RE: Question About Some Spells

[Legacy_Pstemarie]

               Wasn't sure where exactly to post this, so sorry if its in the wrong place

Anyway...

I'm in the process of updating the spells to the 3.5 rules and came across these:

• Greater Bull's Strength
  
  
• Greater Cat's Grace
  
  
• Greater Eagle's Splendor
  
  
• Greater Endurance
  
  
• Greater Fox's Cunning
  
  
• Greater Owl's Wisdom

The spells do not actually seem to be part of the game, other than appearing in the Toolset under the Special Abilities tab of the Creature Properties window. They are not linked back to any character class' spell progression (only the Innate level is assigned in spells.2da), nor are they linked back to any feat.

Does anyone know if these spells are actually "used" in the game? If they're not I'm going to convert them to the mass versions.
               
               

               

                     Modifié par Pstemarie, 08 juillet 2011 - 08:25 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Failed.Bard]

               Aside from being able to be added as a Cast Spell item property, I've never found them implimented anywhere in game.  From a quick look at the scripts, five of the six stack with the "normal" versions, suggesting they're unfinished.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Pstemarie]

               Being that they are all 6th level they correspond nicely with the Mass versions from 3.5. Therefore, that's what they'll become. Thanks, FB.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Shadooow]

               

Pstemarie wrote...

Being that they are all 6th level they correspond nicely with the Mass versions from 3.5. Therefore, that's what they'll become. Thanks, FB.

Many custom modules out there uses them for potions so if your project should be global, you should not reuse them...
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Pstemarie]

               Project is for my new LAN server so no problems there.

As far as using them for potions - since they have an innate level of 6 they shouldn't even be useable for potions since potions are supposed to be level 3 spells and lower.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Shadooow]

               

Pstemarie wrote...

As far as using them for potions - since they have an innate level of 6 they shouldn't even be useable for potions since potions are supposed to be level 3 spells and lower.

thats for crafting, but they cannot be crafted cos they do not exists in any class spell list, but they appear in cast spell item property so you can make a custom potion with them '>
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Elhanan]

               Uncertain, but I believe it is Greater Bull's Strength that is cast by a Druidic guest at the Inn just before the first combat seen in HotU. I recall as I almost hate to rest and lose the extra boost.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Pstemarie]

               

ShaDoOoW wrote...

Pstemarie wrote...

As far as using them for potions - since they have an innate level of 6 they shouldn't even be useable for potions since potions are supposed to be level 3 spells and lower.

thats for crafting, but they cannot be crafted cos they do not exists in any class spell list, but they appear in cast spell item property so you can make a custom potion with them '>

Right. I was actually referring to the pnp rules, which BioWare broke all over the place when it came to what spells could be used as potions and what could be used as wands.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_HipMaestro]

               There are several high magic servers that I have played that had all (or most) of these spells as potions sold as standard items in a store.  (IIRC one of them was a NWN Diablo server but it may have been changed by now.)

All it does is make all the normal version spells pretty much obsolete, which causes the server to be biased against buffing classes since all classes can purchase and use them.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Failed.Bard]

               

Elhanan wrote...

Uncertain, but I believe it is Greater Bull's Strength that is cast by a Druidic guest at the Inn just before the first combat seen in HotU. I recall as I almost hate to rest and lose the extra boost.

  That would explain why only Greater Bull's Strength, of the six variants, was set to non-stacking.


  The mass versions, properly implimented to 3.5 rules (4 points normal, 6 points empowered, one creature per level) are far more useful in multi-player than 2d4+1 to one target, in my opinion, especially if the server is low magic.  Speaking of, I need to go modify them for my server now, I like the idea.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Pstemarie]

               

Failed.Bard wrote...

The mass versions, properly implimented to 3.5 rules (4 points normal, 6 points empowered, one creature per level) are far more useful in multi-player than 2d4+1 to one target, in my opinion, especially if the server is low magic.  Speaking of, I need to go modify them for my server now, I like the idea.

Actually, Empower shouldn't work on the 3.5 version of either the regular or mass variants. The regular variants (Bull's Strength, Cat's Grace, etc.) and their mass counterparts add a fixed numeric bonus. Empower metamagic only affects variable numeric effects...

"Magical expertise allows certain spells to be cast with a 50% increase in variable numeric effects (number of targets, damage, etc.), excluding duration." NWN Gold Manual pg. 93 or http://www.d20srd.or...tm#empowerSpell

Since the bonus and the number of targets (one creature or one creature per caster level within a 30' radius) are fixed, Empower wouldn't apply nor would Maximize. The only metamagics left would therefore be Extend, Quick, Silent, and Still.
               
               

               

                     Modifié par Pstemarie, 09 juillet 2011 - 09:46 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Shadooow]

               

Failed.Bard wrote...

The mass versions, properly implimented to 3.5 rules (4 points normal, 6 points empowered, one creature per level) are far more useful in multi-player than 2d4+1 to one target, in my opinion, especially if the server is low magic. 

Not really, you still can (atm even empower and maximize) extend them and move them to third spell lvl where most classes dont have anything vital. Which is problem of the sixth level where you have igms/other offensive spells, cleric heals/harms/extend ii/battletide/ts and the same at lvl 7. So they would be more useable only for bard/druid whose spells at these levels sucks.

Anyway its worth it just for the fact that bard looses str etc.

BTW as I see many custom builders around myself include started moving their modules towards 3.5, questions is:

Why you wouldnt use that 3.5 edition hak from vault and doing that from scratch?
               
               

               

                     Modifié par ShaDoOoW, 09 juillet 2011 - 10:53 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Failed.Bard]

               

ShaDoOoW wrote...

BTW as I see many custom builders around myself include started moving their modules towards 3.5, questions is:

Why you wouldnt use that 3.5 edition hak from vault and doing that from scratch?

  In my case, it's because I started making my mod in order to learn the scripting, and I don't learn anything if I just plug other peoples work into my mod.

  My version of Mass Bull's Strength that I wrote after reading this topic, for instance, was a bit of fun trying to think of a good way to write it.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Pstemarie]

               

ShaDoOoW wrote...

[BTW as I see many custom builders around myself include started moving their modules towards 3.5, questions is:

Why you wouldnt use that 3.5 edition hak from vault and doing that from scratch?

In my case, I'd much rather just do it myself. Besides I'm basically going to rewrite the entire spell engine for my module to accomodate proper object damage and breaking - Breaking and Entering http://www.d20srd.or...exploration.htm - I might as well just upgrade all the spells myself while I'm at it.

As for stacking - which a poster mentioned earlier - the Mass variants sould stack with the standard variants, as the bonus is derived from a different source. Fortunately, BioWare handled this correctly in the coding for EffectAbilityIncrease - which will not stack if the source is the same.

With my module (LAN PW - whatever you want to call it) I'm trying to emulate pnp as much as possible when it comes to game mechanics. All too often I find what appears on the Vault to be rather...lacking...in its adherence to the pnp mechanics. However, considering that such things really come down to how one interprets the pnp rules, its safer to say that THEIR interpretation or understanding quite often doesn't match MINE.
               
               

               

                     Modifié par Pstemarie, 09 juillet 2011 - 12:36 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_ShadowM]

               Much like Pstemarie I switching HR to 3.5. The hak version 3.5 on the vault has each spell script as it own file. I moved all the spells to a spellhook system and each one as a function. I also switch all the spells / feats to a custom tlk the one on the vault overwrites biowares. By doing this it allows people when I release it to make their own vision of D&D just by change the spells to what they want them to do and even renaming them in tlk without worry of overwriting bioware base work. I trying to stick to PNP also. I going to be adding a lot of 3.5 spells,  feats, skills and systems (some system are custom search with more options. I started this because I wanted more flexibility. I was going to do this for my lan group but figured I make a version for general release also.
               
               

               

                     Modifié par ShadowM, 09 juillet 2011 - 04:02 .