangerous ground. Furthermore, we've reached a fair equilibrium now, and it's risky to add too many things.
Consider also that we've reached the limit of available portrait icons, so new spells wouldn't benefit from them.
Lastly, 9th level spells are already enough, we should add some 8th level ones instead.

So what would I do.
-Add maybe two 8th level spells.
-Add one 9th level spell at most, IF needed
-Reorder the TDs as TGM suggests, adding again no more than one or two at most.
The menu shouldn't ever be too large: it might contain IA, Planetar, Dragon's
Breath and a new TD, for instance. Much more is risky.
Again, remember about the portrait icons limit. The new spells should be of a type that doesn't need them.

[T.G.Maestro]

Quote

So what would I do.
-Add maybe two 8th level spells.
-Add one 9th level spell at most, IF needed
-Reorder the TDs as TGM suggests, adding again no more than one or two at most.
The menu shouldn't ever be too large: it might contain IA, Planetar, Dragon's
Breath and a new TD, for instance. Much more is risky.
Again, remember about the portrait icons limit. The new spells should be of a type that doesn't need them.

Lets see.
8th level spells? Through HLAs? Sorry, but I don't find this a good idea. HLAs are (and should be) above spells of 8th level and lower in every aspects. While I find it interesting to add bonus 6-7-8th level spell slots, I don't like the idea to add 8th level spells through HLAs. Your suggestion has merit on one point though - mages have very few 8th level spells compared to other levels.
Why only ONE 9th level spell? Maybe you don't understand how I picture those modified tables. They would contain 2-3 passive or innate abilities like Scribe Scrolls and Arcane Knowledge, 6-7 9th level spell HLAs like Aegis and Comet, and the TD innate. That one would have heavy prerequisites of course. I don't want to create too many new 9th level spells, if thats what you mean - we have more than enough, we only need to toss in a few like Weird or Prismatic Sphere.
About adding new TDs, I disagree. Variety is a must here. TDs are not common spells, and normally there are limitless variations. Of course we cannot achieve this, but at least we can offer many choices for the players. Some of these would have greater restrictions, while others not - even among these magics are greater and lesser ones. The list will likely contain the following TDs (at least many of them):
- Barrier of Thoth;
- Dragon's Breath;
- Improved Alacrity;
- Deathfield (improved version);
- Ratecliffe's Deadly Finger;
- Crimson Wall of Lictilon;
- Summon Planetar(s);
- Summon Balrog;
- Tenser's Telling Blow;
- Rune of Immunity (improved version);
- Prismatic Globe;
- Whisper's Malicious Elemental Gates;
- Montero's Retaliation;

this list may change of course. Some of these might be impossible to implement, we'll see.

About portrait icons, well, thats a real problem, since we cannot give new ones without removing an old icon. We must try to make the new Dweomers to fit some existing icons or use none at all.

[Jinnai]

T.G.Maestro, on Mar 30 2004, 01:15 PM, said:

About portrait icons, well, thats a real problem, since we cannot give new ones without removing an old icon. We must try to make the new Dweomers to fit some existing icons or use none at all.

Or just canabalize some old spells.

This idea seems best, although it seems more akin to a sorceror ability-wise, although its not available to them (just pointing out the irony ).

I think then that everyone TD should have a vastly increased casting time to compensate for this though. Everyone should be more than 1 round at a minimum.

[T.G.Maestro]

According to the books, some of them has a casting time of 6 seconds, while others last hours. We will likely use casting times between 6 and 30 seconds.

[Jinnai]

T.G.Maestro, on Mar 30 2004, 02:44 PM, said:

According to the books, some of them has a casting time of 6 seconds, while others last hours. We will likely use casting times between 6 and 30 seconds.

True, but here they also had to be memorized like in the books. For that i'd say since you can now pick them for each situation i'd add some casting time to compensate.