Spells that don't interrupt

jesterdesu

I know this isn't down to particular spells because sometimes the same spell will be interrupted, sometimes it won't.

For example, fighting Bassilus just now and was sure I generally interrupt his rigid thinking spell (his first cast), then use a potion of free action if I cannot interrupt his hold spells next. This time, hit him with an arrow during casts of both and he has pain animation but spell is still cast.

I've noticed this since vanilla but have never understood it... as I understand a spell should be interrupted 100% of the time if the enemy has the pain animation.

Jarrakul

My understanding is that it has to do with how a spell is scripted, and whether or not it's cast from a scroll. Certain spells are scripted to be uninterruptable, and scrolls can't be interrupted.

jesterdesu

It would make sense if some sort of logic prevailed, but have deffo interrupted spells in the same part of the game, only to be unable to interrupt them at other times.

meagloth

I heard cleric spells are supposed to be harder to interrupt.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

jesterdesu

In that case I won't feel bad about reloading if it occurs with undesired results!

Lord_Tansheron

Scripted spells can be a good thing, too. Keeping casters interrupted by as little as looking at them angrily is a somewhat weird system in the first place. While the other binary extreme is perhaps not the BEST solution, if it's used sparingly it at least adds some extra sense of danger to spellcasters, instead of making them pincushions for your archer.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Lord_Tansheron

subtledoctor said:

But either way, whichever rule you use, imho all casters should be playing by that same rule.

Ideally, yes.

However the limitations of scripted AI sometimes make it necessary for the computer to cheat a little so as not to be a complete pushover. Great scripts minimize the times where this happens, but it remains a common recourse even for the most creative scripts simply due to the inherent limitations. As always though, it is of course a matter of degrees.

jesterdesu

Lord_Tansheron said:

Scripted spells can be a good thing, too. Keeping casters interrupted by as little as looking at them angrily is a somewhat weird system in the first place. While the other binary extreme is perhaps not the BEST solution, if it's used sparingly it at least adds some extra sense of danger to spellcasters, instead of making them pincushions for your archer.

I can understand your point of view, however casters already have so many ways of mitigating damage and nobody can say that casters are underpowered as the game currently stands.

Lord_Tansheron

jesterdesu said:

I can understand your point of view, however casters already have so many ways of mitigating damage and nobody can say that casters are underpowered as the game currently stands.

That depends on what you mean by "the game". In both BG1 and IWD casters are mostly a joke. IWD especially makes them complete pushovers because you can interrupt with little to no effort. Even on many bosses you can literally stick an archer on them and never worry about ANY spell being cast at all, ever.

BG2 casters are tougher because of their defenses, but in the unmodded state they're still ridiculously easy to interrupt. Just get something that deals elemental damage, and watch as you poke through twelve dozen layers of Stoneskin as though it wasn't there. And that's just on mages, clerics are completely irrelevant because they basically have no defenses that can stand up to dedicated interruption.

I find that crippling casters so severely so easily is not where I want my game to be. Things like SCS address this issue by use of smart scripts, but they also frequently go back to "cheating" on spells with uninterruptable scripted spells, or scripted instant buff sequences, etc. I am completely fine with that, because while it's technically outside of the rules, it adds much more to the experience for me than it takes away.

Of course, in the end I wouldn't call even unmodded casters "underpowered" per se (though mostly because everything else is even weaker), but that doesn't mean that the system isn't inherently flawed.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

jesterdesu

I understand the logic but getting an arrow in the face is gna be pretty distracting for most people too!

A caster's other protection vs interrupt is faster casting times... obviously this isn't so NPC acessible as things stand, but giving some of the tougher mages some non-droppable items to reduce cast time might help.

Also, fixing cast times so only the more potent spells take longer to cast... no idea what logic is currently used here. If changed it would mean that a mage has to find a place of relative safety before pulling out the big spells, but could cast smaller ones much easier.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

DreadKhan

Playing IWD2 with its 3.0 Concentration checks really makes interrupting hard... Even a lvl 1 caster can manage a great base modifier (+12 is very possible), meaning you will not be easily breaking their concentration on a lvl 1 spell, especially with an arrow, seeing as they likely have 8 Hp if arcane. You really can't reliably interrupt without a high damage spell. This was probably too hard to interrupt, but a tough mage should have a decent shot at not being interrupted by a graze from an arrow. I'd say a crit hit should always interrupt, as it represents a blow to a vulnerable area iirc. An arrow to the face would be distracting I think, an arrow that cuts your leg though?

I like Clerics being harder to interrupt too, seeing as they are trained for combat/danger far beyond a mage.