Skip to content

What weapon proficiencies do these magically created weapons use?

Oxford_GuyOxford_Guy Member Posts: 3,729
in Archive (General Discussion)
The current discussion about proficiencies for touch spells (see: http://forum.baldursgate.com/discussion/comment/196411/#Comment_196411 ) has got me wondering, what are the current weapon proficiencies for: Melf's Minute Meteors, Magical Stone, Shillelagh (club?), Flame Blade (scimitar is implied), Spritual Hammer (presumably war hammers, but is it?) and what *should* they be, if different?

Also - can a cleric/thief backstab with Shillelagh or Flame Blade (as a thief can with a club or scimitar)? All This has never been clear to me!
«1

Comments

  • Oxford_GuyOxford_Guy Member Posts: 3,729
    Anyone?
  • bdeonovicbdeonovic Member Posts: 86
    Good questions...aaah i love the mysteries that are Baldur's Gate! Its what entranced me when I was a wee little one; having to discovery all of these little nuances to try and become a master of the world I was thrown into before it mastered me was quite the thrill.
  • Oxford_GuyOxford_Guy Member Posts: 3,729
    @bdeonovic - indeed, still seems a mystery to many, apparently, as no one else has replied yet! I guess this is something that can perhaps be investigated with Near Inifinty, but I've never been able to get this to work on my computer, despite installing Java,
  • lunarlunar Member Posts: 3,460
    Oxford_Guy said:

    @bdeonovic - indeed, still seems a mystery to many, apparently, as no one else has replied yet! I guess this is something that can perhaps be investigated with Near Inifinty, but I've never been able to get this to work on my computer, despite installing Java,

    You can look it up each item via DLTCEP. It is a very easy to use program. I do not have access to my PC with BG:EE right now so I can not check. But I remember shocking grasp was labeled as 'hand to hand' while chilltouch and ghoultouch were labeled as mace or club, so I guess they were bugged. Haven't checked others, but clerical touch spells (cause wounds, slay living, harm) should be 'hand to hand' too.

  • Oxford_GuyOxford_Guy Member Posts: 3,729
    lunar said:

    Oxford_Guy said:

    @bdeonovic - indeed, still seems a mystery to many, apparently, as no one else has replied yet! I guess this is something that can perhaps be investigated with Near Inifinty, but I've never been able to get this to work on my computer, despite installing Java,

    You can look it up each item via DLTCEP. It is a very easy to use program. I do not have access to my PC with BG:EE right now so I can not check. But I remember shocking grasp was labeled as 'hand to hand' while chilltouch and ghoultouch were labeled as mace or club, so I guess they were bugged. Haven't checked others, but clerical touch spells (cause wounds, slay living, harm) should be 'hand to hand' too.

    Yes, chilltouch and ghoultouch are bugged, this has been reported, see:
    http://forum.baldursgate.com/discussion/comment/198406/#Comment_198406

    It's the other magically created weapons I'm less sure about
  • lunarlunar Member Posts: 3,460
    Okay, I can check when I have access to my PC. :)
  • Oxford_GuyOxford_Guy Member Posts: 3,729
    lunar said:

    Okay, I can check when I have access to my PC. :)

    Great, what be very interested to know!
  • elminsterelminster Member, Developer Posts: 16,316
    edited December 2012
    In Near Infinity melf minute meteors is listed as darts, magical stone isn't a bullet it is just an offensive spell (direct damage), Shillelagh is listed in the maces category (separate category from clubs), fire seeds (you did not mention) are listed as darts, Spiritual hammer is listed as a hammer.

    Flame Blade is where things get tricky. There are two listed. One is a long sword used by doomsayers, the other, what I believe is the actual priest spell based on the fact that its duration clearly improves every two levels, is listed as a short sword (all other scimitars are listed as long swords) (Fblade.itm is the name of the item I believe we are referring to).

    Lunar can confirm this all later with DLTCEP.
  • elminsterelminster Member, Developer Posts: 16,316
    lunar said:

    Okay, did some research with DLTCEP and in-game testing.

    Some basic info first. Fighter types (fighter, ranger, paladin and kits) who use a weapon they are not proficient with suffer -2 to hit. Clerics/thieves/bards suffer -3 and mages suffer a whopping -5 to hit when using a weapon they lack proficiency. Multi/dual class characters use the least penalty. For example a fighter/mage will get -2 to hit when using a weapon he has no proficiency.

    According to DLTCEP, weapon items have an 'item type' and 'proficiency type'. An item type of 'Hand to Hand' makes it ignore all weapon proficiencies. A proficiency type of 'Large sword' makes it ignore all weapon proficiencies since BG:EE has no large sword proficiency.

    Shocking Grasp-Item type:Hand to Hand Proficiency:Large Sword Has innate +4 to hit.

    It seems if the item type is 'Hand to Hand', proficiency type is ignored. Large sword proficiency is also ignored. This item ignores proficiency, a mage with no weapon proficiency can use it with +4 to his THAC0. I believe this is correctly implemented and bug free.

    Chill touch-Item Type:Mace Proficiency:Club Has innate +5 to hit.

    Ooh, this one is bad!
    Since item type is not 'hand to hand', it uses its proficiency type, which is club. This is an item that think it's a mace and behaves like a club!?!
    A mage (who can not have prof. in clubs) using this will suffer a non proficiency penalty of -5, and this will be negated by its innate +5 to hit. (is this expected behaviour?) But, a fighter/mage without club proficiency will have +3 bonus. (+5 innate, -2 for non-proficient fighter penalty). While a bard will have +2 (+5 innate, -3 non-proficient rogue penalty) Finally, if a f/m or bard has proficiency in clubs, there is no penalty, you get +5 bonus to hit. Specialisation will further give +1 to hit to a total of +6 to hit bonus.

    What it should have been:Item type:Hand to hand and/or Proficiency:Large sword

    Ghoul Touch-Item Type:Mace Proficiency:Club Has innate +4 to hit.

    This one is same as Chill touch, or even worse since it has only +4 innate bonus. Club proficiency adjusts your THAC0 here, same as above.

    Melf's Minute Meteors-Item Type:Dart Proficiency:Large Sword Has innate +5 to hit.

    Since there is no large sword proficiency in BG:EE this ignores proficiencies. Has innate +5 to hit. A mage with no proficiency in darts will still use them with +5 to hit. Solid spell, BTW.

    Phantom Blade-Item Type:Big Sword Proficiency:LONGSWORD Has innate +3 to hit

    This one is bad.
    Since proficiency is a valid Longsword, a character with no proficiency in longswords will suffer to hit rolls. A mage who can not have longsword proficiency will have -2 to hit. (+3 innate bonus, -5 no proficiency penalty for mages.) Its proficiency should have been LARGEsword, which is irrelevant in BG:EE, thus it totally ignores proficiencies.


    Shilelagh Item Type:Mace Proficiency:Large Sword Has innate +1 to hit

    This one is good, Large Sword proficiency means it totally ignores proficiencies. A lvl 1 druid who has no prof. in clubs will still use it with +1 to hit.

    Flame Blade Item Type:Small sword Proficiency:SHORT SWORD Innate +0 to hit.

    Aaaagh this one is TERRIBLE! It requires a 'short sword' proficiency which druids or clerics can never get! It has no to hit bonus too. Terrible oversight. Any cleric/druid will wield it at -3.

    Spiritual Hammer- Item Type:Hammer Proficiency:Warhammer Has innate + to hit depending on level

    This one correctly uses War hammer proficiency or lack thereof. May use advantages of specialisation, haven't checked.

    Cause Serious/Critical Wounds -Item Type:Hand to Hand Proficiency:Large Sword Has +2 to hit

    These are very well done. They both have hand to hand item type which ignores proficiencies, and large sword proficiency does the same. They don't require any proficiency. This is how a touch spell should look like!

    Slay Living and Harm are same as Cause wounds series, they are okay. Slay living has +3 to hit, while Harm has +2. (for some reason) I would opt. all of the touch spells to have +4 to hit for consistency and ease of use, but they are not bugged otherwise.

    Sol's Searing Orb-Item Type:Dart Proficiency:DART!!!! Has +3 to hit

    This is as terrible as Flaming Sword. It checks for a valid dart proficiency, and clerics can never have dart proficiency. So cleric suffers -3 to hit, but it is compensated by its innate +3 to hit. BUT the spell description clearly says it does not require a proficiency and has +3 to hit. Bugged. Proficiency should change into:Large Sword (just like Melf's Minute Meteors) so it does not give a penalty.

    Bug report time. :D
  • leddyhsleddyhs Member Posts: 54
    edited December 2012
    @lunar
    Wow great work, thanks! A quick question: Enchanted Weapon spell? Lv4 Wiz / Ench. Any weirdness going on with them? It also seems like the Seeking Sword is based on Longsword profiency, which is pretty unfortunate for a Cleric.

    I wonder how this all can be abused in the BG1 engine..
    Post edited by leddyhs on
  • Oxford_GuyOxford_Guy Member Posts: 3,729
    elminster said:

    lunar said:

    Okay, did some research with DLTCEP and in-game testing.

    Some basic info first. Fighter types (fighter, ranger, paladin and kits) who use a weapon they are not proficient with suffer -2 to hit. Clerics/thieves/bards suffer -3 and mages suffer a whopping -5 to hit when using a weapon they lack proficiency. Multi/dual class characters use the least penalty. For example a fighter/mage will get -2 to hit when using a weapon he has no proficiency.

    According to DLTCEP, weapon items have an 'item type' and 'proficiency type'. An item type of 'Hand to Hand' makes it ignore all weapon proficiencies. A proficiency type of 'Large sword' makes it ignore all weapon proficiencies since BG:EE has no large sword proficiency.

    Shocking Grasp-Item type:Hand to Hand Proficiency:Large Sword Has innate +4 to hit.

    It seems if the item type is 'Hand to Hand', proficiency type is ignored. Large sword proficiency is also ignored. This item ignores proficiency, a mage with no weapon proficiency can use it with +4 to his THAC0. I believe this is correctly implemented and bug free.

    Chill touch-Item Type:Mace Proficiency:Club Has innate +5 to hit.

    Ooh, this one is bad!
    Since item type is not 'hand to hand', it uses its proficiency type, which is club. This is an item that think it's a mace and behaves like a club!?!
    A mage (who can not have prof. in clubs) using this will suffer a non proficiency penalty of -5, and this will be negated by its innate +5 to hit. (is this expected behaviour?) But, a fighter/mage without club proficiency will have +3 bonus. (+5 innate, -2 for non-proficient fighter penalty). While a bard will have +2 (+5 innate, -3 non-proficient rogue penalty) Finally, if a f/m or bard has proficiency in clubs, there is no penalty, you get +5 bonus to hit. Specialisation will further give +1 to hit to a total of +6 to hit bonus.

    What it should have been:Item type:Hand to hand and/or Proficiency:Large sword

    Ghoul Touch-Item Type:Mace Proficiency:Club Has innate +4 to hit.

    This one is same as Chill touch, or even worse since it has only +4 innate bonus. Club proficiency adjusts your THAC0 here, same as above.

    Melf's Minute Meteors-Item Type:Dart Proficiency:Large Sword Has innate +5 to hit.

    Since there is no large sword proficiency in BG:EE this ignores proficiencies. Has innate +5 to hit. A mage with no proficiency in darts will still use them with +5 to hit. Solid spell, BTW.

    Phantom Blade-Item Type:Big Sword Proficiency:LONGSWORD Has innate +3 to hit

    This one is bad.
    Since proficiency is a valid Longsword, a character with no proficiency in longswords will suffer to hit rolls. A mage who can not have longsword proficiency will have -2 to hit. (+3 innate bonus, -5 no proficiency penalty for mages.) Its proficiency should have been LARGEsword, which is irrelevant in BG:EE, thus it totally ignores proficiencies.


    Shilelagh Item Type:Mace Proficiency:Large Sword Has innate +1 to hit

    This one is good, Large Sword proficiency means it totally ignores proficiencies. A lvl 1 druid who has no prof. in clubs will still use it with +1 to hit.

    Flame Blade Item Type:Small sword Proficiency:SHORT SWORD Innate +0 to hit.

    Aaaagh this one is TERRIBLE! It requires a 'short sword' proficiency which druids or clerics can never get! It has no to hit bonus too. Terrible oversight. Any cleric/druid will wield it at -3.

    Spiritual Hammer- Item Type:Hammer Proficiency:Warhammer Has innate + to hit depending on level

    This one correctly uses War hammer proficiency or lack thereof. May use advantages of specialisation, haven't checked.

    Cause Serious/Critical Wounds -Item Type:Hand to Hand Proficiency:Large Sword Has +2 to hit

    These are very well done. They both have hand to hand item type which ignores proficiencies, and large sword proficiency does the same. They don't require any proficiency. This is how a touch spell should look like!

    Slay Living and Harm are same as Cause wounds series, they are okay. Slay living has +3 to hit, while Harm has +2. (for some reason) I would opt. all of the touch spells to have +4 to hit for consistency and ease of use, but they are not bugged otherwise.

    Sol's Searing Orb-Item Type:Dart Proficiency:DART!!!! Has +3 to hit

    This is as terrible as Flaming Sword. It checks for a valid dart proficiency, and clerics can never have dart proficiency. So cleric suffers -3 to hit, but it is compensated by its innate +3 to hit. BUT the spell description clearly says it does not require a proficiency and has +3 to hit. Bugged. Proficiency should change into:Large Sword (just like Melf's Minute Meteors) so it does not give a penalty.

    Bug report time. :D
    Indeed, this looks like a complete mess! Who wants to submit this?
  • Oxford_GuyOxford_Guy Member Posts: 3,729
    BTW be aware that this bug report covers some of the touch spells that are bugged, but not all the issues identified here with the other spells:

    http://forum.baldursgate.com/discussion/comment/199579#Comment_199579
  • Oxford_GuyOxford_Guy Member Posts: 3,729
    lunar said:

    Okay, did some research with DLTCEP and in-game testing.

    Some basic info first. Fighter types (fighter, ranger, paladin and kits) who use a weapon they are not proficient with suffer -2 to hit. Clerics/thieves/bards suffer -3 and mages suffer a whopping -5 to hit when using a weapon they lack proficiency. Multi/dual class characters use the least penalty. For example a fighter/mage will get -2 to hit when using a weapon he has no proficiency.

    According to DLTCEP, weapon items have an 'item type' and 'proficiency type'. An item type of 'Hand to Hand' makes it ignore all weapon proficiencies. A proficiency type of 'Large sword' makes it ignore all weapon proficiencies since BG:EE has no large sword proficiency.

    Shocking Grasp-Item type:Hand to Hand Proficiency:Large Sword Has innate +4 to hit.

    It seems if the item type is 'Hand to Hand', proficiency type is ignored. Large sword proficiency is also ignored. This item ignores proficiency, a mage with no weapon proficiency can use it with +4 to his THAC0. I believe this is correctly implemented and bug free.

    Chill touch-Item Type:Mace Proficiency:Club Has innate +5 to hit.

    Ooh, this one is bad!
    Since item type is not 'hand to hand', it uses its proficiency type, which is club. This is an item that think it's a mace and behaves like a club!?!
    A mage (who can not have prof. in clubs) using this will suffer a non proficiency penalty of -5,

    It looks like Ghoul Touch and Chill Touch have already been reported and acknowledged as being bugged in the bug report I linked to above BTW, unless you think there's anything further to add to that report?
    lunar said:


    Melf's Minute Meteors-Item Type:Dart Proficiency:Large Sword Has innate +5 to hit.

    Since there is no large sword proficiency in BG:EE this ignores proficiencies. Has innate +5 to hit. A mage with no proficiency in darts will still use them with +5 to hit. Solid spell, BTW.

    Two questions - if the caster *does* have proficiency in darts, say a fighter/mage with 2 pips in them, would they get an additional to hit bonus? If not, should they? I.e. should the proficiency for MMM be darts or not?
    lunar said:


    Phantom Blade-Item Type:Big Sword Proficiency:LONGSWORD Has innate +3 to hit

    This one is bad.
    Since proficiency is a valid Longsword, a character with no proficiency in longswords will suffer to hit rolls. A mage who can not have longsword proficiency will have -2 to hit. (+3 innate bonus, -5 no proficiency penalty for mages.) Its proficiency should have been LARGEsword, which is irrelevant in BG:EE, thus it totally ignores proficiencies.

    Unless this one is meant for fighter/mages where it might actually *help* them if they have pips in long swords?
    lunar said:


    Shilelagh Item Type:Mace Proficiency:Large Sword Has innate +1 to hit

    This one is good, Large Sword proficiency means it totally ignores proficiencies. A lvl 1 druid who has no prof. in clubs will still use it with +1 to hit.

    Flame Blade Item Type:Small sword Proficiency:SHORT SWORD Innate +0 to hit.

    Aaaagh this one is TERRIBLE! It requires a 'short sword' proficiency which druids or clerics can never get! It has no to hit bonus too. Terrible oversight. Any cleric/druid will wield it at -3.

    Spiritual Hammer- Item Type:Hammer Proficiency:Warhammer Has innate + to hit depending on level

    This one correctly uses War hammer proficiency or lack thereof. May use advantages of specialisation, haven't checked.

    Cause Serious/Critical Wounds -Item Type:Hand to Hand Proficiency:Large Sword Has +2 to hit

    These are very well done. They both have hand to hand item type which ignores proficiencies, and large sword proficiency does the same. They don't require any proficiency. This is how a touch spell should look like!

    Slay Living and Harm are same as Cause wounds series, they are okay. Slay living has +3 to hit, while Harm has +2. (for some reason) I would opt. all of the touch spells to have +4 to hit for consistency and ease of use, but they are not bugged otherwise.

    Sol's Searing Orb-Item Type:Dart Proficiency:DART!!!! Has +3 to hit

    This is as terrible as Flaming Sword. It checks for a valid dart proficiency, and clerics can never have dart proficiency. So cleric suffers -3 to hit, but it is compensated by its innate +3 to hit. BUT the spell description clearly says it does not require a proficiency and has +3 to hit. Bugged. Proficiency should change into:Large Sword (just like Melf's Minute Meteors) so it does not give a penalty.

    Thanks for the analysis, though I'm still a little unsure what the correct behaviour *should* be for some of these...
  • lunarlunar Member Posts: 3,460
    edited December 2012
    I think Shocking Grasp has the correct behaviour regarding to 'touch' spells. Every touch spell (chill, ghoul, cause wounds, slay living, harm) should have +4 bonus to hit and no proficiency penalty/bonus. In PnP they ignore armor bonuses but since it can not be implemented, +4 to hit is a good work-around. +2 to hit bonus of Cause wounds and Harm (even Slay's +3) is too low and makes the cleric waste the spell if he misses, making them weak IMHO.

    Phantom Blade:In spell description it says the caster uses it as if he is proficient. To me this means no bonus or penalty. (apart from the blade's innate +3 to hit) However it now uses longsword proficiency, if you don't have it, you suffer penalty. In case of mages that is -5. If you are specialised or grandmaster, you get the bonuses and use the phantom blade as a grandmaster. Clearly a bug to me. Either it should not check for any proficiency (set its proficiency to Largesword) or it SETs your longsword proficiency to 1 as long as it is equipped.

    As for MMM I have to check, but I don't think they gain bonus from dart specialisation or mastery. They use no proficieny, just give their innate +5 to hit and wielder's DEX ranged attack bonus/penalty. (if any)

    Flame blade spell suggests the caster wields it as a scimitar, so at least it should require scimitar proficiency, so that druids can use it without penalty. (Clerics will always use it awkwardly, though) It now requires a silly shortsword proficiency, which is a bug IMHO. Even fighter/cleric and Fighter/druid multiclasses can not have a shortsword proficiency! Only way to use this spell without a penalty, is having a human fighter with shortsword proficiency and dual into a cleric/druid. When fighter levels are activated you should have your shortsword proficiency. Even then you are not going to be able to equip regular shortswords, but with this spell you can create a flaming shortsword you can use. You need to create your whole character build around this if you wish to use Flame blade without penalty in the current game, which I think is a bug. IIRC Anomen in BG2 had spear (he even tells a story about his fighter days when he killed wyverns with his spear) proficiency from his fighter levels, but he could not use any spear.
  • Oxford_GuyOxford_Guy Member Posts: 3,729
    BTW for the touch spells, does the caster benefit from any Strength to hit bonuses? I assume Dex to hit bonuses apply for all the ranged ones?
  • Oxford_GuyOxford_Guy Member Posts: 3,729
    edited December 2012
    lunar said:

    I think Shocking Grasp has the correct behaviour regarding to 'touch' spells. Every touch spell (chill, ghoul, cause wounds, slay living, harm) should have +4 bonus to hit and no proficiency penalty/bonus. In PnP they ignore armor bonuses but since it can not be implemented, +4 to hit is a good work-around. +2 to hit bonus of Cause wounds and Harm (even Slay's +3) is too low and makes the cleric waste the spell if he misses, making them weak IMHO.

    Phantom Blade:In spell description it says the caster uses it as if he is proficient. To me this means no bonus or penalty. (apart from the blade's innate +3 to hit) However it now uses longsword proficiency, if you don't have it, you suffer penalty. In case of mages that is -5. If you are specialised or grandmaster, you get the bonuses and use the phantom blade as a grandmaster. Clearly a bug to me. Either it should not check for any proficiency (set its proficiency to Largesword) or it SETs your longsword proficiency to 1 as long as it is equipped.

    As for MMM I have to check, but I don't think they gain bonus from dart specialisation or mastery. They use no proficieny, just give their innate +5 to hit and wielder's DEX ranged attack bonus/penalty. (if any)

    Flame blade spell suggests the caster wields it as a scimitar, so at least it should require scimitar proficiency, so that druids can use it without penalty. (Clerics will always use it awkwardly, though) It now requires a silly shortsword proficiency, which is a bug IMHO. Even fighter/cleric and Fighter/druid multiclasses can not have a shortsword proficiency! Only way to use this spell without a penalty, is having a human fighter with shortsword proficiency and dual into a cleric/druid. When fighter levels are activated you should have your shortsword proficiency. Even then you are not going to be able to equip regular shortswords, but with this spell you can create a flaming shortsword you can use. You need to create your whole character build around this if you wish to use Flame blade without penalty in the current game, which I think is a bug. IIRC Anomen in BG2 had spear (he even tells a story about his fighter days when he killed wyverns with his spear) proficiency from his fighter levels, but he could not use any spear.

    @lunar - do you want to post a bug report for these or would you like me to? I'd really like this fixed.

    Post edited by Oxford_Guy on
  • lunarlunar Member Posts: 3,460
    edited December 2012
    Oxford_Guy said:

    BTW for the touch spells, does the caster benefit from any Strength to hit bonuses? I assume Dex to hit bonuses apply for all the ranged ones?

    Checked this throughly. It seems if the item type is 'hand to hand', it ignores STR bonuses to hit. Created a human cleric with 10 str and half-orc cleric with 19 str and leveled up them to 16 via console. (have the xp cap remover) Tried shilelagh, spiritual hammer, flame blade, cause wounds and slay/harm series. In shileleagh, spiritual hammer and flame blade, half-orc correctly gained +3 to hit from his 19 STR, his final THAC0 was always 3 better than the human. They both were proficient in warhammers so neither suffered when using Spiritual Hammer. They both suffered -3 to hit when using Flame Blade since they lacked short sword proficiency. Half Orc was able to use it with his normal THAC0 since STR +3 bonus compensated for -3 non proficiency penalty. Human had no choice but attack crudely with a worse THAC0.

    In cause wounds series, slay living and harm, their final THAC0s were the same. Since these are 'hand to hand' attacks they do not benefit from STR.

    It seems 'item type' is important here, it determines whether STR or DEX bonuses factor to hit rolls. For example, MMM and Sol's Searing Orb are identified as 'dart' so they gain DEX bonuses to hit. Problem is, Sol's orb wrongly checks for Dart PROFICIENCY as well, whereas clerics can never have proficiency in darts. Its proficiency should be set to invalid 'Large Sword' category. It is done correctly in MMM, wrong in Sol's Searing Orb. Then again with the xp cap clerics do not get to cast Sol's Searing Orb so I guess this oversight is not that important.

    On that note, Energy Blades HLA is available in BG:EE if you remove the cap, and the Energy Blades do use that 'dart proficiency' again. Not a problem for mages, who probably has it by lvl 18, but clerics can never get it so they only get +7 to hit with it. (+10 from item, -3 for non-proficiency) Then again HLAs are not BG:EE's concern. There is one mage HLA with no description that CHUNKS the user upon casting. lol.
    Oxford_Guy said:


    @lunar - do you want to post a bug report for these or would you like me to? I'd really like this fixed.

    Oh feel free to go on and report them if you wish, I really don't know how to do bug-reports, rules and all, and yes I would like them to get fixed too.
  • Oxford_GuyOxford_Guy Member Posts: 3,729
    lunar said:

    Oxford_Guy said:

    BTW for the touch spells, does the caster benefit from any Strength to hit bonuses? I assume Dex to hit bonuses apply for all the ranged ones?

    Checked this throughly. It seems if the item type is 'hand to hand', it ignores STR bonuses to hit. Created a human cleric with 10 str and half-orc cleric with 19 str and leveled up them to 16 via console. (have the xp cap remover) Tried shilelagh, spiritual hammer, flame blade, cause wounds and slay/harm series. In shileleagh, spiritual hammer and flame blade, half-orc correctly gained +3 to hit from his 19 STR, his final THAC0 was always 3 better than the human. They both were proficient in warhammers so neither suffered when using Spiritual Hammer. They both suffered -3 to hit when using Flame Blade since they lacked short sword proficiency. Half Orc was able to use it with his normal THAC0 since STR +3 bonus compensated for -3 non proficiency penalty. Human had no choice but attack crudely with a worse THAC0.

    In cause wounds series, slay living and harm, their final THAC0s were the same. Since these are 'hand to hand' attacks they do not benefit from STR.

    It seems 'item type' is important here, it determines whether STR or DEX bonuses factor to hit rolls. For example, MMM and Sol's Searing Orb are identified as 'dart' so they gain DEX bonuses to hit. Problem is, Sol's orb wrongly checks for Dart PROFICIENCY as well, whereas clerics can never have proficiency in darts. Its proficiency should be set to invalid 'Large Sword' category. It is done correctly in MMM, wrong in Sol's Searing Orb. Then again with the xp cap clerics do not get to cast Sol's Searing Orb so I guess this oversight is not that important.

    On that note, Energy Blades HLA is available in BG:EE if you remove the cap, and the Energy Blades do use that 'dart proficiency' again. Not a problem for mages, who probably has it by lvl 18, but clerics can never get it so they only get +7 to hit with it. (+10 from item, -3 for non-proficiency) Then again HLAs are not BG:EE's concern. There is one mage HLA with no description that CHUNKS the user upon casting. lol.
    @lunar - Thanks for checking, that's all very useful to know.

    BTW is there a way to find out which magically-created weapons one can backstab with?
    <
    Oxford_Guy said:


    @lunar - do you want to post a bug report for these or would you like me to? I'd really like this fixed.

    Oh feel free to go on and report them if you wish, I really don't know how to do bug-reports, rules and all, and yes I would like them to get fixed too.
    Okay, I'll probably do this tomorrow, would be great to get this fixed, as I like the idea of a fighter/mage, bard or cleric using touch spells and/or magically-created weapons.
  • QuartzQuartz Member Posts: 3,853
    @lunar You are awesome.

    Also it appears my fears revolving around such weapons are very well-founded fears. I do not regret using such spells now, gotta say...
  • Oxford_GuyOxford_Guy Member Posts: 3,729
    BTW if I bug reported this, I'll put the relevant link here, and perhaps people could "agree" my bug report in the hope that it might get fixed more urgently?
  • lunarlunar Member Posts: 3,460
    edited December 2012
    On backstabbing with magicaly created weapons. I created a cleric/thief and mage/thief to check this. Had interesting revelations:

    Shilelagh-Suitable for backstab! This is great for cleric/thieves. It has +1 to hit and 2d4 base damage, equievelant of backstabbing with a morning star or bastard sword. Cool!

    Flame Blade-Suitable for bacsktab! But then again you have -3 to hit with it due to its bugginess. (short sword proficiency for a cleric..ahh)

    Spiritual Hammer-SUITABLE for backstab! This was a major surprise! Normally warhamers are not suitable for backstab purposes but this one is. And it is golden! More power for cleric/thieves! They are not as sucky as most people think! This may be considered bug or cheese, though.

    Cause wounds/slay/harm-They do not have any weapon damage, they only do their magical effecs when they connect, so no backstab goodness. Same for other magical touch spells of mages. (shocking, chill, ghoul)

    Phantom Blade-Suitable for backstab! And does some sweet damage. You will suffer the non proficiency penalty if you do not know how to use a longsword though.
    Quartz said:

    @lunar You are awesome.

    Also it appears my fears revolving around such weapons are very well-founded fears. I do not regret using such spells now, gotta say...

    Thanks, just trying to help and all..and it is fun too! ^^

  • lunarlunar Member Posts: 3,460
    edited December 2012
    leddyhs said:

    @lunar
    Wow great work, thanks! A quick question: Enchanted Weapon spell? Lv4 Wiz / Ench. Any weirdness going on with them? It also seems like the Seeking Sword is based on Longsword profiency, which is pretty unfortunate for a Cleric.

    I wonder how this all can be abused in the BG1 engine..


    Yeah Seeking Sword is gimped for clerics, it asks for longsword proficiency. It has +4 to hit and is a powerful +4 weapon, but clerics do get -3 to hit with it since they lack proficiency.

    I created the most interesting character with it.

    Started a human Priest of Helm, leveled a bit. Attacks with Seeking Sword has only +1 to hit due to prof. penalty, such a waste. Dual-classed into thief. Wow, surprise! You can put proficiency in long/shortswords now! It feels weird though, to stop being a priest of guardians and vigilance and become a thief. Quite a change. Maybe to better learn the tricks of the vile rogues? Or one too many blows to the head? It makes sense if the alignment is CN..Heck, everything makes sense to them.

    An interesting note, during the transision period, when his cleric levels are inactive, this character is pretty gimped. He can not use cleric weapons mace/flail/hammers since his active class is thief. He can not use bladed weapons like daggers and swords since he has cleric levels, however inactive. He can only equip a club or staff. And a sling. Worse than a mage! Very weak.

    But once his cleric levels are back, he is awesome. He can now equip heavy cleric weapons, but bladed weapons are forever banned to him. It is inconsequental. Remember he did have the longsword and shortsword proficiency at thief level up 1. So he can use Seeking Sword AND Flaming Blade (and also Shilelagh and Spiritual Hammer too, if he has hammer proficiency, which he can have at cleric lvl 1) without penalty. In fact this is the only character who can use Seeking Sword and Flaming Blades with no penalty AND backstab with them to boot! He even gets single weapon proficiency, it works with his magical weapons. He has a bit better AC and increased crit. chance and more style and flair with it. Way cool! He is one bad-a$$ ex-priest. :D

    Certainly the most interesting build I've heard in a while. A mockery of Helm Priesthood? Your call.

    EDIT: And a bug alert. Oh...my..gods! This build is even more powerful thanks to a wonderful bug. Seeking sword never expires! Tried resting, CTRL+T to pass time, wait forever..it stays forever with you. It disables spell casting, which is bad, but our rogue/ex-priest can now have a permanent +4 weapon he is proficient with, and backstab with it at his leisure. Dispel magic or CTRL+R will get rid of it, I think, but you can create another one after resting. Heh. Those wonderful, wonderful bugs. To think, have it active when dual-classing and he has his beloved Seeking sword all the time. Yay!

    I am so going to start a thread about this. :-D

    EDIT2:Seeking sword expires sometimes. Sometimes does not. Weird. Still he can cast it again. ^^ Oh. I got it. Resting or CTRL+T does not affect Seeking Sword's timer. It has its own, weird and wrong timer somehow. (duration is longer than 1 round/level as it says in kit desc.) Buggy anyway.
    Post edited by lunar on
  • Oxford_GuyOxford_Guy Member Posts: 3,729
    I'll try to bug report this tonight (UK time), though it's quite a complicated one!
  • RAM021RAM021 Member Posts: 403
    Anyway to dual-wield magically created weapons?
  • leddyhsleddyhs Member Posts: 54
    @lunar
    I noticed that Chill Touch persists through resting (all methods of forcing time to pass quicker) too, alongside many other magically conjured weapons.

    Wow that's pretty creative build you got there. -)
  • Oxford_GuyOxford_Guy Member Posts: 3,729
    Oxford_Guy said:

    I'll try to bug report this tonight (UK time), though it's quite a complicated one!

    @Avenger_teambg has advised "to wait for next patch so we see clearly what's still remaining to be fixed."

    He/She also said: "I think one doesn't have to set the item type to 'hand to hand' as @lunar mentioned in that other post.
    It is enough if the proficiency is set to 0 (Long sword is kinda misnomer, in the bg2 engine the bg1 legacy proficiencies are not used). I know Sol's orb isn't fixed yet. "

    (reference: http://forum.baldursgate.com/discussion/comment/202220#Comment_202220 )
  • Oxford_GuyOxford_Guy Member Posts: 3,729
    @lunar - what, if any, of these has the current "2011" patch fixed and which are still bugged?
  • lunarlunar Member Posts: 3,460
    Chill Touch-fixed, proficiency set to 00 Large Sword, omitting non-proficiency penalty.

    Ghoul Touch-still has club proficiency, bug.

    Phantom Blade-fixed, proficiency set to 00 Large Sword, same as above

    Flame Blade-fixed, proficiency set to 00 Large Sword, same as above

    Spiritual Hammer-fixed (was it bugged, I thought it using hammer prof. was its speciality?) proficiency set to 00, this ignores weapon proficiencies now, before it used hammer prof.

    Searing Orb-still has dart proficiency, bug.

    Seeking Sword-still uses longsword proficiency, bug.

    Cause Wounds, Slay living, Harm, Shocking Grasp-unchanged, they are still okay.

    I don't have much time to run eleborate tests right now, but just checking item types via DLTCEP tells me they have fixed most of the problems. However no matter how thick the mesh was, a few mosquitos, as Gorion would have said, have found their way into the patch. :p

  • RiolathelRiolathel Member Posts: 330
    bdeonovic said:

    Good questions...aaah i love the mysteries that are Baldur's Gate! Its what entranced me when I was a wee little one; having to discovery all of these little nuances to try and become a master of the world I was thrown into before it mastered me was quite the thrill.

    Being a noob in game seems to be where most of the fun is had
Sign In or Register to comment.

2024 Overhaul Games, a division of Beamdog. © 2024 Hasbro, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Baldur's Gate, Dungeons & Dragons, D&D, Forgotten Realms, Baldur's Gate, Wizards of the Coast and their logos are trademarks of Wizards of the Coast LLC in the U.S.A. and other countries, and are used with permission. Hasbro and its logo are trademarks of Hasbro, Inc. and are used with permission. © 1998 BioWare Corp. All Rights Reserved. BioWare, the BioWare Infinity Engine and the BioWare logo are trademarks of Bioware Corp. Black Isle Studios and the Black Isle Studios logo are trademarks of Interplay Entertainment Corp. Atari and the Atari logo are trademarks owned by Atari Interactive, Inc. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.