Proposal: Bring Spells in line with PnP

Ideas and suggestions for game mechanics and rules.
User avatar
NESchampion
Staff Head - Documentation
Posts: 884
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 12:46 am

Proposal: Bring Spells in line with PnP

Post by NESchampion »

I would like to bring spells more in line with their PnP equivalents. Mismatched and differentially powered spells throw off the game balance and cause confusion; it is notable that NWN2 functions in real-time unlike it's PnP counterpart though. This is likely to be a big project as there are a lot of spells that don't function like they do in PnP; for now I'm going to start this thread off with level 1 spells and work my way up. If I miss any spells that aren't functioning properly please chime in.

Level 1 Spells
Endure Elements: Change from DR 10/- all elements to an RP spell.

Endure Elements in PnP functions as follows:
A creature protected by endure elements suffers no harm from being in a hot or cold environment. It can exist comfortably in conditions between -50 and 140 degrees Fahrenheit without having to make Fortitude saves). The creature’s equipment is likewise protected.

Endure elements doesn’t provide any protection from fire or cold damage, nor does it protect against other environmental hazards such as smoke, lack of air, and so forth.


This one will probably warrant some discussion, and possibly just reducing the DR and duration as some area scripts use minor elemental damage to simulate environment temperature that Endure Elements would actually protect against.

Protection From Alignment: Not sure how close I can get this to PnP; right now it gives immunity to mind-affecting spells, not just a temporary reprieve to such effects.
Grease: Change AOE to Medium to match PnP.
Sleep: Cap at 4 HD per PnP instead of 4 + 1d4.

Color Spray: Change effect applications to match PnP. Change range to 15 foot cone instead of 30 foot cone to match PnP.

Color Spray in PnP functions as follows:
  • 2 HD or less - The creature is unconscious, blinded, and stunned for 2d4 rounds, then blinded and stunned for 1d4 rounds, and then stunned for 1 round.
    3 or 4 HD - The creature is blinded and stunned for 1d4 rounds, then stunned for 1 round.
    5 or more HD - The creature is stunned for 1 round.
This change would make it more useful against weaker targets (longer duration of multiple penalties) and less useful against stronger targets (shorter penalty duration). Range reduction to bring it in line with PnP.

Burning Hands: Change to range to 15 foot cone instead of 30 foot cone to match PnP. Change school to Evocation to match PnP.
Enlarge/Reduce Person: Change to actually change size categories or apply an appropriate bonus. (I'll need to chat with tech about how best to approach this one still).
Current PC: Olaf - The Silver Marches
User avatar
Blindhamsterman
Haste Bear
Posts: 2396
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 11:13 am
Location: GMT

Re: Proposal: Bring Spells in line with PnP

Post by Blindhamsterman »

My thoughts:

Endure Elements:
I'd suggest that it'd be best to have ALFA do a PW wide update of cold areas to require fort saves or take (subdual?) damage. Then have EE work vs that (auto passing those effects). Would require some co-operation from HDMs though.

Protection From Alignment:
if you can make it work like pnp instead then cool!

Grease:
sounds good!

Sleep:
Yep sounds good

Color Spray:
Yep sounds good.

Burning Hands:
again, sounds good

Enlarge/Reduce Person:
Would be cool if these actually gave proper bonuses for the size change.


Final note:
My only suggestion - check how small 15ft range is for the cones, if it's TOO small it'll become rather useless on all cone based spells. If it looks like it could still be used in a real time game without too much hard times, then yeah definitely fix.
Standards Member


Current PC: Elenaril Avae'Kerym of the Lynx Lodge
<Heero>: yeah for every pc ronan has killed dming, paazin has killed 2 with his spawns
User avatar
Brokenbone
Chosen of Forumamus, God of Forums
Posts: 5771
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 1:07 am
Location: London, Ontario, Canada

Re: Proposal: Bring Spells in line with PnP

Post by Brokenbone »

EE sounds like a lot of effort to make "inhospitable areas", always sucks to take a working ability (even an OP one) and say "tra la la it's a RP effect now." Fine though. Or possibly also fine if just a reduced effect like say, soak 5hp not 10hp to the same max. Or soak 2hp to a max of whatever... etc. Lots of space between "RP only" and "where it's at."

Color Spray - remember the blindness talk we had in IRC about how blindness causes mob paralysis? Essentially "the same or worse than stunning"? Even though I see range being monkeyed with, number of targets going up, on what I think we all acknowledge is a bugged / OP effect. PCs though I gather are okay under blindness, because we can still react (even in panic) and maybe do things other than stand there like an idiot. Dunno, I guess I'm just saying "if this spell is a mess as is due to blindness & AI, why fool with it without first addressing the underlying problem?"

Just from the hip type thoughts.
ALFA NWN2 PCs: Rhaggot of the Bruised-Eye, and Bamshogbo
ALFA NWN1 PC: Jacobim Foxmantle
ALFA NWN1 Dead PC: Jon Shieldjack

DMA Staff
User avatar
Ksiel
Frost Giant
Posts: 710
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2004 5:24 pm
Location: Mobile, Alabama
Contact:

Re: Proposal: Bring Spells in line with PnP

Post by Ksiel »

I believe 15 ft cones would make those spells completely useless in real time strategy.
Current PC: Anovallis "Nova" Starmane

Retired but not forgotten: Bhael Ezri, Blaise Dawnbright, Bastian Cross, Tristan Celvante, Logan Castill, Dorian Orthallas, Kharak Aza'DeDuin, Nyx
User avatar
ElCadaver
Rust Monster
Posts: 1202
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2004 3:22 pm
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Proposal: Bring Spells in line with PnP

Post by ElCadaver »

Is the way all enemies in NWN2 deal damage/damage types PnP canon? Don't you really need to look at both sides of the coin here, if you will be making these sorts of changes?

Plus you might need to rewrite the AI, as NPC's may cast spells based on their old descriptions, not the new ones.

Just a few things that came to mind reading the discussion
Image
User avatar
Blindhamsterman
Haste Bear
Posts: 2396
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 11:13 am
Location: GMT

Re: Proposal: Bring Spells in line with PnP

Post by Blindhamsterman »

Is the way all enemies in NWN2 deal damage/damage types PnP canon? Don't you really need to look at both sides of the coin here, if you will be making these sorts of changes?
actually, basic damage from most enemies is actually pretty much spot on, we've even had a number of creatures get 'fixes' of late (Wyverns for one!!!) Note that creature fixing, isn't a tech thing, whereas fixing spells is. Hense NES offering his services.
Plus you might need to rewrite the AI, as NPC's may cast spells based on their old descriptions, not the new ones.
Nope, they use the exact same spell scripts we use :) - oh wait, you mean criteria that they're based on. Hmm probably a fair point! make cones smaller and we might have enemies trying to cone you when out of range!
I believe 15 ft cones would make those spells completely useless in real time strategy.
was my gut feeling as well, on the other hand, getting maybe a screenshot of how large it actually would be could probably help.
EE sounds like a lot of effort to make "inhospitable areas", always sucks to take a working ability (even an OP one) and say "tra la la it's a RP effect now." Fine though. Or possibly also fine if just a reduced effect like say, soak 5hp not 10hp to the same max. Or soak 2hp to a max of whatever... etc. Lots of space between "RP only" and "where it's at."
yeah, either way, we could do with having our areas with horrible climates actually have an effect (silverymoon pass for example should be sooooo cold as should the cloudpeaks on BG and no doubt number of areas on MS). Then EE wouldn't be RP only, giving it maybe 1 point of DR that switches the spell off when it totals to 20 might be a reasonable work around I guess. (as the only area that DID have any environment stuff, was <meta> and it did single points of cold damage.
Standards Member


Current PC: Elenaril Avae'Kerym of the Lynx Lodge
<Heero>: yeah for every pc ronan has killed dming, paazin has killed 2 with his spawns
Zelknolf
Chosen of Forumamus, God of Forums
Posts: 6139
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:04 pm

Re: Proposal: Bring Spells in line with PnP

Post by Zelknolf »

Alternatively, we could make canonical supercold areas. -- If we're talking about changes on the scope of pen-and-papering spells en masse, just getting hazards of extra cold/ extra hot weather over to the pen and paper standards would be a pretty trivial addition: and it would be a nifty addition to our ruleset to boot. It'd be the kind of thing we could brag on: "Ever get annoyed that a chilly breeze does lethal damage elsewhere? ALFA's evolved beyond that! (come play here; we're pretty awesome. srsly guys)"
Ronan
Dungeon Master
Posts: 4611
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 9:48 am

Re: Proposal: Bring Spells in line with PnP

Post by Ronan »

I have many comments/additions I don't have time to post here, but my main thoughts are:
Bring resist and protection from energy in-line with 3.5

Bring Stoneskin in-line with 3.5, and make similar changes to Greater Stoneskin and Premonition.

People will whine less about OP casters and time compression when buffs are brought to 3.5's rules.

Cone-based spells can really suck in RT play. The caster has to get near the mobs to target them, so so he'll often be targeted in response, changing their vector and making them harder to hit with the spell.
User avatar
Blindhamsterman
Haste Bear
Posts: 2396
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 11:13 am
Location: GMT

Re: Proposal: Bring Spells in line with PnP

Post by Blindhamsterman »

Bring Stoneskin in-line with 3.5, and make similar changes to Greater Stoneskin and Premonition.
How do you mean 'in line with 3.5'?
The spell works just like pnp with the exception of a material cost not being required, however, if we add material costs to some spells, it should really be to all spells that require them. And we should have a simple system of the spells just taking the required GP from inventory when cast (or failing if not enough gp are there).
-Note: I'm actually heavily in favour of material components, and have been for over a year (there are comments from me suggesting we add them). However, it needs to be an across the board thing, not a "pick'n'mix".

If you've an interest in doing that, I can go through all the spells we have, and create a spreadsheet with spell name and material component cost.


Shortening durations on spells is actually a bad idea as was pointed out when I suggested it in the other thread, 10min/level spells lasting longer than hour/level spells may be silly, but thats not a fault of the 10min/level spells, it's a fault of our borked time system. Shortening their durations just means those spells become decidedly sub par (I know that minute/level spells in DM session even as a level 9 caster are often pointless - they're gone before you've moved to the next room).
Standards Member


Current PC: Elenaril Avae'Kerym of the Lynx Lodge
<Heero>: yeah for every pc ronan has killed dming, paazin has killed 2 with his spawns
User avatar
Brokenbone
Chosen of Forumamus, God of Forums
Posts: 5771
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 1:07 am
Location: London, Ontario, Canada

Re: Proposal: Bring Spells in line with PnP

Post by Brokenbone »

Ronan makes a good point about cones in RT play.

PnP, folks don't all move at the same time, it's a pecking order based on initiative. If your caster finds himself the appropriate number of squares from a mob, who since it isn't their turn, are standing there like bowling pins, blast them. I do not mind if a cone is like a baseball bat compared to a hammer in a situation of moving targets. PnP with all the squares there and usually patience about making your moves is a lot more like chess (though an egg-timer hourglass may from time to time be appropriate for the right group)... NWN battle is frantic & twitchy.
ALFA NWN2 PCs: Rhaggot of the Bruised-Eye, and Bamshogbo
ALFA NWN1 PC: Jacobim Foxmantle
ALFA NWN1 Dead PC: Jon Shieldjack

DMA Staff
danielmn
Fionn In Disguise
Posts: 4678
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 9:08 pm

Re: Proposal: Bring Spells in line with PnP

Post by danielmn »

Blindhamsterman wrote:
Bring Stoneskin in-line with 3.5, and make similar changes to Greater Stoneskin and Premonition.
How do you mean 'in line with 3.5'?
The spell works just like pnp with the exception of a material cost not being required, however, if we add material costs to some spells, it should really be to all spells that require them. And we should have a simple system of the spells just taking the required GP from inventory when cast (or failing if not enough gp are there).
-Note: I'm actually heavily in favour of material components, and have been for over a year (there are comments from me suggesting we add them). However, it needs to be an across the board thing, not a "pick'n'mix".

If you've an interest in doing that, I can go through all the spells we have, and create a spreadsheet with spell name and material component cost.

Shortening durations on spells is actually a bad idea as was pointed out when I suggested it in the other thread, 10min/level spells lasting longer than hour/level spells may be silly, but thats not a fault of the 10min/level spells, it's a fault of our borked time system. Shortening their durations just means those spells become decidedly sub par (I know that minute/level spells in DM session even as a level 9 caster are often pointless - they're gone before you've moved to the next room).
Material components/foci for all vanilla cleric spells have already been done by myself and are up on the tsm ftp I believe. I likely still have the batch of .erfs if they can't be found...did these a while ago.
Swift wrote: Permadeath is only permadeath when the PCs wallet is empty.
Zyrus Meynolt: [Party] For the record, if this somehow blows up in our faces and I die, I want a raise

<Castano>: danielnm - can you blame them?
<danielmn>: Yes,
<danielmn>: Easily.

"And in this twilight....our choices seal our fate"
User avatar
Blindhamsterman
Haste Bear
Posts: 2396
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 11:13 am
Location: GMT

Re: Proposal: Bring Spells in line with PnP

Post by Blindhamsterman »

awesome Dan, it'd be cool to have the spells actually require the special foci as they need em (though not sure on the insane amount of work required to update every spell... i guess it'd just be a check if an item with the correct resref is in the PCs inventory in most cases (as very few spells actually require stuff be destroyed in the casting))
Standards Member


Current PC: Elenaril Avae'Kerym of the Lynx Lodge
<Heero>: yeah for every pc ronan has killed dming, paazin has killed 2 with his spawns
paazin
Fionn In Disguise
Posts: 3544
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 1:07 am
Location: UTC +2
Contact:

Re: Proposal: Bring Spells in line with PnP

Post by paazin »

Changing endure elements would mean requiring a changing of a number of scripts inside existing modules.

This is possible but it's not trivial.

Alternatively if morph it from 10/40 reduction to, say, 2/20, you'd get relatively the same benefit with "hostile" environments
People talk of bestial cruelty, but that's a great injustice and insult to the beasts; a beast can never be so cruel as man, so artistically cruel.
paazin
Fionn In Disguise
Posts: 3544
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 1:07 am
Location: UTC +2
Contact:

Re: Proposal: Bring Spells in line with PnP

Post by paazin »

ElCadaver wrote:Is the way all enemies in NWN2 deal damage/damage types PnP canon? Don't you really need to look at both sides of the coin here, if you will be making these sorts of changes?

Plus you might need to rewrite the AI, as NPC's may cast spells based on their old descriptions, not the new ones.

Just a few things that came to mind reading the discussion
Most of the stuff would be identical. But it's always possible to "fudge" this stuff so if a NPC casts the spell material/special requirements aren't needed.
People talk of bestial cruelty, but that's a great injustice and insult to the beasts; a beast can never be so cruel as man, so artistically cruel.
User avatar
Curmudgeon
Gadfly
Posts: 4312
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 12:07 am
Location: East coast US

Re: Proposal: Bring Spells in line with PnP

Post by Curmudgeon »

Can we please keep in mind that we are not playing a turn-based game with effectively infinite time available to each player to plan actions between turns?

Spell components have been debated before and turned down by the community as an excessive burden on player time, and must also consider their load on server resources - we have too many PCs at present carrying too many items around as it is without forcing them to add a collection of dozens of spell components.

A scripted weather/environmental/terrain system affecting movement and adding potential damage for extremes would be interesting to add.
- Curmudgeon
HDM ALFA 03 - The Silver Marches
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Maxim #12: A soft answer turneth away wrath. Once wrath is looking the other way, shoot it in the head." - The Seventy Maxims of Maximally Effective Mercenaries

"This is not my circus. These are not my monkeys."

Realmslore: Daily Dwarf Common
Locked