Howdy, Stranger!

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

Categories

Axis & Allies 1942 Online is now available in Early Access! Buy it on Steam. The FAQ is available.
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

What Would You Like from a Tweaks Mod?

semiticgodsemiticgod Member, Moderator Posts: 13,349
There are a bunch of tweak mods around, and they cover all kinds of bases. But there are still a few things I think could be improved even on a heavily tweaked install, and I've been considering combining my existing mods into one package for user convenience. I wanted to ask around to see what kind of minor tweaks people would like to see, things that aren't already covered by other tweak mods.

Currently, I only have a few existing mods and ideas for new tweaks:

1. Make wands usable once per day and rebalance their strength, OR make wands usable infinitely and make them much weaker
2. Let the Enchanted Weapon spell scale from +1 up to +5, instead of being a flat +3
3. Make IWD Belhifet's immunities more similar to SoD's
4. For SoD,
let Caelar stay outside the party if she's helping you against Belhifet, even if the player doesn't have a full party, mostly to make the fight a bit more concept-friendly for solo runs
5. Rebalance XP rewards in BG1, giving better scaling for trap/lock/scroll scribing XP, making ordinary enemies like kobolds give more XP while stuff like sirines and basilisks give somewhat less
6. Make potions shorter-lasting but undispellable, like in Item Revisions
7. Let certain spells reach around corners when appropriate (a non-physical spell like Confusion shouldn't be so limited by walls and corners)
8. Bundle in my other mods, like the Korax and Lilarcor NPC mods and the Seducer and War Hulk kit mods.

What are the little things that you think could be slightly improved, even in a heavily-modded game?

StummvonBordwehrgorgonzola
«1

Comments

  • StummvonBordwehrStummvonBordwehr Member, Mobile Tester Posts: 664
    Hi @semiticgod
    Great ideas. I would love to see your instant buffing script as an innate ability.

    semiticgod
  • AasimAasim Member Posts: 591
    One word, one desire - trolls' "I cant die unless I'm hit with fire/acid/God forbid stuck in a web/sometimes I still won't die/I force you to pick Death Spell as 1st 6th level pick on your sorcere just so I'm less annoying to kill script - REMOVED FROM THE GAME. PERMANENTLY. There's code in Tactics mod already, I guess it should just be updated for EE.

    semiticgodgorgonzola
  • semiticgodsemiticgod Member, Moderator Posts: 13,349
    @subtledoctor: Good point about trolls. That's probably the most sensible idea.

    I'd like my mod to be focused on dealing with stuff that isn't handled elsewhere (I don't want to replicate the work of already-excellent mods), so I might leave wands alone and let your mod fill that role instead.

  • CamDawgCamDawg Member, Developer Posts: 3,394
    That or make trolls like fission slimes, so that hitting them at any time with fire/acid prevents the whole fake death cycle.

  • FlashburnFlashburn Member Posts: 1,723
    Give the Spirit Warrior of Watcher's Keep level 5 the Killsword so you don't have to spend 5 whole minutes doing that boring challenge every time.

    semiticgodThacoBellStummvonBordwehr
  • AndreaColomboAndreaColombo Member Posts: 5,320
    edited April 5
    P&P everything (except some spells that wouldn’t be fun if P&P-ized, like Spell Immunity)!

    I’m actually thinking of starting my own P&P tweaks mod, though there’s a ton of learning between me and actually releasing anything of the sort.

    Zaghoul
  • RaduzielRaduziel Member Posts: 4,476
    @AndreaColombo feel free to take a look at DoF's code as it PnP-ize some spells (and more to come). This should save you some time.

    And I agree with your idea, the closer to PnP, the better. That's one of the reasons why I prefer IWD over BG - the spells there usually are closer to PnP behavior.

    AndreaColomboZaghoul
  • gorgonzolagorgonzola Member Posts: 2,671
    @AndreaColombo @Raduziel
    a more pnp like game is a good idea, but i don't see it as a tweak mod that usually address multiple things that can annoy the player or fix some bugs.
    is something with a much greater impact on the game, like playing with scs or item revision, instead of tweaking some aspect of the game changes the whole gameplay feeling.

  • RaduzielRaduziel Member Posts: 4,476
    @gorgonzola That can be easily addresses by putting PnP-altering as a component so people would be able to decide if they want or don't want it.

  • gorgonzolagorgonzola Member Posts: 2,671
    semiticgod wrote: »
    1. Make wands usable once per day and rebalance their strength, OR make wands usable infinitely and make them much weaker
    if is technically possible would be great to have the chance to use them in both versions, like you can use returning weapons mlee or ranged.
    unlimited use with weak effect or strong effect that consumes charges. i would like also the latter as charges/day instead of in the present way.
    semiticgod wrote: »
    3. Let the Enchanted Weapon spell scale from +1 up to +5, instead of being a flat +3
    why not also the MMM, now they scale only as number, but not as thac0 and damage.
    imo both enchanted weapon and mm should scale up to lev 20 like skull trap, making them viable even in late game, without being op at the beginning.
    semiticgod wrote: »
    5. For SoD,
    thank you so much for the spoiler, i really appreciate it as i put particular care in not being spoiled about that game!
    semiticgod wrote: »
    8. Let certain spells reach around corners when appropriate (a non-physical spell like Confusion shouldn't be so limited by walls and corners)
    about that i don't know...
    probably also other spells with a physical or elemental component should not be limited by corners, stuff like fogs or a web, while walls blocking the explosion of a fireball, or a skull trap, that having magical damage has not physical or elemental component, makes more sense.
    still i think that like it is now there is more tactical value as terrain characteristics can be used defensively and must be considered when the spells are used offensively.

    an other tweak i would really appreciate is to widen the aoe of the enhanced bard song, imo has to be possible to have all the party under its effect. something like all the party members in the sight of the bard affected would be great, making impossible to hide the bard in some place and sing or have a thief backstabbing under the song half area far from the bard like in the original game, but having both mlee and ranged toons getting the song benefit.
    at now only tactics where all the mlee fighters are packed in a small area and the bard is very near are possible, and this don't lead to interesting tactical playing.

    semiticgod
  • gorgonzolagorgonzola Member Posts: 2,671
    @Raduziel yes, sure. and i like that whenever is possible in all the mods the components are optional.
    i really don't like the " take all or nothing" approach of some mods, improved anvil is a good example of that approach.

    but what i mean is is that a PnPzation of the games is a work that deserves a whole mod just for itself.

  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,174
    Why wouldn't PnP Spell Immunity be fun? The BG2 version is pretty terrible IMHO...

  • semiticgodsemiticgod Member, Moderator Posts: 13,349
    Eh, I don't want to create a different Spell Immunity spell for every spell in the game. SI: Abjuration or SI: Evocation is more friendly than SI: Magic Missile or SI: Hold Person. If you made it really accurate to PnP, it would only apply to spells that did not bypass MR, which means it could never be used to block Remove Magic, and Remove Magic and Dispel Magic would be even more powerful than they already are.

    Unless @subtledoctor knows how to create a whole bunch of spell-specific SI spells via a bunch of WeiDU commands. Then, for SCS purposes, we could replace vanilla SI: Divination with SI: True Seeing and SI: Abjuration with SI: something else.

    Or just tack on an SR-style Dispelling Screen, which could also arguably provide a more balanced solution.

  • RaduzielRaduziel Member Posts: 4,476
    Even if a SI is coded for each spell, the display of the menu at the action bar would be terrible.

    IE's SI is bad - as is TS - but it is the best thing we can have.

  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,174
    semiticgod wrote: »
    Unless @subtledoctor knows how to create a whole bunch of spell-specific SI spells via a bunch of WeiDU commands. Then, for SCS purposes, we could replace vanilla SI: Divination with SI: True Seeing and SI: Abjuration with SI: something else.

    It actually wouldn't be hard. It would be annoying to cast though - you would have to scroll through several hundred spells with each screen only showing ~14 at a time.

  • semiticgodsemiticgod Member, Moderator Posts: 13,349
    edited April 6
    @subtledoctor: What if you limited it to just a few dozen of the most important spells? We wouldn't need to add immunity to Haste or Mislead or any of the non-hostile spells. Seems like immunity to one spell would be kinda weak for a level 5 spell, though.

  • DavidWDavidW Member Posts: 702
    I remain the only person on Earth who thinks BG2 Spell Inmunity is both fun and balanced.

    gorgonzolaAndreaColombo
  • RaduzielRaduziel Member Posts: 4,476
    Changing SI's behavior would also put it in an odd place when compared to (Minor) Globe of Invulnerability.

    The way I see it would be, at the same time, way weaker and way stronger than both spells.

    And in PnP (IIRC) you can only immunize yourself against a spells that has affected you earlier. So no protection against Wail of Banshee unless you survived it someday.

    Also, my issue with SI is not the spell itself, but the fact that it blocks traps and monsters' special abilities. Those should be classified as schooless, IMHO.

    AndreaColombo
  • gorgonzolagorgonzola Member Posts: 2,671
    DavidW wrote: »
    I remain the only person on Earth who thinks BG2 Spell Inmunity is both fun and balanced.
    we are at least 2 :)

    AndreaColombo
  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,174
    DavidW wrote: »
    I remain the only person on Earth who thinks BG2 Spell Inmunity is both fun and balanced.

    What can I say, I was inculcated by Demi.

    Actually I wouldn't mind that much, if it was actually treated like a single spell: rather than 8 different spells that can be cast from one memorization, and which can be layered over each other. If it is a single spell, then it should be a single spell, and work as other buffs in IWD/EEs: casting it should cancel earlier castings, and you should only be able to have one variant active at a time. So, no combining SI:Div and SI:Abj. That would be fair and consistent.
    semiticgod wrote: »
    What if you limited it to just a few dozen of the most important spells? We wouldn't need to add immunity to Haste or Mislead or any of the non-hostile spells. Seems like immunity to one spell would be kinda weak for a level 5 spell, though.

    That would be easy enough. Maybe weak, yeah. Frankly I think Demivrgvs' idea is ultimately the best. You can block a certain amount of spells with Deflections; you can block low-level magic entirely with Globes; and you can block certain categories of harm with Pro Fire/Cold/Lightning/Acid/Energy plus Death Ward, Mind Blank, and True Sight. School immunity is superfluous; stackable school immunities are superfluous and inconsistent and needlessly OP.

    Sorry to keep going off-topic. I'll stop now. :blush:

  • Ludwig_IILudwig_II Member Posts: 187
    Why would you need SI:Div when you have Non-Detection?

  • gorgonzolagorgonzola Member Posts: 2,671
    https://baldursgate.fandom.com/wiki/Non-Detection
    This spell protects an invisible or hidden (via Hide in Shadows) character from some low-level divination spells:
    Clairvoyance
    Detect Invisibility
    Invisibility Purge

    It does not protect against:
    True Seeing
    True Sight
    Oracle
    Detect Illusion

    if it is correct si divination is a much better protection, but non detection is lev 3, last 4 hours and can be cast on other characters so both the spells are useful depending on the situation.

  • Ludwig_IILudwig_II Member Posts: 187
    Cool, thanks for that. Though this makes me confused. I'm playing a Stalker currently and when I hide in shadows and walk near mages, they sometimes cast True Sight. But if I wear cloak of non detection while they are casting it, then they can't detect me even though they have True Sight. That's why I assumed Non Detection to be protecting against all detection spells

  • AasimAasim Member Posts: 591
    Ludwig_II wrote: »
    Cool, thanks for that. Though this makes me confused. I'm playing a Stalker currently and when I hide in shadows and walk near mages, they sometimes cast True Sight. But if I wear cloak of non detection while they are casting it, then they can't detect me even though they have True Sight. That's why I assumed Non Detection to be protecting against all detection spells

    You assumed correctly. ND however only works if Invisibility source is technically coded as "non-magical", like stealth. If you're stealthed, you'll remain unseen even if enemy casts True Sight. Wiki is wrong there.

    AndreaColombogorgonzolaLudwig_II
  • AndreaColomboAndreaColombo Member Posts: 5,320
    edited April 6
    @semiticgod and @Raduziel have pretty much summed up the reasons why I think a P&P Spell Immunity wouldn't be fun—so you can count me in as a third person who likes the way it is, @DavidW and @gorgonzola :)

    P&P SI only makes you immune to a single spell at a time, to which you must have already been subjected at least once. It would be way too situational and weak for a 5th-level slot, and I would personally never end up using it.

    If I ever got around to making a P&P mod (with of course the exception of what has already been P&P-ized by aTWEAKS and Rogue Rebalancing), I would probably shy away from modifying many spells in a significant manner as that may not play well with SCS.

  • StummvonBordwehrStummvonBordwehr Member, Mobile Tester Posts: 664
    edited April 7
    I would love to see some tweaking of spells that add fatigue when cast or after.

    1) remove fatigue from restoration scrolls or spells - because why?
    2) remove fatigue from haste and RWotF in IWD - they can be dispelled before they run out any way?

    Edit:
    Give Algernons cloak 100 charges

    Further edit:
    Let Zaviaks goggles have 10 charges

    Post edited by StummvonBordwehr on
    ThacoBell
  • RaduzielRaduziel Member Posts: 4,476
    Actually, I'll follow @subtledoctor 's idea and will remove the option to add layer after layer of SI. You pick one and stick with one - like I did with DoF's (PnP) version of Fireshield.

    If @semiticgod is ok with me hijacking the idea from his thread, of course.

    AndreaColombo
  • semiticgodsemiticgod Member, Moderator Posts: 13,349
    I can remove fatigue from haste and RWF from IWD, though I'll need to rebalance the latter as well. Other mods already remove fatigue from Restoration effects, but I may as well replicate that in a tweak mod. Incidentally, those fatigue effects cannot be dispelled.

    @Raduziel: Sure; it's not even my idea to begin with.

    What do you guys think about Spell Immunity being granted to druids and clerics, possibly as a level 6 spell?

    StummvonBordwehr
  • gorgonzolagorgonzola Member Posts: 2,671
    Aasim wrote: »
    Ludwig_II wrote: »
    Cool, thanks for that. Though this makes me confused. I'm playing a Stalker currently and when I hide in shadows and walk near mages, they sometimes cast True Sight. But if I wear cloak of non detection while they are casting it, then they can't detect me even though they have True Sight. That's why I assumed Non Detection to be protecting against all detection spells

    You assumed correctly. ND however only works if Invisibility source is technically coded as "non-magical", like stealth. If you're stealthed, you'll remain unseen even if enemy casts True Sight. Wiki is wrong there.
    wiki is indeed wrong. a thief using hide in shadows and the cloak is not revealed by true sight, if i am not wrong also a mage with sotm and the cloak is not revealed, but a mage protected by the cloak and an invisibility spell is revealed. i am not sure if a thief hidden in shadows and protected by the not detection spell behaves as the one protected by the cloak, probably not.

    still the original question "Why would you need SI:Div when you have Non-Detection?" is answered.
    there are many spells that reveal invisibility and illusions, of different levels.
    detect illusions cancel any illusion spell of lev 3 or lower, oracle of lev5 or lower, so improved invisibility is not cancelled by the first, but is killed by the second, that can not kill a projected image, that needs true sight. si:div protects from every spell that reveals invisibility but glitterdust that is not a divination spell.
    P&P SI only makes you immune to a single spell at a time, to which you must have already been subjected at least once. It would be way too situational and weak for a 5th-level slot, and I would personally never end up using it.
    my problem about it is not only that, as with meta knowledge we can know what the ai enemy will do so in many situations we have anyway to protect ourselves from a single particular spell in a certain situation. is also that it lead the player to the use of that meta knowledge instead of giving versatility and more tactical options. the player must know that the next day he will fight that battle, that the enemy will cast that spell and will have to memorize the right si spell to counter it, is not the way i like to play the game.
    (but is my opinion, if for some others a pnpized spell immunity brings fun i am fine with it...).

    AndreaColombo
Sign In or Register to comment.