The Adventurer's Lounge: Guidance and Support for No Reload Challengers- Newbie or Veteran
Alesia_BH
Member Posts: 786
Are you new to the forums? Interested in the No Reload Challenge, but a little overwhelmed? Maybe a little shy about posting in the thread? This is the place for you. The purpose of this thread is to give prospective No Reloaders a chance to introduce themselves, ask questions, seek advice, and prepare for their adventure. Think of this thread as an orientation and cocktail lounge all wrapped up into one. It's a place to learn and a place to schmooze. A place to prepare: A place to begin.
This thread will also serve as a technical support supplement to the No Reload Challenge. Do you need install guidance before you start? Has your active character encountered a bug? This is the place to ask for help. This is the place to get help.
This is the place.
Good hunting everyone!
Best,
A.
This thread will also serve as a technical support supplement to the No Reload Challenge. Do you need install guidance before you start? Has your active character encountered a bug? This is the place to ask for help. This is the place to get help.
This is the place.
Good hunting everyone!
Best,
A.
28
Comments
First, backstory for the uninitiated. Previous tests had suggested that a specialist -2 saving throw bonus unexpectedly (and erroneously) applies when unkitted warriors use weapons with unschooled on hit effects. The belief was that matching zeros in the kit and effect school fields underpinned this behavior.
In an attempt to test whether my unkitted fighter, Aestica, would enjoy such bonuses when wielding darts of stunning, I created a berserker named Bestica, and pitted her against Aestica in a dart tossing match. The results were surprising, to say the least, and suggest that our prior model of the specialist penalty was incomplete, at best.
1) With save v spells set to 1, Bestica would roll between 3 and 22 against Aestica's darts of stunning. Bestica would never fail her save. In contrast, Aestica would never roll above 18, and she would fail her save
2) Results were repeated with Celestial Fury: same findings. Bestica would roll between 3 and 22 against Aestica's Fury. Bestica would never fail her save. In contrast, Aestica would never roll above 18, and she would fail her save
3) Pitting Aestica against Koshi, a kensai, wielding Fury, led to similar result: Aestica would never roll above 18 and she'd fail her save.
4) Pitting Bestica against Koshi, a kensai, wielding Fury, produced the following: Bestica would never fail her save, she'd roll between 1 and 20
Based on these data is appears that kitted fighters enjoy a +2 bonus when facing weapons with unschooled on hit effects, hence Bestica's 22s versus Aestica. It also appears that they enjoy a -2 bonus when wielding such weapons, hence Aestica's failure at save v spells=1 against Bestica's darts. It also appears that when kitted warriors face each other with on hit effect weapons, the bonuses cancel out, hence Bestica's rolled 1s with no failures against Koshi.
Is this weird? Yes. Nonsensical? Absolutely. That doesn't necessarily mean it doesn't happen. Participants in the original no reload challenge had long observed save anomalies that made little sense. After some experimentation, we thought we had a developed a model to explain them. Now it appears we may be in need of a revised model. I'm unwilling to draw any conclusions as of yet, but the old model does seem imperiled.
At present, I'm seeking replication of the Aestica/Bestica/Koshi findings. I'd particularly like to reach out to players who participated in the original discussion on the Bioware forums, @Grond0 and @Corey_Russell. In light of his apparent interest, @semiticgod is invited to share findings as well. I'd be super-pleased to hear from others once the four of us (Grond0, Corey, Semiticgod and I) are on the same page.
Let's solve this, kids!
Best,
A.
I can confirm @Alesia_BH's findings:
1) Unkitted fighters with saving throws of 1 facing each other will roll saves of between 1 and 20 as expected and never be stunned.
2) Kitted fighters with saving throws of 1 facing each other will also roll saves of between 1 and 20 (tried berserker against another berserker, a kensai and a wizard slayer).
3) Kitted fighter vs unkitted will result in saving throws of between -1 (assumed) and 18 and will stun. In the reverse direction the kitted fighter rolls between 3 and 22.
The evidence therefore seems pretty clear that kitted fighters receive both a bonus to resist on-hit weapon effects and cause those hit to receive a penalty. I think the reason that seems odd is mainly because it contradicts an earlier hypothesis about the source of the anomaly. However, the logic of the bonus/penalty for mages in the first place is that they are better at their own school. If that was implemented as being better at anything that wasn't a different school, i.e. not just their own school, but 'no school' spells, that would arguably be consistent with these results. Then all we have to do is stretch the assumption one stage further and say that rather than being implemented only for mages, the bonus and penalty were applied to kits generally.
Whether the above holds any water could be tested quite quickly by doing the same test with non-fighters, e.g. kitted mages, druids, thieves etc. If no-one else tries that I'll have a go at some point tomorrow.
Anyway, I conducted my own tests on EET. Confirmed. When kitted characters use weapons which have no spell school, they impose a -2 penalty on the saving throw. When kitted characters are attacked by such weapons, they get a +2 bonus to their own save. If one kitted character attacks another, the penalty cancels out the bonus.
Unkitted characters neither get a bonus to their save against such weapons, nor do they impose a penalty when using such weapons.
This applies for all weapons with a spell school of "None." These are all of the weapons that do have a spell school:
Black Blade of Disaster: Necromancy
BONEDAG.itm (don't know who uses this): Enchantment
Cause Wounds/Harm: Necromancy
Energy Blades: Invocation
Melf's Minute Meteors: Invocation
Fire Seeds: Invocation
Ghoul Touch: Necromancy
Mordenkainen's Sword: Enchanter (for some reason)
Phantom Blade: Invocation
Shocking Grasp: Transmutation
Slay Living: Necromancy
Sol's Searing Orb: Invocation
Spell Immunity only blocks the on-hit effects of these weapons; it will not stop the damage.
This, however, does not apply to effects applied by .eff files. This means that Power Attack is NOT affected by either the kit of the attacker or the defender. This should apply to all such .eff file-based on-hit effects, but Power Attack is the only one which offers a save.
So, if you're playing an unkitted character, you will suffer a -2 penalty against saving throws from enemy weapons if the enemy has a kit, which you should factor in when considering the saving throw you'll need to guarantee making your save. If you have a kit, however, you suffer no such penalty.
Most kits are already stronger than the unkitted class. This save bonus and save penalty compounds the advantage.
BTW @Alesia_BH I tried the planar sphere thingy where I change the slider, using vanilla BG 2, and oddly enough, the enemies were always the same regardless of the slider. But maybe I need to change the slider before entering the sphere, I am not sure. Regardless, the enemies with the Gauntlets of Ogre Power were always there, even when I changed the difficulty to novice. But if I actually had a new game of novice and made it to this point, I think they wouldn't, but guess would be easy enough to prove - just have to get out of the dungeon on novice level, should be able to do that...
The console code for the Planar Sphere is AR0411. Entering CLUAConsole:MoveToArea("AR0411" ) will get you there.
Best,
A.
Thank you! This is immensely helpful.
I will consider replicating your install as it seems close to what I want to run with.
I'd suggest that this is probably less surprising to those of us who were aware that there were anomalies at play, than to those entirely unfamiliar with the issue. I do think we should refer this to the EE team, as well as ToBex. At the very least, this is worthy of their consideration.
Best,
A.
1) kitted warriors use weapons with schoolless on hit effects
2) unkitted monsters use schoolless special abilities (According to Grim Jim, replication?)
3) kitted mages cast spells within their specialty school
The save bonus applies when:
1) kitted warriors face schoolless weapons
2) kitted warriors face schoolless special abilities (According to Grim Jim, replication?)
3) kitted mages face spells from their specialty school
NW: This is not necessarily a comprehensive list: It only covers the cases adequately documented as of time of writing
It's something other than intuitive. I suspect we agree that bonuses and penalties should only apply when:
A ) kitted mages cast spells within their specialty school
B ) kitted mages face spells from their specialty school
Best,
A.
NW: Reviewing the old thread, Grim Jim had observed what we've confirmed in relation to specialist warriors and schoolless weapons. He just never got around to revisiting the case of Koshi and Celestial Fury in particular and explicitly updating the model in the general case
In my SCS v30, EE v1.3 install, I appear to be observing an assymmety. Bestica appears to be enjoying a +2 bonus against Aestica's Power Attack. She's rolling between -1 and 18. Aestica, in contrast, rolls between -3 and 16 against Bestica's Power Attack.
I've yet to see Bestica applying a penalty, though she seems to be enjoying a bonus.
Best,
A.
EDIT: If I set both of their save v death to -1, Bestica will never fail against Aestica's Power Attack, whereas Aestica will fail against Bestica's Power Attack.
I'd be more interested in seeing a mage with a proper mage kit with and against schoolless weapons. That would provide a more game relevant confirmation
I like to charm her with Algernon's Cloak, have her summon a Phase Spider, then Haste the spider and my party before I speak to Garrick. Then I turn the spider against her and poison her through her pre-cast Stoneskins.
Sometimes I recruit Firebead Elvenhair and have him chip in a summoning spell, but he does have 90% resistance to Algernon's Cloak due to being an elf, so it can take lots of tries before you successfully charm him.
However, I don't think now that things work quite like that. I did a quick test pitting an unkitted thief against a swashbuckler. As I was coming to expect the swashbuckler showed saves of 3-22, while the thief (with a saving throw of 0) could be stunned and never rolled more than 18. Trying it with a mage vs an illusionist, however, didn't give that result - both of them rolled saves of 1-20. Possibly that means someone was aware originally of this potential bug, but only applied the fix to the specialist mage kits that were the underlying cause?
Best,
A.
Best,
A.
I started working with the Magic Number in the context of arcane playthroughs, however, the concept works with non-arcane characters as well.
It's best illustrated though example. Let's work with a warrior first. Let's pit a warrior against a single non-specialist mage who only has three spells: Remove, Malison and Finger of Death. Assume no Sequencers, Triggers, or Contingencies
If a character is currently imperiled, the Magic Number is said to be zero. If the mage would need to take one action to put a character in danger, it is 1, etc.
Let's give our warrior an unbuffed save v spells of 1 to start with and let's remain unbuffed. Our Magic Number is zero: We are currently imperiled via FoD.
Now, let's keep our base save v spells at 1, and buff with a Potion of Invulnerability. Our Magic Number is 1: the mage would need to cast Remove to imperil us.
Finally, let's set our base save v spells to -1 and take a Potion of Invulnerability. Our Magic Number is 2. The mage would have to cast Remove and then Malison to imperil us.
How is this useful? The space of safe tactical avenues is effected by the Magic Number. With a Magic Number of zero, for example, our warrior would be unwise to lead with his or her aura offensively, else risk having a clouded aura when a counter should be put into play. He or she would also benefit from maintaining distance, in order to widen the counter window. With a Magic Number of 1 or above, we could lead with our aura, although we'd be better off maintaining distance. With a Magic Number of 2, we could lead with our aura, perhaps at close range. At range, we could safely initiate a plan of attack that requires two consecutive uses of aura. Our options expand as our Magic Number gets larger.
In arcane playthroughs, Magic Numbers can get much higher. Let's imagine we're running Spell Shield + SI:A + GoI + Spell Deflection + Spell Turning. Let's further stipulate that we will only be imperiled if an enemy takes down the SI:A. Let's assume that Ruby Ray is the only debuff available, and that there are no Sequencers, Triggers, or Contingencies at play. Recall that spell protection removers will (should) take Spell Shield down first and then move from the top down, based on the level of the protection. Our Magic Number is 5. One for the Spell Shield, one for the Spell Turning, one for the Spell Deflection, one for the GoI and then, finally, one for the SI:A. We can lead with our aura and execute a plan of attack requiring multiple consecutive uses of aura (3, 4 or 5, depending on the level of safety sought). We can fight from range, or in close proximity. We have a lot of options.
So, that's how it works. Will others find this concept helpful? I have no idea. What I can say is that I've benefitted from working with it- especially in arcane playthoughs.
Best,
A.
And, yes: It is helpful for analyzing enemy defenses, as well as examining your own.
Best,
A.
But if you have multiple mages in the party, bear in mind that you can take down enemy defenses much faster. Three mages can cast Spell Thrust, Secret Word, and Breach in a single round, removing every part of the above Spell Trigger in a single round, at the cost of half your party's aura. A party of low-level mages can actually bring down a single high-level mage fairly easily--though you'll need the level 7 Ruby Ray of Reversal spell to take down a level 9 Spell Trap.
Likewise, if the enemy has multiple mages in it, it becomes much, much harder to maintain your own defenses, and that's why Yuan-ti Mages are so dangerous. They come in packs, so they can throw out Secret Words or Spell Thrusts and Remove Magic or Breach spells in the same round, taking down your defenses faster than you can remove theirs.
Multiple mages also leave you with an important quandary: do you focus all of your attention on a single mage to kill it, or spread your attention across two or three mages so they're forced to focus on their defenses instead of attacking you? Because if you try to debuff them all at once, you might fail to slow down any of them, while wasting your aura and leaving your party vulnerable.
Has anyone had trouble with landing magic attacks on the proper target? Because I've also noticed that sometimes enemies will waste a Khelben's Warding Whip, for example, on one of my fighters who has no spell protections active. And is there a good way to avoid this problem?
It's especially sticky when mages like Irenicus or Tolgerias summon clones, who can soak up those magic attacks if you don't kill them first (and the Simulacrum clones can be very hard to kill quickly).