Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories

Neverwinter Nights: Enhanced Edition has been released! Visit nwn.beamdog.com to make an order. NWN:EE FAQ is available.
Soundtracks for BG:EE, SoD, BG2:EE, IWD:EE, PST:EE are now available in the Beamdog store.
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

Non-detection spell: What does it do?

AlonsoAlonso Member Posts: 699
The description of this spell is wrong. However, there is very little information about it online, and the little there is, is quite contradictory. The best I've found is the page about the spell in the wiki, but the wiki tends to be quite unreliable. Can anybody confirm what the spell actually does?

To avoid confusion I want to emphasize that, as the title and this first post say, this thread is about the Non-detection SPELL. It is NOT about the Non-detection cloak. Information about the cloak is welcome, of course, but is not the main topic of the thread.

Post edited by Alonso on
Brecher
«1

Comments

  • lroumenlroumen Member Posts: 1,781
    edited June 1
    I think the real non-technical questions are.

    1. Does hide in shadows + nondetection protect from those spells or subset thereof
    2. Does sanctuary + nondetection protect from those spells or subset thereof
    3. Does any of the invisibility spells (mage or priest) + nondetection project from those spells or subset thereof
    4. Does invisibility potion + nondetection protect from those spells or subset thereof
    5. Does invisibility from item (such as a certain staff) protect from those spells or subset thereof

    Rik_KirtaniyaAlonsogorgonzola
  • FlashburnFlashburn Member Posts: 1,713
    edited June 1
    Damn. The more I think about this, the more unsure of myself I get. Now that you bring power levels into it, I don't know about #5. Let's just agree that SI: Divination is better if you really want to stay hidden with no caveats (well, except the thief skill Detect Illusion).

    Bubbsemiticgodlolien
  • BubbBubb Member Posts: 639
    edited June 1
    Perhaps we should defer to the local priest of Oghma?

    @kjeron, I summon you!

    Flashburnlolien
  • AlonsoAlonso Member Posts: 699
    kjeron wrote: »
    It still takes 2x casts/triggers to remove the Invisibility: the first to remove Non-Detection, the second to remove Invisiblity.
    In which cases does it take two casts? With the cloak, with the spell, or with both? Does it take two casts with any kind of invisibility?

  • kjeronkjeron Member Posts: 1,957
    The Cloak's Non-Detection cannot be removed.
    Spell Non-Detection + any non-illusionary Invisibility (Hide in Shadows and similar) requires two casts/triggers of Oracle/Detect Illusion/True Sight.

    AlonsoStummvonBordwehrgorgonzolalolien
  • AlonsoAlonso Member Posts: 699
    kjeron wrote: »
    Spell Non-Detection + any non-illusionary Invisibility (Hide in Shadows and similar) requires two casts/triggers of Oracle/Detect Illusion/True Sight.
    What invisibilities are non-illusionary?

  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,131
    Alonso wrote: »
    kjeron wrote: »
    Spell Non-Detection + any non-illusionary Invisibility (Hide in Shadows and similar) requires two casts/triggers of Oracle/Detect Illusion/True Sight.
    What invisibilities are non-illusionary?
    kjeron wrote: »
    Staff of the Magi (and any on-equip invisibility) works the same as the invisibility from Hide in Shadows/Move Silently with regards to removal. It has no type or school, but is dispel-able. There are also some spells that apply similar Invisibility effects, used by enemies to simulate Hide in Shadows/Move Silently, as well as "natural" invisibility (Hellcats), and the Shaman's Spirit Form HLA.

  • MathsorcererMathsorcerer Member Posts: 2,648
    My Non-Detection spell and Cloak of Non-Detection always work perfectly because I made sure the give the user protection from divination attack spell types.

  • gorgonzolagorgonzola Member Posts: 2,596
    Alonso wrote: »
    kjeron wrote: »
    Spell Non-Detection + any non-illusionary Invisibility (Hide in Shadows and similar) requires two casts/triggers of Oracle/Detect Illusion/True Sight.
    What invisibilities are non-illusionary?

    i am not sure about it, but maybe the invisibility from the ring you can loot from the city gates lich fight gives a non illusionary invisibility that coupled witht he cloak can not be dispelled.
    i don't have a save game suitable to test it now, can someone check the item file and confirm it?
    My Non-Detection spell and Cloak of Non-Detection always work perfectly because I made sure the give the user protection from divination attack spell types.

    not easy if the user is not a mage or a thief with uai, as afaik the only way to protect from divination attack spell types is SI illusion. and with that protection not detection becomes redundant for everything but glitterdust or a thief using detect illusions, things that happen only in few instances.

    Alonsololien
  • Luke93Luke93 Member, Mobile Tester Posts: 1,178
    edited June 10
    @kjeron
    • Is there any noticeable difference between opcode #47 and opcode #116?
    • Does 'Nondetection + Invisibility' protect against opcode #136 (Force visible) and opcode #193 (Invisibility detection)?

  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,131
    Nothing protects against opcode 193 - neither Nondetection, nor SI:Div.

    Not sure about 136.

  • AasimAasim Member Posts: 591
    I think all of invisibility abilities cast from items are fixed in ee - they're all coded as illusionary protections.

  • MathsorcererMathsorcerer Member Posts: 2,648
    gorgonzola wrote: »
    My Non-Detection spell and Cloak of Non-Detection always work perfectly because I made sure the give the user protection from divination attack spell types.

    not easy if the user is not a mage or a thief with uai, as afaik the only way to protect from divination attack spell types is SI illusion. and with that protection not detection becomes redundant for everything but glitterdust or a thief using detect illusions, things that happen only in few instances.

    What you say is true. What I meant is that I added the "protection from spell type" opcode of 205 to the Cloak, protecting from spell type 5 of "divination attack" much like what Spell Immunity: Illusion does. In BG2EE what will happen is that enemy mages will sit there and cast True Sight repeatedly to no effect.

    gorgonzolalolien
  • AlonsoAlonso Member Posts: 699
    kjeron wrote: »
    The Cloak's Non-Detection cannot be removed.
    Spell Non-Detection + any non-illusionary Invisibility (Hide in Shadows and similar) requires two casts/triggers of Oracle/Detect Illusion/True Sight.
    Did anybody understand what @kjeron said here about "non-illusionary Invisibility"?

  • DeucetipherDeucetipher Member Posts: 521
    edited June 15
    kjeron wrote: »
    Staff of the Magi (and any on-equip invisibility) works the same as the invisibility from Hide in Shadows/Move Silently with regards to removal. It has no type or school, but is dispel-able. There are also some spells that apply similar Invisibility effects, used by enemies to simulate Hide in Shadows/Move Silently, as well as "natural" invisibility (Hellcats), and the Shaman's Spirit Form HLA.

    See above. It's non illusionary because it does not belong to the illusion school, nor does it have a type. I think, anyway.

    gorgonzolaJuliusBorisov
  • Grond0Grond0 Member Posts: 5,139
    Alonso wrote: »
    kjeron wrote: »
    The Cloak's Non-Detection cannot be removed.
    Spell Non-Detection + any non-illusionary Invisibility (Hide in Shadows and similar) requires two casts/triggers of Oracle/Detect Illusion/True Sight.
    Did anybody understand what @kjeron said here about "non-illusionary Invisibility"?

    The point about non-illusionary relates to the need for two spells (or two triggers of True Sight) to remove the effect. The first spell removes the non-detection (and any other illusionary effects as well), but if there is non-illusionary invisibility this won't be removed until the second spell.

    gorgonzolaAlonsoJuliusBorisovlolien
  • AlonsoAlonso Member Posts: 699
    kjeron wrote: »
    Staff of the Magi (and any on-equip invisibility) works the same as the invisibility from Hide in Shadows/Move Silently with regards to removal. It has no type or school, but is dispel-able. There are also some spells that apply similar Invisibility effects, used by enemies to simulate Hide in Shadows/Move Silently, as well as "natural" invisibility (Hellcats), and the Shaman's Spirit Form HLA.

    See above. It's non illusionary because it does not belong to the illusion school, nor does it have a type. I think, anyway.

    It doesn't look like that quote answers my question, actually it doesn't even say anything about illusionary/non illusionary. Anyway, since finding an answer is becoming so difficult, I'll venture a guess: Do you mean that Hide in Shadows/Move Silently, the Staff of the Magi invisibility, and other on-equip invisibility are non illusionary; and every other kind of invisibility is illusionary?

  • AasimAasim Member Posts: 591
    Alonso wrote: »
    kjeron wrote: »
    Staff of the Magi (and any on-equip invisibility) works the same as the invisibility from Hide in Shadows/Move Silently with regards to removal. It has no type or school, but is dispel-able. There are also some spells that apply similar Invisibility effects, used by enemies to simulate Hide in Shadows/Move Silently, as well as "natural" invisibility (Hellcats), and the Shaman's Spirit Form HLA.

    See above. It's non illusionary because it does not belong to the illusion school, nor does it have a type. I think, anyway.

    It doesn't look like that quote answers my question, actually it doesn't even say anything about illusionary/non illusionary. Anyway, since finding an answer is becoming so difficult, I'll venture a guess: Do you mean that Hide in Shadows/Move Silently, the Staff of the Magi invisibility, and other on-equip invisibility are non illusionary; and every other kind of invisibility is illusionary?

    I don't know about SotM, but generally yes - that's how ND works.

  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,131
    edited June 17
    Alonso wrote: »
    kjeron wrote: »
    Staff of the Magi (and any on-equip invisibility) works the same as the invisibility from Hide in Shadows/Move Silently with regards to removal. It has no type or school, but is dispel-able. There are also some spells that apply similar Invisibility effects, used by enemies to simulate Hide in Shadows/Move Silently, as well as "natural" invisibility (Hellcats), and the Shaman's Spirit Form HLA.

    See above. It's non illusionary because it does not belong to the illusion school, nor does it have a type. I think, anyway.

    It doesn't look like that quote answers my question, actually it doesn't even say anything about illusionary/non illusionary. Anyway, since finding an answer is becoming so difficult, I'll venture a guess: Do you mean that Hide in Shadows/Move Silently, the Staff of the Magi invisibility, and other on-equip invisibility are non illusionary; and every other kind of invisibility is illusionary?

    You understood and reiterated it (more or less) correctly, so I think it did answer your question. :smile:

    A more complete answer is, if you look at the files with a utility like Near Infinity, "illusionary" invisibility means the .SPL or .ITM or .EFF causing the effect has its Primary Type ("school of magic") set to Illusion (EDIT - or has its Secondary Type set to "illusionary protection"). "Non-illusionary" as used above refers to sources of invisibility whose Primary Type and Secondary Type are not set to "Illusionary."

    From a player's perspective, the things listed by Kjeron and again by you, are the sources of invisibility that fall into the latter category.

    Post edited by subtledoctor on
    gorgonzola
  • kjeronkjeron Member Posts: 1,957
    A more complete answer is, if you look at the files with a utility like Near Infinity, "illusionary" invisibility means the .SPL or .ITM or .EFF causing the effect has its Primary Type ("school of magic") set to Illusion. "Non-illusionary" as used above refers to sources of invisibility whose Primary Type/school of magic is not set to Illusion.
    "Illusion" Primary/School and/or "Illusionary Protection" Secondary/Type
    Though many effects that are one are also the other.

    gorgonzolalolien
  • AlonsoAlonso Member Posts: 699
    There might be a contradiction here:
    Bubb wrote: »
    Makes the target immune to [...]
    Oracle (only if invisibility is non-illusion type)
    True Sight (only if invisibility is non-illusion type)
    I. e., the target is immune.
    kjeron wrote: »
    Non-Detection + any non-illusionary Invisibility (Hide in Shadows and similar) requires two casts/triggers of Oracle/Detect Illusion/True Sight.
    I. e., the target is NOT immune.

  • BubbBubb Member Posts: 639
    edited June 17
    @Alonso: If Non-Detection is given by the cloak it follows what I said. I failed to account for the Non-Detection spell, which can be dispelled by Oracle's / True Sight's "secondary type" removal. So:

    (Non-Detection by cloak):
    Oracle (only if invisibility is non-illusion type)
    True Sight (only if invisibility is non-illusion type)

    (Non-Detection by spell):
    Oracle (two casts required)
    True Sight (two applications required)

    StummvonBordwehrGrond0
  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,131
    edited June 17
    Not contradictory, because Nondetection itself is an illusionary protection.

    So while you have Nondetection up, if you are a thief hiding in shadows (a non-illusionary form of invisibility), your hiding is immune to being dispelled by Oracle/True Sight.

    But, upon being hit by Oracle or True Sight, the Nondetection itself is dispelled. So thereafter, your hiding is no longer immune. The next casting of Oracle or periodic instance of True Sight will dispel your hiding.

    The Nondetection from the Cloak, being an equipped effect, cannot be dispelled in this way. That's why the Cloak's version of Nondetection is far superior to the spell itself. It makes you truly immune to Oracle/True Sight - at least, if you are utilizing non-illusionary methods of invisibility.

    Also, incidentally, this thread makes it really, really clear just how awful this whole system of invisibility is in the vanilla game. And why everybody therefore ought to use my mod to make it more sensible.
    I added the "protection from spell type" opcode of 205 to the Cloak, protecting from spell type 5 of "divination attack" much like what Spell Immunity: Illusion does. In BG2EE what will happen is that enemy mages will sit there and cast True Sight repeatedly to no effect.

    That is no doubt better than the vanilla game (though watching enemies repeatedly cast TS doesn't really sound fun) but ultimately it's just a patch. IMHO a more comprehensive solution is called for.

    StummvonBordwehrGrond0
  • AlonsoAlonso Member Posts: 699
    edited June 18
    OK, with a lot of effort and the loss of a few thousand neurons I had bonded with over the years, I've managed to come up with a description that hopefully describes accurately what this SPELL does:

    Non-detection is meant to be used in conjunction with some source of invisibility, like the Invisibility spell or the stealth ability of rogues. When the target of Non-detection becomes invisible, his invisibility cannot be dispelled by the spells Invisibility Purge, Detect Invisibility or Glitterdust (the blinding effect of Glitterdust still applies, though).

    The spells Detect Illusion, Oracle, True Seeing and True Sight do remove Non-Detection. However, they do it in different ways depending on the source of the invisibility they try to remove: If the invisibility is natural, is obtained by wearing an item, or is obtained by using rogue stealth; it takes two invisibility dispellings to remove it. The first dispelling removes Non-detection, but the creature remains invisible. Only the second dispelling removes the invisibility itself. With other types of invisibility, Detect Illusion, Oracle, True Seeing and True Sight dispel both Non-detecion and the invisibility at the same time.


    Is that correct?

    To avoid confusion I'd like to repeat that this is a description of the SPELL, not of the cloak.

    Post edited by Alonso on
    [Deleted User]lolien
  • gorgonzolagorgonzola Member Posts: 2,596
    not yet
    Alonso wrote: »
    The spells Detect Illusion, Oracle, True Seeing and True Sight do remove Non-Detection.
    is true only if the non detection is obtained with a spell, if is obtained with an item (cloak) it can not be remomved by spells.
    this is why the combo not detection (by cloak) and invisibility (non illusionary type like the hide in shadows of a thief) makes a toon completely immune to spells that reveal illusions.

    note that creatures that can naturally see trough invisibility can see (and target) an invisible person so even that combo does not work with them.

    i am not sure of how not detection, by spells and by items, interacts with the thief skill that reveals illusions, does not detection works to stop the effect of that skill? (i assume it does not, but i am not sure about it).

  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,131
    edited June 17
    gorgonzola wrote: »
    true only if the non detection is obtained with a spell,

    I think Alonso's proposed text is for the spell description, so that's okay.

    gorgonzolalolien
Sign In or Register to comment.