235 replies to this topic

[T.G.Maestro]

Not to be a AD&D-Lawyer here, but I'd like to make one point TGM. You keep referring to "Negative Energy" and imply that it doesn't relate to fatigue, energy loss, etc... In the basic principle of the game it does. What AD&D does for the "magic" is give a lack of something actual substance. For example, heat is the opposite of cold. Cold however isn't a "real" force. It's merely a lack of heat. In the game, we don't cast a Cone of Cold, and suck the heat out of the area, we blast it with a palaple force of "coldness". The same applies to the positive/negative energy. When you're "zapped" by a vampire, they remove "positive energy". They do this because they have contact with the negative material plane. The effect is the same as if you'd run a marathon, been studying for a day, etc... It's all semantics. It's why in PnP so many spells and such actually age the caster, and so many monsters can "suck the life" from you

I understand, thanks for the clarification Hlid!
Still, I'm not convinced that we'd have to use something THAT crippling to balance these spells.

As for the design of your TDs... It'd be a bloody nightmare to attempt to code it. With oodles and oodles of repetative files made in order to give the illusion of selection you want.

I do not understand you here however. What repetative files are you talking about? I'd appreciate a bit longer explanation, if you don't mind. What I suggested would work the following way:

- TD HLA added to the Innates menu.
- upon selection, a script would check for the requirements of the desired spell. If they were met, the script would add that spell to the Innates repertoire. If not, the attempt to develop a TD would be lost. At this part the TD innate would "remove itself".
- if someone picks it again, he would get the very same 2da list of possible spells, and the same process would start.

I'm a bit undecided about choosing the same spell multiple times though.

[Littiz]

I think both hlid and I misinterpreted (at the first reading).
Now I got it:
for you each TD pick would only grant an ONE TIME choice. When your choice is made, you're able to cast that specific TDs always, as long you have the needed material.
If you keep the same list, there is no need for hundreds of files (there would be otherwise).

Basically, it seems a very complicated way of twisting what already happens: you choose one new spell at each level up... (and sorcs, if you give 1 pick to them, will always go for the most powerful choice).
Only that you'd need a damn lot of scripting and headaches for the materials and such.

I remain of my opinion. We don't need anything such complicated, and user-unfriendly.
A simple common 2da + the draining effect would be much more usable and similar to the existant play style.

Edited by Littiz, 21 October 2004 - 09:27 AM.

[T.G.Maestro]

I think both hlid and I misinterpreted (at the first reading).
Now I got it:
for you each TD pick would only grant an ONE TIME choice. When your choice is made, you're able to cast that specific TDs always, as long you have the needed material.
If you keep the same list, there is no need for hundreds of files

Exactly. Thats what I meant.

Basically, it seems a very complicated way of twisting what already happens: you choose one new spell at each level up...

remain of my opinion. We don't need anything such complicated, and user-unfriendly.
A simple common 2da + the draining effect would be much more usable and similar to the existant play style

But this way we'd lose the most interesting and unique elements of this (the components and the "development", which I find a very nice -and implementable- addition) and would only reatin the worst feature (the Level Drain).
All in all, that would mean releasing the skeleton of this idea - it would "exist", but in a poor shape.
Again, I'm not trying to argue here pointlessly, but I'd suffer to see an otherwise brilliant idea implemented in such a minimalist way. It'd work alright, but far from what was planned.
Honestly Littiz: could you implement the scripting part of this? I mean the component materials and such (and we still dropped the INT checks!)?

and sorcs, if you give 1 pick to them, will always go for the most powerful choice

Actually, that wouldn't be that easy to choose, but hey, I can accept sorcerers not having ANY access to these at all!

Edited by T.G.Maestro, 21 October 2004 - 10:36 AM.

[Jinnai]

Perhaps instead of damage or xp loss their can be points of contitution loss that lasts for so many play-time hours? That way you can cheese rest to get all your constitution back.

Edited by Jinnai, 21 October 2004 - 10:17 AM.

[Littiz]

Again, I'm not trying to argue here pointlessly, but I'd suffer to see an otherwise brilliant idea implemented in such a minimalist way. It'd work alright, but far from what was planned.

Ehm, as you planned. Frankly I'd prefer it the other way.
Anyway, I'll try to provide clearer answers.

Honestly Littiz: could you implement the scripting part of this?

Yes and no. Your version has still a big problem: you'd want scripts ran also at casting time, while I proposed to move all checks to an adequate selection time for a reason (that I explained already): to run scripts at casting time we'd need a forcing which would cause severe problems with most of the spells (some couldn't be "stopped" even if the scripts ordered so, others couldn't be properly targeted, and so).
Having already considered such issues, I proposed the alternative version I explained a couple of pages behind.

This is for the "doability" part.
But there are other issues to note.

You'd want material components: this would mean probably new items, new bams, places to find such items, reasons to find them, maybe dialogs, and all.
This should be added to the already heavy implementation cost (scripts, weidu and all), and quite frankly I'm not really ready to sustain it. Or better, I'm positive I wouldn't have the time, and I even think it wouldn't be worth it: the result would be, all in all, a bit too tricky, unfriendly and a bit alien for the general "simpleness" of the abilities system.

My aim with this component would be:
-freeing 9th slots
-making 10th level spells harder and more "costly" to cast
-completing the HLAs system, which is close to completion already.

These aims might be reached with a far more efficient (and nicely looking, and player-friendly) method than going for improbable solutions we wouldn't save ourselves from. This is my opinion, at least.

I mean the component materials and such (and we still dropped the INT checks!)?

Ehm, I think I've been saying that the INT check is not really implementable for an year or so...

Edited by Littiz, 21 October 2004 - 11:11 AM.

[T.G.Maestro]

Ehm, as you planned

Yes. Since it was I who had the basic idea of this whole component, at least I have the right to to have my plans about it, no? Implementing it is another story, that is why we are discussing it for so long.

Your version has still a big problem: you'd want scripts ran also at casting time, while I proposed to move all checks to an adequate selection time for a reason (that I explained already): to run scripts at casting time we'd need a forcing which would cause severe problems with most of the spells (some couldn't be "stopped" even if the scripts ordered so, others couldn't be properly targeted, and so).

Hmm. If I understand correctly, this means that we cannot properly implement those component material checks when casting, right? This means that we cannot add costs for the actual castings? But since you say it is the doable part...

You'd want material components: this would mean probably new items, new bams, places to find such items, reasons to find them, maybe dialogs, and all.

Of course not Littiz, where did you get this from?
Fortunately, BG2 has more than enough "misc" items scattered everywhere, only a madman would want to design new ones. No, forget this part as it is. As an example, here are the proposed components for a few TDs, just to give a picture (note that these are only the casting costs, the cost of development is almost always higher!):
- Improved Alacrity: 6.000 Gold, 1 Diamond;
- Barrier of Toth: 5.000 Gold, 1 Emerald, Shield of at least +2 enchantment;
- Dragon's Breath: 4.400 Gold, 1 Sunstone, 1 scroll of Fireball;
- Telling Blow: 5.200 Gold, 1 Star Saphire, a weapon of at least +3 enchantment;
- Montero's Retaliation: 3.000 Gold, 1 Arrow of Biting, 1 scroll of Contingency.
and so on, I have a list of all the possible TDs.

This should be added to the already heavy implementation cost (scripts, weidu and all), and quite frankly I'm not really ready to sustain it.

As you see, you don't have to.

the result would be, all in all, a bit too tricky, unfriendly and a bit alien for the general "simpleness" of the abilities system

As it was meant to be both in pnp and here. TDs ar everything but simple and (caster)friendly.

My aim with this component would be:
-freeing 9th slots
-making 10th level spells harder and more "costly" to cast
-completing the HLAs system, which is close to completion already.

Hopefully we agree on the basics then, as it seems...

Edited by T.G.Maestro, 21 October 2004 - 11:12 PM.

[Littiz]

Yes. Since it was I who had the basic idea of this whole component, at least I have the right to to have my plans about it, no?

And since I'm supposed to work on it, bear the burden of the technical issues and keep finding solutions where solutions are seemingly not to be found, am I allowed to have an opinion as well?

Hmm. If I understand correctly, this means that we cannot properly implement those component material checks when casting, right? This means that we cannot add costs for the actual castings? But since you say it is the doable part...

Sigh...
I've clearly said what solution (of the ones including scripts, I mean) I consider implementable, it's still a few pages behind: I've said several times that if you want scripts, that one is the way to go.
Of course, this doesn't mean we *must* use a solution including scripts and components.

As it was meant to be both in pnp and here. TDs ar everything but simple and (caster)friendly.

TGM, you forget that in PnP *ALL* spells are supposed to require material components...
A crpg is a semplified version of a RPG, couldn't be otherwise.

Edited by Littiz, 22 October 2004 - 12:02 AM.

[T.G.Maestro]

OK, lets see your proposed version again:

Anyway, we might alter the concept: the Dweomer base ability simply works as a preparatory work.
Using that one I might run a script (checking INT or something), and add the actual Dweomers as innates (this would solve targeting and menu issues).
When one is fired, all are "used" (similarly to the shapechange effects).

Using the base ability again would require some hours of cooling down, also the base ability would clear the spells available before reapplying them (this to solve resting issues and such).
This way to use 4 TDs in a "day" a mage should:
-use the first one
-wait the cooldown time
-reapply the base spell, to "prepare the availabe TDs
-repeat

So you say the base TD should be a preparatory ability. Here we agree, thats exactly what I had in mind and suggested in these last posts.
Now, as you said, selecting this TD from the innates bar would put all the available spells there. This is a problematic part. We cannot add ALL TDs that simply, that would be completely madness - one needs heavy preparation to get at least one of these to work, definitely not get them all at once...! Allowing mages to have instant access to all of them would be the greatest overkill. Actually, that is why I keep suggesting "developing" them one-by-one. In the case we add them together, we should add checks for XP level and different things to decide which one of them are useable at that moment. Again, allowing acces to all of them is not an option here. Simply unbalancing, no matter how we swarm them with negative effects (which is also avoidable, even the suggested Level Drain is TOO much!).

Here is my next suggestion, based on all these discussions:
- we use the starting method of my proposed version (e.g. the base TD ability applies the selected spell (from a 2DA list, containing all the TDs) to the innates bar). Here the player has to be able to pay the development costs (experience level, material components, gold) of the selected 10th level spell, or the selection and the ability is wasted. This would be the only part where scripting is needed. After this, the TD innate would be removed, and the player would have to re-select it from the HLA table to develop another spell.
At castings there would be no scripting, no costs, nothing. Once developed, the mage could cast the spell without any further costs, he should only deal with the negative effects of the actual casting (Fatigue, Winded state). After cast, the cooldown period (marked by the Fatigue icon) would start, and TDs would become unuseable for that duration. After this timer expires, the Fatigue would wear off and the mage would be once again able to cast a TD.

As I see, thi solution is much easier than my last one, and still retain some flavour of the original idea.

Opinions?

Edited by T.G.Maestro, 22 October 2004 - 12:28 AM.

[Nerik]

At a slight tangent, and I'm not sure if this is implementable,

Would it be possible to design the True Dweomers so that it appears as if the character who 'learns' a TD is listed as the creator of the TD (i.e. instead of 'Kreb's Flaming Dragon' we have 'Jan's Flaming Dragon')?

Charles

[T.G.Maestro]

At a slight tangent, and I'm not sure if this is implementable,

Would it be possible to design the True Dweomers so that it appears as if the character who 'learns' a TD is listed as the creator of the TD

Hehe, now, this is truly a secondary issue here, if you don't mind.
By the way, most TDs will appear without the names of their creators: Telling Blow instead of Tenser's Telling Blow for example.

[Rathwellin the Bard]

TGM & Littiz ... would it be possible to have a 'generic' TD HLA that is useable once per day.

When used it opens the spell protection like menu & the mage selects a HLA to 'prep'. Once 'prepped' a single use ability for that TD shows up in his innates (or maybe even as a single use ?item? that can be equipped in the quick use slots). Materials, if any, would be used in preparation. Level drain, if any, would occur on actual use of the TD.

Maybe you could have two or three 'generic' TD HLAs each containing several spells in the sub-menu. Multi-mages would only get the 'first' TD HLA. Singles would eventually get access to both or all of them.

You might be able to restrict the TD HLA from being used again until the innate or item it creates is used even if the player rests.

[Eon Blue Apocalypse]

Perhaps instead of damage or xp loss their can be points of contitution loss that lasts for so many play-time hours? That way you can cheese rest to get all your constitution back.

How about a permanent non-healable 1 point constitution loss each time you cast a TD? If people don't like it, then that would only reflect the fact that casting a TD is something some wizards are willing to do and others aren't.

[Littiz]

- we use the starting method of my proposed version (e.g. the base TD ability applies the selected spell (from a 2DA list, containing all the TDs) to the innates bar). Here the player has to be able to pay the development costs (experience level, material components, gold) of the selected 10th level spell, or the selection and the ability is wasted. This would be the only part where scripting is needed. After this, the TD innate would be removed, and the player would have to re-select it from the HLA table to develop another spell.
At castings there would be no scripting, no costs, nothing. Once developed, the mage could cast the spell without any further costs, he should only deal with the negative effects of the actual casting (Fatigue, Winded state). After cast, the cooldown period (marked by the Fatigue icon) would start, and TDs would become unuseable for that duration. After this timer expires, the Fatigue would wear off and the mage would be once again able to cast a TD.

A bit more doable, but you keep forgetting about a point.
To prevent further castings while fatigued, you need the protection from spell effect... now, if a specific TD targets someone else than the caster (ex: through projectiles) this cannot work (and you should know since we've already banged our head on the problem ).
Again, my proposed solution took care even of this aspect B), of course B)
If you renounce to the cooldown period we might apply a level drain effect just to balance this out, though.

Another thing: I don't think (I might be wrong) there are scripts commands to check if you possess something like "a +2 enchanted shield".
You'd need to list each item... (consider also the possible presence of item mods...)

Permanent constitution loss seems a bit too much, imho

[T.G.Maestro]

How about a permanent non-healable 1 point constitution loss each time you cast a TD? If people don't like it, then that would only reflect the fact that casting a TD is something some wizards are willing to do and others aren't.

This was my way of reasoning too with th permanent XP loss, but people got freaked out even by mentioning it. CON loss would be the same thing, but even less logical.

When used it opens the spell protection like menu & the mage selects a HLA to 'prep'. Once 'prepped' a single use ability for that TD shows up in his innates (or maybe even as a single use ?item? that can be equipped in the quick use slots). Materials, if any, would be used in preparation. Level drain, if any, would occur on actual use of the TD.

Rath, this is nearly the same idea I had a few posts before - only that I'd make it a "development" ability instead of preparation, and would add those innate TDs as permanent abilities.

A bit more doable, but you keep forgetting about a point.
To prevent further castings while fatigued, you need the protection from spell effect... now, if a specific TD targets someone else than the caster (ex: through projectiles) this cannot work

Why Protection From Spell? We could easiyl do this with a Disable Spellcasting Ability (innates), or Remove Icon (innates). Of course, other innate would be denied as well, but this is explainable.
Also, if we don't like this solution, there is another (tricky) method: instead of adding the Prot. from Spell opcode directly to the spell itself, we add a delayed EFF file containing the Protection from Spell effect. This way the protection would only be applied once the spell has been cat, and it's effects are active. I already used this for one of my "experimens" and it works.

Another thing: I don't think (I might be wrong) there are scripts commands to check if you possess something like "a +2 enchanted shield".
You'd need to list each item...

Really, this is a secondary issue, one that can be dealt with easily: we can always choose components that mean minimal work for the scripting part.

[Littiz]

Why Protection From Spell? We could easiyl do this with a Disable Spellcasting Ability (innates), or Remove Icon (innates). Of course, other innate would be denied as well, but this is explainable.

We don't like it. Lose spell triggers and other innates that should be usable?

Also, if we don't like this solution, there is another (tricky) method: instead of adding the Prot. from Spell opcode directly to the spell itself, we add a delayed EFF file containing the Protection from Spell effect. This way the protection would only be applied once the spell has been cat, and it's effects are active. I already used this for one of my "experimens" and it works.

No, it won't work with spells that use projectiles for instance. The effect doesn't prevent the spell to be cast, it only prevents the effects to be applied. So you cannot use it to prevent castings of spells like meteor swarm, for instance, or Volcano (remember?)
That's why I moved the cooldown time to the selection spell.

[T.G.Maestro]

it won't work with spells that use projectiles for instance. The effect doesn't prevent the spell to be cast, it only prevents the effects to be applied. So you cannot use it to prevent castings of spells like meteor swarm

I'll further examine this issue, but right now I'm concentrating on Refinement's Improved Celestials, and a proper documentation.

[Feanor]

it won't work with spells that use projectiles for instance. The effect doesn't prevent the spell to be cast, it only prevents the effects to be applied. So you cannot use it to prevent castings of spells like meteor swarm

I'll further examine this issue, but right now I'm concentrating on Refinement's Improved Celestials, and a proper documentation.

You really want to improve all, TG. But have Caedwyr not done something similar sometime ago ?

[T.G.Maestro]

Actually, he did.
I will use his work as a basis (with his permission of course), but this time it will be finished: Caedwyr revised (or more precisely: "pen-and-papered") the Deva and the Planetar only - his mod left Fallen Devas, Dark Planetars and both type of Solars unchanged. This caused some mess with some creatures improved while the others still the old BG2 style.

Now, what I'm going to do is to once again revise ALL of these creatures, following Caedwyr's method, and spicing things a bit at my taste (e.g. more fitting abilities, etc.)

[Feanor]

Actually, he did.
I will use his work as a basis (with his permission of course), but this time it will be finished: Caedwyr revised (or more precisely: "pen-and-papered") the Deva and the Planetar only - his mod left Fallen Devas, Dark Planetars and both type of Solars unchanged. This caused some mess with some creatures improved while the others still the old BG2 style.

Now, what I'm going to do is to once again revise ALL of these creatures, following Caedwyr's method, and spicing things a bit at my taste (e.g. more fitting abilities, etc.)

Why would you need to revise the solars since there are no solar in game to confront (the only one is that which counsels charname) ?

Edited by T.G.Maestro, 25 October 2004 - 07:33 AM.

[T.G.Maestro]

Tsk-tsk Feanor, you haven't played enough with Refinements I see...
The clerical innate Divine Intervention (good and evil version) has the chance to summon a Solar or a Fallen Solar...