Skip to content

HoF Spell Damage

TvrtkoSvrdlarTvrtkoSvrdlar Member Posts: 353
So I'm playing through HoF atm, and my sorceress is really falling behind.

Monster HP wouldn't be a problem if spell damage scaled at least +50% into HoF, but it doesn't.

As it stands right now, casters are nothing more than walking buff/debuff dispensers. It's frickin' sad.

I've no problem with playing melee-heavy parties, but sometimes a man just wants to blow things up! :D

And before someone accuses me of wanting an 'easier' game (whatever the heck that means), I'd like to point out that fighter types scale very nicely into HoF. It's not about making the game easier (as laughable as that sounds, since there's no real challenge to it anyway, outside of planned self-restriction), but I honestly think that having damage-oriented casters becoming obsolete in the higher difficulty modes is not a hallmark of good design.

I'm not ripping on BiS or Overhaul (I love the IWD series to death); the game is *very* fun! The EE itself is a joy to play, what with the improved resolutions, the zooming, and all the delicious new graphical and spell effects (as long as Overhaul keeps making stuff, I'll keep buying it!). However, it'd be nice if damage-oriented casters got some love too. In HoF mode only, mind you, not the normal difficulty settings. Something like a flat-out +50% increase to damage done by spells (this would *not* affect spell duration, or saving throws, or range - merely the raw damage itself). It's sad that HoF monsters shrug off fireballs, and laugh at getting tickled by skull traps.

So, damage buff? Please? Pretty please? :)


If Overhaul won't do this (let's face it, had they wanted to, it would've been included with the release), then is there some way to tweak the game's variables or tables or whatever to simply increase player spell damage by a certain amount? Failing that, could an equippable item be cobbled together that would radiate an aura which lowers the magic resistances of all enemies in a large area of effect (this is a messy and inelegant solution because it would make even high-MR monsters susceptible to magic attacks, but whatever, I'll take what I can get).

Any ideas? :/
Abel
«13

Comments

  • Manveru123Manveru123 Member Posts: 52
    It was the same in original IWD, so it has nothing to do with EE. The fact is that on HoF casters are nothing more than summoners, buffers and debuffers, who fling offensive spells when they have nothing else to do. But that does not mean you have to use a melee-heavy party. I myself am only using two melee characters (F/T and a Monk) on my lv1 HoF run, and honestly I don't even want more. This game has a lot of different buffs and debuffs so my casters are always occupied anyway.

    That's how HoF was designed originally I'm afraid, so no, there is nothing you can do about that other than lower the difficulty.
    GrabtharsHammerJuliusBorisov
  • TvrtkoSvrdlarTvrtkoSvrdlar Member Posts: 353
    edited November 2014
    @Manveru123‌

    It's flawed design.

    If someone made a crappy bridge that had to be closed 50% of the time due to weather, would you praise the designer?

    Also, with all due respect, I don't care what *you* want. It's cool that you're ok with playing debuff-oriented casters, but that should be a CHOICE, not a NECESSITY. Lack of options is a bad thing, not something one espouses as a design decision. The old IWD isn't some sacred cow no one's allowed to touch - if I may be so bold, I'd say it was touched many times over, and in multiple places, as Overhaul did their thing and enhanced the game. So one more poke wouldn't change things too much.

    And no, I don't *have* to have damage-specc'd casters -- I can run an all-melee train, and wreck the game just fine (I've played through the old IWD1&2 more times than I can count) -- but I *want* to! I'm merely expressing a desire to see a flawed aspect of an otherwise excellent game addressed, and tweaked. That's the whole point of the EEs, isn't it? To fix the bad and polish the good?

    Yeah, thought so.
  • Manveru123Manveru123 Member Posts: 52
    Enhancing the game does not mean completely changing one of its core features. It's too bad you don't like it, but many others do, and - using your own words - they also don't care what *you* want. If you don't enjoy playing HoF, feel free not to. That's your "choice".
    elminster
  • MathsorcererMathsorcerer Member Posts: 3,037

    Also, with all due respect, I don't care what *you* want.

    Yet you want us to care about what *you* want? Why?

    smeagolheart
  • TvrtkoSvrdlarTvrtkoSvrdlar Member Posts: 353
    @Mathsorcerer
    Because the thread is about tweaking a flawed aspect of the game.

    It's flawed because it limits options. That is bad. More options is good.

    The EEs are about expanding on the good parts and eliminating the bad.

    Overhaul has made far more long-reaching balance decisions than a simple +x% spell dmg.


    His entire comment boils down to: "Tough luck chum, accept it and move on."

    That adds about 0 useful input. Especially considering the nature of the topic itself.

    I didn't ask: "Should I accept this limitation, or not?"
    I asked: "How can we overcome this flaw?"

    Then there's the patronizing where he thinks I'm a snot-nosed kid who has no clue what HoF is/was.

    I'm going to stop now, before this slides from snarky shitposting into personal attack territory.

    Anything else you'd like explained?


    P.S. Gratz for being useless poster #2.
  • TvrtkoSvrdlarTvrtkoSvrdlar Member Posts: 353
    edited November 2014
    @Manveru123‌

    Do you have any idea why that 'limitation' is there in the first place?

    It's because BiS was contractually obligated to reproduce the setting/spells as closely as possible.

    They didn't put in those shitty restrictions (among a host of others) because they loved shitty restrictions.

    There are tons of things about D&D tabletop that translate horribly into computer games (ex: rogues).

    I know this because I was on the boards discussing all the crappy (and awesome) aspects of the game.

    This was over a decade ago.


    The EE was/is a chance to set thing right, and correct the previously-uncorrectable.


    If you enjoy arbitrary limits and lack of options, then more power to you.

    But you can at least have the courtesy to not respond in threads that don't interest you.

    Hurr...

    Durr...


    P.S.
    HoF is not a 'core feature' - it was tacked on at the end because BIS felt the game was too short.

    This is perfectly evinced by the fact that the entire mode is hilariously lacking in balance.

    But you know better, because you were there with them, making the game. Right? :)
  • Manveru123Manveru123 Member Posts: 52
    If flaming like a butthurt teenager is your idea of a discussion, then there's nothing more to say. Grow up.
    smeagolheartAncalagon44rodrigjAristillius
  • karnor00karnor00 Member Posts: 680
    The whole point of monsters having more hitpoints is to make them harder to kill. If spell damage were buffed by 50% at the same time then this would defeat the whole point of the hitpoint buff.

    After all, HoF mode doesn't increase player melee damage by 50%, so spells and melee are in exactly the same relative position as in non-HoF mode.

    As for the whole HoF mode - it's always been a pretty simplistic way of increasing difficulty. In much the same way that hard difficulty (which doubles monster damage) is a pretty poor difficulty increaser.

    Real difficulty increases would be more challenging AI (such as SCS), but if Beamdog tried to implement something like this, there would be endless arguments about exactly what changes they should/should not be making.
    rodrigj
  • TvrtkoSvrdlarTvrtkoSvrdlar Member Posts: 353
    edited November 2014
    @Manveru123‌
    Maybe you should stop shitposting in threads which don't interest you?

    Even better, instead of patronizing people and talking to them like they're drooling retards hardly worthy of your divine illumination, learn to constructively add to a topic. Then, you'll be able to have meaningful conversations, instead of wondering why people are pissed at you when you completely disregard what they've written in order to go on tangents no one wants to hear or cares about.

    Honestly, your entire attitude reeks of a false sense of superiority.

    Take it somewhere else, kid.


    @karnor00‌
    While I agree that HoF is a poor substitute for SCS-type augmentation, I disagree on other points.

    Your claim that upping spell damage would wreck the game is missing the point. Fighter-type characters scale far too efficiently into HoF, due to gaining more attacks per round, obtaining weapons with +APR, and having Imp. Haste doubling said APR (it's not that hard to hit 10 APR). And there's nothing wrong with melee characters gaining more potency to tackle ever-increasing challenges. But, compared to casters, they're far, far, far ahead.

    On the other side, Haste does nothing for magical damage-dealers.

    There's no spell to boost magical damage output, or items to cut down on casting time/pause.

    BG2 had Imp. Alacrity, but IWDEE doesn't (maybe my game has a bug, but I haven't seen it yet).

    Also, your assessment of the relationship between HoF and damage output is off the mark as well.

    Melee-oriented characters and their damage output in normal difficulty modes is, as a ratio, very similar to melee-oriented HoF characters and their damage output in HoF, which is to say, as monster HP grows, so does melee damage output. Why? Because melee scales. Casting doesn't. A fireball always does 10d6, while that +2 longsword wielded by one of your frontliners benefits directly from more thac0, more damage buffs, and more APR. So, the overall ratio is heavily skewed toward melee.

    Look, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with playing buffers/debuffers, but that should be a CHOICE, not a NECESSITY. That's what this is all about. Because right now, there's no point flinging fireballs, skull traps, and horrid wiltings when they do pitiful amounts of damage. And sorcerers, which are the epitome of spell-slinging craziness, are reduced to glorified bards.

    It's a flawed concept, and one which cuts down on viable options.

    +N% spell damage in HoF would fix it.

    It could even be tied to caster level, to simulate thac0 and APR scaling that fighters enjoy.

    Say, +5% bonus spell damage for every 1 level of the casting character.

    That would make damage spells viable again, without upsetting game balance too much.



    Post edited by TvrtkoSvrdlar on
    Commander_Abakus
  • MathsorcererMathsorcerer Member Posts: 3,037
    If you want your spellcasters to do more damage then mod the spells so that things like fireball go up to 20d6 or even all the way to 30d6. That is what I do...or, rather, that is what I will be doing when I start putting my own little touches on the spells.

    As you know, HoF was originally part of Heart of Winter and was designed to make the game more challenging but this forces you to change your tactics--no more wading right and cutting things down.

    HoF will become much easier now that spells like Protection from Normal Weapons and Protection from Magical Weapons are in the game. Yes, they are short in duration but we have the option of taking advantage of the "modify duration" opcode to make them last longer, presuming you don't reset the duration to something like 1 round/level. Of course, the damage resistance items were made for HoF--it doesn't matter how much damage the giant is doing when you are 90% resistant to slashing damage. Dwarven Defenders....they are *the* class to have for HoF, especially if you EEKeeper yourself a dwarven dd/cleric.
  • TvrtkoSvrdlarTvrtkoSvrdlar Member Posts: 353
    edited November 2014
    @Mathsorcerer‌

    Your suggestion about spell-modding does make sense, but I'm a fan of elegant solutions.

    While one can always manually tweak every single spell to one's preference, that's cumbersome.

    Also, wouldn't that wreck non-HoF difficulty? I doubt there's a HoF-only opcode for damage.

    I mean, don't get me wrong, I *enjoy* HoF, but I hate limiting myself to cookie-cutter parties.

    It's especially vexing to have your wizards and sorcerers become little more than utility casters.

    I don't know, I might just mod Imp. Haste to also give Improved Alacrity for the duration. That would bring casters up to fighters' level of damage output, as the removal of spell-casting pause would mirror the doubling of APR that warriors receive (honestly, it would be preferable to just halve the 1-round pause to just 3 seconds, to simulate the doubling, but I don't think that's possible - it's either 0sec. delay, or 6). Thing is, I'm not sure the new IWDEE .dat file for DLTCEP is even out yet, and I know some of the opcodes were shuffled around, and some are missing as well. Or does IWDEE use BG[2]EE opcode order, since it's based on that engine?

    On the topic of DDs and damage resistance, yeah, you're 100% right. My current party has one as the main tank, but their lack of an 'aggro' spell really detracts from their usefulness. The sad part is that an elven fighter/mage in the same party has both more survivability and damage output than the DD, what with the plethora of stoneskins, mirror images, blurs, and everything else he can throw into the mix. DDs would be *much* better if they had a way of forcing monsters to focus exclusively on them for a couple of seconds when combat is met. I'd mod this in myself, but I have no clue how to set up an AoE taunt spell that doesn't also break scripts and turn monsters into drooling imbeciles (not that they weren't ones to begin with, lol).

    But I agree, damage resistance items are (currently) the way to go.
  • Is it THAT impossible for the devs to implement a viable niche for damage dealing casters in HoF?
    I suppose that this can be tackled further if enough people advocate it.

    Modding spells sounds good as a temporary solution though. Can someone point me to where I can learn more about it?
  • TvrtkoSvrdlarTvrtkoSvrdlar Member Posts: 353
    edited November 2014
    @Commander_Abakus‌

    It's not impossible, it's just that people seem to have an aversion to changing the rules, even if said rules never made much sense to being with.

    The mere fact that an entire class of characters is obviated in HoF should be a telling reminder that there's something horribly wrong with that kind of design.

    I'm not advocating for making spellcasters the ultimate killing machines, but a static damage buff to their laughably-weak spells (when tossed at HoF mobs) would be a nice way to even out the playing field.

    But as it stands right now, there's nothing an offensive spellcaster can do in terms of damage output that comes even close to an Imp. Hasted 10 APR dual-wielding fighter. And that's an issue that should be addressed, if for nothing else then for the sake of consistency.
    Post edited by TvrtkoSvrdlar on
    Commander_AbakusAbel
  • MathsorcererMathsorcerer Member Posts: 3,037
    No, there is no HoF-only opcode but I suppose it could be possible to use opcode 332 (specific damage modifier) on some spell then apply a script so that if Difficulty = Nightmare mode or if the variable for NightmareMode = 1 the spell gets applied to the character. That way, if HoF mode is on then characters do 50% or 75% or 100% more damage like their foes do.
  • TvrtkoSvrdlarTvrtkoSvrdlar Member Posts: 353
    @Mathsorcerer‌
    Hmmm, that could work... But it would still add a static amount of +dmg. from the get-go.

    I'd love it if Overhaul implemented a +5% spell damage per caster level type of passive buff.

    What do you think about these numbers?

    +50% spell damage @‌ level 10
    +100% spell damage @‌ level 20
    +150% spell damage @‌ level 30

    It may look overpowered, but it's still nowhere near a 10 APR fighter.

    And that's ok, since fighters have to get up close and personal.
  • Lord_TansheronLord_Tansheron Member Posts: 4,211
    Why so complicated? Spells already have a scaling mechanic, a flat modifier in HoF would simply build on that. Adding another scaling mechanic on top of it seems weird.
    FinneousPJ
  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,963
    The argument that melee scales better because they can hit 10 APR and have it last longer because of spellcasters durations being longer because they are leveled up is a flawed one.

    It sounds like your gripe is that spells don't scale as much as you'd like them to. Fireball should do more damage after reaching a certain level and whatnot instead of capping out at whatever arbitrary level it caps out at.

  • TvrtkoSvrdlarTvrtkoSvrdlar Member Posts: 353
    edited November 2014
    @Lord_Tansheron‌
    Because thac0 is for fighters what spell damage dice is for casters.

    APR is for fighters what a new scaling +N% damage mechanic ought to be for casters.

    A flat-out one-time bonus seems somewhat too static in such a dynamic, level-progressive game.


    @smeagolheart‌
    If you're accusing my argument of being flawed, then the burden of proof is on you, so it's expected that you'll at least explain what you mean and where you're coming from, instead of enshrining your view as the default, correct one.

    And if you'd taken the time to read through this thread (or any of the other ones with a similar theme), you'd understand why the second paragraph of your post is completely meaningless. (spoiler: APR is a gateway to higher control functions via buff-enhanced damage output; spells are a static, tapered resource which not only can't 'proc' more than once per round, but are also artificially capped at a level far below HoF mob HP... to clarify, you can either have huge damage with huge delays in between, or moderate damage with no delay - institute the weaker portions of each of the aforementioned, and you end up with gimped damage-dealers who, overall, do less damage than a wet towel, and an order of magnitude less than an Imp. Hasted dual-wielding 10 APR fighter hopped up on a cocktail of clerical buffs and potions).
    Abel
  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,963

    @Lord_Tansheron‌
    Because thac0 is for fighters what spell damage dice is for casters.

    APR is for fighters what a new scaling +N% damage mechanic ought to be for casters.
    A flat-out one-time bonus seems somewhat too static in such a dynamic, level-progressive game.

    @smeagolheart‌
    If you're accusing my argument of being flawed, then the burden of proof is on you, so it's expected that you'll at least explain what you mean and where you're coming from, instead of enshrining your view as the default, correct one.

    And if you'd taken the time to read through this thread (or any of the other ones with a similar theme), you'd understand why the second paragraph of your post is completely meaningless. (spoiler: APR is a gateway to higher control functions via buff-enhanced damage output; spells are a static, tapered resource which not only can't 'proc' more than once per round, but are also artificially capped at a level far below HoF mob HP).

    As the correct one, I say you are incorrect. Anyway, titles aside, it really sounds like you are looking for some kind of unnerfed spell table, no? This kind of makes sense as an argument for you. Once you reach high enough levels, the damage from spells should keep scaling. You might have a leg to stand on there.

    As to the main thing you are railing for, if the damage from a melee weapon doesn't get changed from 1d8 damage, why should the damage of a fireball change?

    APR for a fighter caps out at Level 13. Any additional APR are gained through buffs or items that are not particularly tied to HOF mode.
  • TvrtkoSvrdlarTvrtkoSvrdlar Member Posts: 353
    edited November 2014
    @smeagolheart‌
    Because melee weapon damage is just the base. On top of that you have +STR bonuses, potion buffs, spell buffs, and APR, which is king of it all.

    Casters don't get any of that.

    The main reason a fireball needs to do a lot more damage is because it's a limited resource constrained not only by its limited availability, or its memorization prerequisite, or available spell slots, or casting time, but also that darned 6-second delay between spells (Vancian magic systems are a sucky choice for hack'n'slash games).

    Meanwhile, a fighter swinging that lousy 1d8 sword can keep going all day long, 'till the end of time.

    And even capping at 13, fighters still have +ARP items.

    You know what the equivalent of an APR item for a caster would be? A double-strike passive ability. Something like what wild mages sometimes experience - toss out a fireball, and an additional one goes flying out.

    So, to balance HoF casters, we can have one of the following:

    1)huge damage on spells... I'm talking about 30d6 fireballs
    2)normal damage spells, but 0 pause in between casts, and double spell slots
    3)moderately buffed damage (15d6 fireballs), and casting pause reduced to 3 seconds
    4)spell APR; a 100% chance on cast to fire out an additional +1/2/3 spells (works only on damage spells)
    5)a level-dependent, stacking +5% spell damage boost (so, at level 10, your spells would do +50% dmg.)

    Take your pick.
  • CheryChocieCheryChocie Member Posts: 47



    2)normal damage spells, but 0 pause in between casts, and double spell slots

    This is possible using the IWD editor quite easily. You can add spell memorisation levels and add the effect of Aura Cleansing in the effects tab to both increase the number of spells you can memorise and remove the pause in casting. It's not the most elegant solution but it would introduce pseudo-scaling to casters if you created your own rules about what level your caster would gain access to this hyper casting mode.

    I personally would just like for spells to scale infinitely, in as much as, Fireball gains 1D6 damage every level without a cap, so you end up with 30D6 fireballs, 30D8 Abi Dalzim's etc. I don't know whether that would make some spells overpowered, as it stands Skull Trap is the only spell I know without a cap and it's still not overpowered.

    I adore Mages in every franchise that has them and yea it does sadden me that they scale so poorly damage wise in HoF. There are items like the ring from Kontik or his Dagger whichever it was, that increases Cold Spell damage by 15% but it's still not much.

  • TvrtkoSvrdlarTvrtkoSvrdlar Member Posts: 353
    edited November 2014
    @CheryChocie‌
    I'm not familiar with IWDEE's tables and data structure. The only way I can think off the top of my head of giving casters Improved Alacrity and doubling their spell slots is via equippable items like rings and whatnot. Do you have a better idea, or were you thinking that as well?

    Second, yeah, having spells scale literally to level 30 would be ok-ish, but it's kind of cumbersome and it still wouldn't do much for early and mid-game HoF because mob packs have insane HP even during the beginning stages of the game, and your mage's improved fireball still only does 60 damage max at level 10 (and that's if they don't make their saving throw, which many of them will).

    And, about Kontik's dagger/ring... Would you happen to know the item's code? I've checked the old IWD1 guide by DSimpson, but the dagger just gives some arbitrary cold resistance. Did Overhaul change it for the EE? Because if the dagger allows your frost spells to do N% more damage, then adding all other type of damage to a similar item would be a cakewalk...

    It would be easy to make a ring that enhances all types of damage by N% (including magical damage), and is wearable only by spellcasters. IIRC, such percentage-based damage-type fiddling wasn't possible in original BG1/2, or their enhanced editions - you had to have ToBEx installed.
  • CheryChocieCheryChocie Member Posts: 47
    edited November 2014
    @TvrtkoSvrdlar‌
    If you open your game in EE Keeper, go to the effects tab and click add, you can scroll down to two options, one called Spell: Wizard Spell Slots Modifier [42] and the other called Spell Effect: Aura Cleansing [188]. Each of them have an explanation on how to use them as seen in these screenshots

    http://imgur.com/nmbCvq8,Haiockn#0

    Simply apply them both and you have a caster with extra memorisation and no pause between spells.

    As for Kontik's ring, it's called Kontik's Ring of Wizardry and the item code is RINGKON.
  • TvrtkoSvrdlarTvrtkoSvrdlar Member Posts: 353
    @CheryChocie
    Ah, you're using EE...

    Completely forgot about it, lol! :)

    But that dagger/ring you mentioned - I can't find it anywhere.
  • CheryChocieCheryChocie Member Posts: 47
    @TvrtkoSvrdlar‌

    Yea I forgot to add that, edited my post now.
  • AbelAbel Member Posts: 785
    Like the ideas and the way you justify them.
    Just want to add that spells do seem to scale unless stated otherwise. I didn't check them all, but since you spoke about Abi-Dalzim's Horrid Wilting, yes it scales up to 30D8, as does for instance Skull Trap up to 30D6.
  • GoturalGotural Member Posts: 1,229
    No no, don't buff magic damage. It's good as it is, since enemies's AI is bad and can't focus casters properly, your casters have a lot of freedom during battles.

    Two arcanes casters both unleashing Chain Contingency 3X ADHW + Spell Sequencer 3X Skull Trap at the same time can already wipe out most of the mobs in HoF. If you are using 3,4 or even 5-6 casters at the same time it becomes hilarious.

    I understand that an arcane caster doesn't have the same damage output per second than a Fighter, but let's not forget that they are able to damage multiple foes at once, that they are mostly invincible if you play them well and that they bring all the utility. If they could compete on single target damage with Fighters, why would you pick anything else ?
    elminsterJuliusBorisov
  • ZyzzogetonZyzzogeton Member Posts: 526
    edited November 2014
    HoF is intended for Level 15. A level 15 spellcaster with access to high end spells will obliterate mob packs at the beginning. And will continue to do so as they gain levels and access to more spells.

    They can also summon their own "party" Buff that party, and suddenly you have a spellcaster with their own Fighters, and the ability to drop bombs.

    What can Fighters do?

    Right, swing those swords. Those oodles of HP? It'll get eaten away by those mobs that won't drop dead in a single hit.

    Without spellcaster support Fighters will run into serious problems in HoF. Without Fighter support, a spellcaster makes their own Fighters

    All Fighters can do is swing their weapons for damage. So you're wondering why Fighters swinging their swords scale so well for HoF? Well what else about them is going to scale?

    Damage dealing is merely one of the things spellcasters have access to. So even if their damage lags a bit, they have other options to make up for it. So you're whining about spellcasters not dealing enough damage? They already have buffs, debuffs, summons why the hell should their damage be competitive or as infinitely sustainable as a Fighter, a class which entire list of abilities is composed of "ME FIGHTER ME SWING WEAPON"
  • FinneousPJFinneousPJ Member Posts: 6,455
    I don't think casters need a boost. Instead, I think we need a better mechanic to replace HoF.
    bob_vengelminster
  • bob_vengbob_veng Member Posts: 2,308
    edited November 2014
    ^ yes!

    earlier it had a certain novelty factor but it's just lame now
This discussion has been closed.