You have been taken by the Mists

Author Topic: [Discussion] Potential PfA change  (Read 32551 times)

RedwizardD

  • Scrollord
  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 1001
  • Avoid Attention - Critical Failure
Re: [Discussion] Potential PfA change
« Reply #50 on: January 13, 2014, 12:57:30 PM »
That is a massive imbalance. Will other spells be added/adjusted to compensate? Magic users will need more spell slots to accommodate such spells if that is the case.

They are perfectly capable of adjusting with the tools currently available to them.

At low levels?

Bad_Bud

  • Developers
  • Dark Power
  • *
  • Posts: 4576
Re: [Discussion] Potential PfA change
« Reply #51 on: January 13, 2014, 12:58:22 PM »
So, after gathering a few notes, this is what I see would change, given a complete adjustment to the PnP version of the spell.

We are LOSING protection against these:

1) Fear Spell, Fear Auras
2) Hold Person, Hold Monster, Hold Animal
3) Confusion
4) Sleep
5) Phantasmal Killer, Weird
6) Power Word: Stun
7) Daze
8) Doom, Bane
9) Tasha's Hideous Laughter

We should be gaining complete protection against Charm Person/Monster, and Dominate Person/Monster (Regardless of the casters alignment or 'mode' of the PfA spell).

Also, we should be gaining Protection from Summoned creatures, utilized by Summoning Spells, Planar Allies, Planar Bindings, and Gate, with the 'Opposing alignment' of the mode cast being immune to the effects (I.E. Good creatures are immune to this when protection from evil is cast, Evil summons immune to this when protection from Good is used.) This however would be much harder to impliment, give the mechanical workings of the hostiling system.

That is a massive imbalance. Will other spells be added/adjusted to compensate? Magic users will need more spell slots to accommodate such spells if that is the case.

It only looks massive because he listed specific spells.  No one was getting killed by Doom, Bane, Tasha's Hideous Laughter, Sleep, Daze, Phantasmal Killer, or Weird anyway.

In regards to low level trouble, the way to not get killed by Hold Person is to travel with friends.  Friends can either protect you while you're disabled or use a Remove Paralysis potion.  In fact all of the effects can be removed by readily available potions if you travel with support.

Hatsune

  • Undead Master
  • ****
  • Posts: 405
  • Ninja-loots Extraordinaire!
Re: [Discussion] Potential PfA change
« Reply #52 on: January 13, 2014, 01:12:52 PM »
Theres alot there that can cause problems, and some are minor, but I listed everything, just for completeness.

Fear, Confusion, Hold Person (and Tasha's to a lesser extent, being a disable), will be the main concerns, but as you said, things will shift more into a reactive, rather then proactive stance. Wizards won't be passing out Lesser Mindblanks for the most part, and Clarity's duration is too short. But, as said, most of these effects will be removable, in a party.

Bane and Doom cast by enemies will start to function, as some people might fail these now. This is a good thing, I think, as it makes their previously worthless spells at least someone worth casting (rather then just being free rounds of attack). But it will add a bit more against the low level party, as both have a decent duration, and will slow up fighting and draw things out.

As far as PvE play, I see change, but nothing that isn't managable, and people will adjust. My worry, is in the PvP arena of play, Basically its just opening up another cheap 'gank' tactic in the the manner of Holding Spells, that will no longer have a reliable counter save for higher level mages. A 21-22 DC isn't out of the question for a focused enchanter, even in the 5-8 level range, most equivalent fighter sorts will have little they can do against this. Its the same thing we see with Flesh to Stone, as this is another 'gank spell' that has no counter, save getting your saves high enough.
Currently Playing:
Ayleese, Slyvan Bardess

armybrat69

  • Undead Slayer
  • ***
  • Posts: 242
  • Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive !
Re: [Discussion] Potential PfA change
« Reply #53 on: January 13, 2014, 01:17:24 PM »
I'm going to preemptively say no to the protection from summons.  I'm not sure how you would even make that work, and summons are pretty nerfed to hell anyway.

Player summons are nerfed, I do not think this applies to the ones spawned by monsters.
"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead." -Thomas Paine

"We are all in the same game; just different levels. Dealing with the same hell; just different levels." -Unknown

HellsPanda

  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 6598
Re: [Discussion] Potential PfA change
« Reply #54 on: January 13, 2014, 01:18:34 PM »
monsters and PCs cast the same summon spells. And the nerf is in their duration

Bad_Bud

  • Developers
  • Dark Power
  • *
  • Posts: 4576
Re: [Discussion] Potential PfA change
« Reply #55 on: January 13, 2014, 01:22:47 PM »
As far as PvE play, I see change, but nothing that isn't managable, and people will adjust. My worry, is in the PvP arena of play, Basically its just opening up another cheap 'gank' tactic in the the manner of Holding Spells, that will no longer have a reliable counter save for higher level mages. A 21-22 DC isn't out of the question for a focused enchanter, even in the 5-8 level range, most equivalent fighter sorts will have little they can do against this. Its the same thing we see with Flesh to Stone, as this is another 'gank spell' that has no counter, save getting your saves high enough.

To be fair, there's not much an enchanter can do once a fighter gets within melee range, and there is no immunity for that either.

Winter83

  • Dark Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
  • 100% Ranger
    • The hunter's query
Re: [Discussion] Potential PfA change
« Reply #56 on: January 13, 2014, 01:30:21 PM »
This will likely rebalance the classes present and picked. There are a ton of clerics roaming around at low levels while more mundane classes (save rogue) are more rare.

Thumbs up.

Remove paralysis pots are cheap to make and come by and can counter hold person easily. Same with fear. Archers and those hanging behind will get a new supportative role.



The Perfect Circle: The Hollow : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avgiqNapUx0

armybrat69

  • Undead Slayer
  • ***
  • Posts: 242
  • Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive !
Re: [Discussion] Potential PfA change
« Reply #57 on: January 13, 2014, 01:30:46 PM »
Honestly unless other spells will be adjusted to balance the change PvA will cause  if changed then I see this change as more debilitating for characters, particularly the low level ones. Too many creatures spam the hold spells which will only result in more party wipes. RedWizard is right too, the spell was designed originally as it was to address other inconsistencies in the original NWN scripts/game. I honestly see no abundant good coming from this type of nerf.
"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead." -Thomas Paine

"We are all in the same game; just different levels. Dealing with the same hell; just different levels." -Unknown

Lucadia

  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 1301
  • Feral Mystic
Re: [Discussion] Potential PfA change
« Reply #58 on: January 13, 2014, 01:46:53 PM »
I cant say your lv 9 mage is going be interested in lesser mind blanking the entire party either, removing their utility for any extended stone/improved invisibility or their own protections. It also throws in the equation that ever pc is going be expected to carry their own abber dream charms, a resource some pcs wont be able to afford or just additional crafting time sink.

Can't you make that argument almost anywhere?  If you encounter necromancy you can't say your level 7 cleric is going to death ward the entire party, for instance.  And yes, people do skimp on those spells, but I don't see anyone complaining when they get killed by Destruction just because because PfA didn't protect from that too, and I think that's the main reason for the suggestion in the first place.  I don't understand why mind-effects were ever singled out in the first place.

No you cant use the same argument. theres various ways to stop destruction. very few mobs cast destruction. almost every spell caster has mind effecting spells though. Clarity to short. theres two few options to replace lesser mind blank as a spell slot either. your average caster that be in such areas is going have few spell slots. Fear auras are also huge. iv tried playing ranged before and not ask for protections, theres situations where the mobs will run around your tanks to get to the low ac target though, then you end up with all your back party suddenly fears, panic, or just dead. Ill point out clerics have more spell slots if you wanted to go that route.

as for your potion route. been in plenty of parties that do that support. but nobody is going be supporting in the happenstance everyone just got paralized at once such as howls that come from bone gollems and everyone fails their save.

Bluebomber4evr

  • Head DM, Developer and Ravenloft Trivia Guru/Community Council
  • Administrator
  • Dark Power
  • *
  • Posts: 20622
    • http://www.nwnravenloft.com
Re: [Discussion] Potential PfA change
« Reply #59 on: January 13, 2014, 01:58:04 PM »
I'm going to preemptively say no to the protection from summons.  I'm not sure how you would even make that work, and summons are pretty nerfed to hell anyway.
Mayvind was only referencing the Gate spell, which checks to see if the player has protection from evil enabled to determine if the balor summoned is hostile or not. This is a function of Gate's spellscript and would still work even if we changed Protection from Alignment's spellscript.

Bluebomber4evr: The Justice, not you, since 2002

Bad_Bud

  • Developers
  • Dark Power
  • *
  • Posts: 4576
Re: [Discussion] Potential PfA change
« Reply #60 on: January 13, 2014, 02:01:17 PM »
I cant say your lv 9 mage is going be interested in lesser mind blanking the entire party either, removing their utility for any extended stone/improved invisibility or their own protections. It also throws in the equation that ever pc is going be expected to carry their own abber dream charms, a resource some pcs wont be able to afford or just additional crafting time sink.

Can't you make that argument almost anywhere?  If you encounter necromancy you can't say your level 7 cleric is going to death ward the entire party, for instance.  And yes, people do skimp on those spells, but I don't see anyone complaining when they get killed by Destruction just because because PfA didn't protect from that too, and I think that's the main reason for the suggestion in the first place.  I don't understand why mind-effects were ever singled out in the first place.

No you cant use the same argument. theres various ways to stop destruction. very few mobs cast destruction. almost every spell caster has mind effecting spells though. Clarity to short. theres two few options to replace lesser mind blank as a spell slot either. your average caster that be in such areas is going have few spell slots. Fear auras are also huge. iv tried playing ranged before and not ask for protections, theres situations where the mobs will run around your tanks to get to the low ac target though, then you end up with all your back party suddenly fears, panic, or just dead. Ill point out clerics have more spell slots if you wanted to go that route.

as for your potion route. been in plenty of parties that do that support. but nobody is going be supporting in the happenstance everyone just got paralized at once such as howls that come from bone gollems and everyone fails their save.

I'm indifferent to this.  I don't care whether Protection from Alignment changes or not.  But when I look at the arguments from both sides, thus far arguments for the change are more varied and make more sense than arguments against.  Almost every argument against is some form of "everyone is going to die."  There are a lot of ways to die, and I'm having a hard time placing mind-effects on a pedestal above all others, because mind-effects just aren't that devastating when compared to things like instant death (which no one is complaining about).  This leads me to believe people can handle the change as well as they can handle destruction, implosion, crippling strike or level drains.  All of these things are debilitating and for the most part, people don't outright counter them by pressing a button (even when they can).  I would like to see some interesting arguments for the case that aren't "it will be too hard" or "newbies will die."  I have been victim to several Hold Persons by Huecuvas recently, and 100% of the time I have survived; two times I was solo and simply did not get killed, and the third time I got knocked unconcious but my friend used a potion to save me.  The duration for a Huecuva's Hold Person is five rounds.  If that is your Achilles' heel then you are probably playing carelessly.

I'm going to preemptively say no to the protection from summons.  I'm not sure how you would even make that work, and summons are pretty nerfed to hell anyway.
Mayvind was only referencing the Gate spell, which checks to see if the player has protection from evil enabled to determine if the balor summoned is hostile or not. This is a function of Gate's spellscript and would still work even if we changed Protection from Alignment's spellscript.

It was in response to Hatsune's earlier post, actually.

Bluebomber4evr

  • Head DM, Developer and Ravenloft Trivia Guru/Community Council
  • Administrator
  • Dark Power
  • *
  • Posts: 20622
    • http://www.nwnravenloft.com
Re: [Discussion] Potential PfA change
« Reply #61 on: January 13, 2014, 02:06:46 PM »
Ah, my mistake. Still, that should clear things up for Mayvind. ;)

Bluebomber4evr: The Justice, not you, since 2002

Meriana

  • Undead Slayer
  • ***
  • Posts: 169
Re: [Discussion] Potential PfA change
« Reply #62 on: January 13, 2014, 02:12:12 PM »
I am in favour of changing PfA as outlined. It would make for more interesting play, perhaps making other spells see some use...

Geiger

  • Guest
Re: [Discussion] Potential PfA change
« Reply #63 on: January 13, 2014, 02:28:33 PM »
I support this across the board.

APorg

  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 5336
  • Fanatic Xenophile
Re: [Discussion] Potential PfA change
« Reply #64 on: January 13, 2014, 02:49:59 PM »
Quote from: Lucadia link=topic=35641.msg443647#msg443647
as for your potion route. been in plenty of parties that do that support. but nobody is going be supporting in the happenstance everyone just got paralized at once such as howls that come from bone gollems and everyone fails their save.

But these low level spells given by potions are meant to be the proper counters for such offensive spells. Right now they're underused precisely because PfE is an easy panacea. The use of Remove Fear, Remove Paralysis and Freedom,  etc., aren't the pillars of defensive strategy they should be, but are instead confined to the role of exotics that you only ever use rarely because someone forgot to use PfE. This change would make all those spells more important.

This change will make things harder,  yes, but it will also mean people have to develop better strategies for coping with many phenomena rather than just using a single spell.
“Moral wounds have this peculiarity - they may be hidden, but they never close; always painful, always ready to bleed when touched, they remain fresh and open in the heart.”
― Alexandre Dumas, The Count of Monte Cristo

BahamutZ3RO

  • Master of Many Alts
  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 2615
Re: [Discussion] Potential PfA change
« Reply #65 on: January 13, 2014, 03:01:46 PM »
I'm actually very alright with this change so long as viable counters are added/modified to be viable.

When are we going to see some changes to make more offensive mage spells viable in PvM?
: )




Indigocell

  • Undead Slayer
  • ***
  • Posts: 190
Re: [Discussion] Potential PfA change
« Reply #66 on: January 13, 2014, 04:06:23 PM »
Why is it that whenever a suggestion for magic is made, it is always something that attempts to reduce the viability of it? So rarely do you get suggestions that attempt to make an unused spell more useful for example.  I am guilty of this myself, it's just an observation I've made.

With that in mind, let's talk a little bit about Fear effects.  If your intent is to make Fear more dangerous by getting through alignment protections, we should probably recognize that Fear is already a pretty dangerous and debilitating spell.  I'm sure others have already mentioned but I didn't go through all the pages.  In PnP, even in the highest stage of fear effects, certain actions should still be possible when they are not in NWN.  "A panicked creature can use special abilities, including spells, to flee; indeed, the creature must use such means if they are the only way to escape. "

There are supposed to be three stages of fear from what I understand Shaken, Frightened, and Panicked.  Currently, the way Fear works in NWN is when you fail a save you enter a state that most closely resembles the "Panicked" state, except worse because no actions are possible.

As for the alignment protection, if you change the spell, nothing terrible is going to happen.  It will simply not be used as often anymore, joining other spells that see very little use.  No big deal really.

HellsPanda

  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 6598
Re: [Discussion] Potential PfA change
« Reply #67 on: January 13, 2014, 04:09:11 PM »
because most people dont get upset when we change spells to be more usefull? And many of them are on their way to the server soon.

Troukk

  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 1470
Re: [Discussion] Potential PfA change
« Reply #68 on: January 13, 2014, 04:12:58 PM »
I support this change.

When I set up my spellbook, I don't even bother with mind affecting spells. Most NPCs are immune to them, and most PCs can protect themselves from them with a lvl 1 spell.

By making this spell less usefull, you're actually making a lot of fun spells more viable. Particularly the ones in the enchantment school.
Not all who wander are lost.

Bluebomber4evr

  • Head DM, Developer and Ravenloft Trivia Guru/Community Council
  • Administrator
  • Dark Power
  • *
  • Posts: 20622
    • http://www.nwnravenloft.com
Re: [Discussion] Potential PfA change
« Reply #69 on: January 13, 2014, 04:15:22 PM »
Why is it that whenever a suggestion for magic is made, it is always something that attempts to reduce the viability of it? So rarely do you get suggestions that attempt to make an unused spell more useful for example.  I am guilty of this myself, it's just an observation I've made.

With that in mind, let's talk a little bit about Fear effects.  If your intent is to make Fear more dangerous by getting through alignment protections, we should probably recognize that Fear is already a pretty dangerous and debilitating spell.  I'm sure others have already mentioned but I didn't go through all the pages.  In PnP, even in the highest stage of fear effects, certain actions should still be possible when they are not in NWN.  "A panicked creature can use special abilities, including spells, to flee; indeed, the creature must use such means if they are the only way to escape. "

There are supposed to be three stages of fear from what I understand Shaken, Frightened, and Panicked.  Currently, the way Fear works in NWN is when you fail a save you enter a state that most closely resembles the "Panicked" state, except worse because no actions are possible.

As for the alignment protection, if you change the spell, nothing terrible is going to happen.  It will simply not be used as often anymore, joining other spells that see very little use.  No big deal really.

Actually, we're in the process of making a whole bunch of spells more useful, but in order to do that we have to reduce dependency on some of the more overused spells such as Protection from Alignment.

Bluebomber4evr: The Justice, not you, since 2002

Bad_Bud

  • Developers
  • Dark Power
  • *
  • Posts: 4576
Re: [Discussion] Potential PfA change
« Reply #70 on: January 13, 2014, 04:27:46 PM »
Why is it that whenever a suggestion for magic is made, it is always something that attempts to reduce the viability of it? So rarely do you get suggestions that attempt to make an unused spell more useful for example.  I am guilty of this myself, it's just an observation I've made.

The reason there's a thread here is because...

We have decided to bring the subject forward for discussion by the community as the spell is used a great deal and we do not wish to blindside you with a major game change.

There's no need to make a topic asking for opinions when we remove the reflex saving throw from Ice Dagger because no one uses Ice Dagger.

As for the alignment protection, if you change the spell, nothing terrible is going to happen.  It will simply not be used as often anymore, joining other spells that see very little use.  No big deal really.

Just because it's not total immunity doesn't mean it's not still a good spell.  +2 AC and +2 to saving throws is very much worth casting.  It has a really good duration, too.

BahamutZ3RO

  • Master of Many Alts
  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 2615
Re: [Discussion] Potential PfA change
« Reply #71 on: January 13, 2014, 04:34:09 PM »
Eh, the AC is a deflection bonus. Shield and Shield of Faith both beat that.
: )




Bad_Bud

  • Developers
  • Dark Power
  • *
  • Posts: 4576
Re: [Discussion] Potential PfA change
« Reply #72 on: January 13, 2014, 05:19:35 PM »
Eh, the AC is a deflection bonus. Shield and Shield of Faith both beat that.

Paladins don't get those spells, and mages can't cast shield on other people.  For clerics, before level 6 it's better to use Protection from Evil than Shield of Faith in most situations because Shield of Faith won't give you a saving throw bonus.  Don't count out the saving throw bonus.  Protection from Alignment is one of the few spells that gives one - and it will stack with the other few.

Cursed Ink

  • Dark Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 522
  • 1# Highest Bounty Winner
Re: [Discussion] Potential PfA change
« Reply #73 on: January 13, 2014, 05:37:56 PM »
My only real concern with this is of course because of my own character, the real reason I use PfA almost constantly is because the duration for Clartity and other spells on items is junk. I almost exclusively use magic items to protect myself and yeah the PfE candle has been a life saver, the Dreamcatchers? Never use them unless running into a Vampire.

Apocrypha

  • Undead Slayer
  • ***
  • Posts: 209
Re: [Discussion] Potential PfA change
« Reply #74 on: January 13, 2014, 05:45:19 PM »
Still need protection from evil when i summon my favorite friend the Balor ?

Yes.

 
Also change the fear effect to reduce fighting capability instead of randon run in corner and beaten to death. % spellfailure and reduce attack base and ac etc..etc..

No.

I personally think that the "run into a corner and do nothing" Fear mechanic on NWN is really just no good at all.  As said, if it granted an immunity for a little while once you pass the save, that'd be something, but as it is you're testing every other round or so versus certain creatures.

With the amount of thought being given to PfA as a 1st level spell, the only thing that really seems unmanageable with the proposed change is the Fear Effect in the first place.

Banned Indefinitely.