Boost Dispels, Remove The Breach Effect, And Add Magical Backlash Spell

[YYA]

In short, I would suggest the following changes:

Greater Dispel Magic -- Caster Level Cap increased from 15 to 25 -- currently it has been increased to 20.
Wall of Greater Dispel Magic -- Caster Level Cap increased from 15 to 25 -- currently it has been increased to 20.

Remove the Breach effect from the following spells:
Lesser Spell Breach
Greater Spell Breach
Mordenkainen's Disjunction

In return, you could increase the Spell Resistance drop from said spells, and increase the duration of the effect.

Add the following spell:
Magical Backlash without spell resistance check.

Abjuration
Level: Bard 2, Sorcerer 2, Wizard 2,
Components: V, S,
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Target: One creature
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Fortitude half
Spell Resistance: No

With a word and a gesture, the target flares with crackling, violet-colored energy. Magical backlash causes any spells affecting the target to resonate painfully.
For each spell currently in effect on the target (not counting magical backlash itself), magical backlash deals 2 points of damage per level of that spell. For example, a creature targeted by magical backlash that is under the effects of bull's strength, blur, and mage armor spells would take 4 points of damage for bull's strength, 4 for blur, and 2 more for mage armor for a total of 10 points of damage.

The change would mean that a Greater Dispel effect could retain the potency it would have if the level cap was 20 instead of 30 -- in other words you would need to have a caster level of 35 to be immune to Greater Dispels. The Greater Dispel Magics spells held by mobs could retain their presumed maximum caster level of 29, so players could still retain their caster level of 30 immunity against regular mob Dispels.

Additionally, without the Breach effect, it would mean that you could actually give bosses spells that would not be automatically stripped away with but a single use of a Lesser Breach Wand. The primary change here in the PvE context would be that in order to offer a challenging boss fight, there would be other options to create a challenge beyond bloated Hit Point pools, unbeatable Saves, and blanket Immunities of today. In other words a boss monsters could have a spell such as Death Ward and Superior Resistance to up boost their their low fortitude saves, and thus a DC caster could attempt to first dispel these effects before casting any of those save or die spells. Not to mention that Greater Dispel Change would make it possible for all casters. As for non-magical characters; you wouldn't need cut through thousands of hit points, because a boss monster could instead have Mirror Images and Concealment, which in turn would help out the lower damage per hit characters to eventually overcome said bosses without decreasing the challenge all that much. After all, when it comes to Mirror Images, they care not for whether you dealt 1 point of damage or 90+, a hit is simply a hit that removes a single Mirror Image.

And finally, I would suggest for the addition of the Magical Backlash spell without the PnP Spell Resistance check, as a potential counter against the highly buffed up spell casters. For example, let us image that a wizard has buffed himself with the following spells:

Code: Select all

Shield (Level 1), 
Death Armor (Level 2), 
Mirror Images (Level 2), 
Cat's Grace (Level 2),
Fox's Cunning (Level 2),
Bear's Endurance (Level 2),
Improved Mage Armor (Level 3),
Clairaudience/Clairvoyance (Level 3),
Displacement (Level 3),
Haste (Level 3),
Mind Blank, Lesser (Level 5),
Superior Resistance (Level 6),
Heroism, Greater (Level 6),
True Seeing (Level 6),
Energy Immunity Fire (Level 7),
Energy Immunity Cold (Level 7),
Energy Immunity Acid (Level 7),
Energy Immunity Sonic (Level 7),
Energy Immunity Electricity (Level 7),
Shadow Shield (Level 7),
Premonition (Level 8).

In other words, the Magical Backlash could deal the following amount of damage:

Code: Select all

+2  [Shield (Level 1),
+4  [Death Armor (Level 2), 
+4  [Mirror Images (Level 2), 
+4  [Cat's Grace (Level 2),
+4  [Fox's Cunning (Level 2),
+4  [Bear's Endurance (Level 2),
+6  [Improved Mage Armor (Level 3),
+6  [Clairaudience/Clairvoyance (Level 3),
+6  [Displacement (Level 3),
+6  [Haste (Level 3),
+10 [Mind Blank, Lesser (Level 5),
+12 [Superior Resistance (Level 6),
+12 [Heroism, Greater (Level 6),
+12 [True Seeing (Level 6),
+14 [Energy Immunity Fire (Level 7),
+14 [Energy Immunity Cold (Level 7),
+14 [Energy Immunity Acid (Level 7),
+14 [Energy Immunity Sonic (Level 7),
+14 [Energy Immunity Electricity (Level 7),
+14 [Shadow Shield (Level 7),
+16 [Premonition (Level 8).
= 192 (Magic Damage, or 96 if save is made for half.)

A wizard usually has 4 hit points per level, so base 120 hitpoints at level 30. If our wizard has base 10 constitution, with that Bear's Endurance, he would have additional 60 hit points at level 30. A total of 180, which means that failing that low Fortitude save could Fugue them. This is in all due likelihood a great source of concern for the players of fully buffed up caster characters, but if this magical damage is dealt individually per spell; the damage received could be reduced by one point per spell with just a single 5% Magic Damage immunity item. That is -21 points of magic damage. Moreover, there are plenty of items that offer additional hit points, and you do not need to have all those spells active at the same time, you can raise your base constitution higher, you can use magical items instead of spells, and all of a sudden the damage dealt by Magical Backlash is far less noticeable.

And if you think about it from the perspective of DM events, if a high level party is buffed up to high heavens, meaning that no genuine challenge can be presented... A DM just needs to spawn in some caster mobs with Magical Backlash... And a lesson will be learned quite fast.

Not to mention that there are players who often complain that they do not want to spend minutes buffing up, well, they do not exactly have to do that even now, but some people just want to be sure rather than to risk it. This change would mean that there is a natural incentive to buff up slightly less, which in and of itself might help improve the overall caster game play experience.

[DaloLorn]

Thinking about the possible existence of Magical Backlash wands has made me realize something... scary.

In your scenario, two taps of the wand would kill the mage in 95% of all scenarios. (The 5% is where the mage rolls a nat 1.) Wands cast faster than spells, and are available to non-casters. Because your proposed tweak to Backlash removes the SR check, it also prevents it from being absorbed by mantles... which means that any rando cross-classing UMD can kill even the most heavily warded (... especially the most heavily warded ) mage in two rounds.

Perhaps a CL-based damage limit might be appropriate if the target makes its save? Maybe no more than 2*CL or 3*CL damage on a successful save? (Or I guess even 4*CL would be appropriate? 5*CL?) In your scenario, and assuming a 10-charge wand at CL10, the mage would take [20/30/40/50] damage per charge (considerably better than a wanded fireball, even if the mage hadn't cast Fire Immunity), which would require [9/6/5/4] unsuccessful uses of the wand to kill them... but still only 1 failed save (regardless of backlash CL) or [5/3/3/2] unsuccessful backlashes from a CL30 caster.

Granted, huge chunks of your hypothetical spell list are things I generally would not cast concurrently unless I had absolutely no idea what I was fighting (if even), but we're still talking about a considerable amount of guaranteed damage available at the tap of a wand. Without some kind of CL-dependent effect, and with the ability to trivially UMD it, you give a massive advantage to UMDing martials over actual spellcasters, because even if the spellcasters have marginally higher DCs, neither side is likely to fail the Fortitude save, and the martials will have two, three, four, or in extreme cases, even five times as much HP as the casters.

Also: Why single out (Wall of) Greater Dispel? Wouldn't it make sense to increase all dispel caps by the same value? (... And maybe add a +5 to Disjunction/Disjoin Magic for consistency?)

[YYA]

In your scenario, two taps of the wand would kill the mage in 95% of all scenarios. (The 5% is where the mage rolls a nat 1.) Wands cast faster than spells, and are available to non-casters. Because your proposed tweak to Backlash removes the SR check, it also prevents it from being absorbed by mantles... which means that any rando cross-classing UMD can kill even the most heavily warded (... especially the most heavily warded ) mage in two rounds.

Well, you could add a special exception to the Spell Mantles, namely that they can block the Magical Backlash. But I would insist that the spell should ignore the spell resistance, because anyone can grind a character to level 11 or so, walk into basement of Blushing Mermaid, and purchase a cloak with 32 Spell Resistance for 100,000~ gold pieces, which for all intents and purposes would be a blanket immunity against UMD Magical Backlash Spell.

But if Spell Mantles can block Magical Backlash Spell, then perhaps the Breach spell effect should be maintained for spell effects such as Spell Mantles, which would serve as an additional reason to still use the Breach Spells -- as both are NWN2's attempt to faciliate caster duels in real time. Thus, in the PvP scenario, an UMD user would first have to use a Wand of Lesser Breach to clear out the potential Spell Mantles, before a scroll or wand of Magical Backlash could be used. Which gives the arcanist a chance to turn invisible, ethereal, dimension door, teleport away, etc. And still win the PvP encounter.

Also: Why single out (Wall of) Greater Dispel? Wouldn't it make sense to increase all dispel caps by the same value? (... And maybe add a +5 to Disjunction/Disjoin Magic for consistency?)

Well, the server had previously increased the caps on all dispel spells by +5, but this was generally rolled back due to player complaints. As for Disjunction, it has no caster level cap to beat the defender's caster level. Thus, it need not be adjusted.

[EasternCheesE]

Well, dispel DCs are already in line with PnP. I myself am not opposed to removing spell breaches or reworking them so they also follow the logic of dispels (with higher base DC) against sets of spells. But, as usual, such changes will create a very big shift in server balance, thus, there are numerous factors to account and with the amount of staff we have here, it can take really long time.

[DaloLorn]

In your scenario, two taps of the wand would kill the mage in 95% of all scenarios. (The 5% is where the mage rolls a nat 1.) Wands cast faster than spells, and are available to non-casters. Because your proposed tweak to Backlash removes the SR check, it also prevents it from being absorbed by mantles... which means that any rando cross-classing UMD can kill even the most heavily warded (... especially the most heavily warded ) mage in two rounds.

Well, you could add a special exception to the Spell Mantles, namely that they can block the Magical Backlash. But I would insist that the spell should ignore the spell resistance, because anyone can grind a character to level 11 or so, walk into basement of Blushing Mermaid, and purchase a cloak with 32 Spell Resistance for 100,000~ gold pieces, which for all intents and purposes would be a blanket immunity against UMD Magical Backlash Spell.

But if Spell Mantles can block Magical Backlash Spell, then perhaps the Breach spell effect should be maintained for spell effects such as Spell Mantles, which would serve as an additional reason to still use the Breach Spells -- as both are NWN2's attempt to faciliate caster duels in real time. Thus, in the PvP scenario, an UMD user would first have to use a Wand of Lesser Breach to clear out the potential Spell Mantles, before a scroll or wand of Magical Backlash could be used. Which gives the arcanist a chance to turn invisible, ethereal, dimension door, teleport away, etc. And still win the PvP encounter.

An additional concern besides SR items is the fact that a UMDed Backlash would also be resisted by high-level drow, svirfneblin, or monks. (Not to mention high-CL Spell Resistance spells.)

I'm definitely in favor of removing the SR check, but I also think that the spell is too good at its intended function, considering the BG meta. In the example you gave, even a failed Backlash still dealt damage comparable to a full blast from a Maximized Starbolt, a spell four (three with ASoC) spell levels higher and 5 RTAs harder to fully land than Backlash. An unsuccessful Empowered Backlash would have inflicted damage on par with an Empowered Maximized Starbolt (in a hypothetical where such a thing was possible... though Maximized Daggerbolt sort of works out to the same thing ), or the average output of a successful Disintegrate or a Sneak Polar Dagger!

The most egregious part of the whole affair is that a CL3 Backlash scroll from a vendor is going to be exactly as potentially devastating as a ~CL39 Bloodseeking Wild Backlash from a feytouched blood archmage! Granted, the spell DC is going to jump from 15 to somewhere in the low-to-mid thirties on a dedicated abjurer, so the archmage does receive some benefit from their investment, but with save inflation being what it is, those UMDing martials and priests I mentioned would still have excellent odds of passing the Fortitude save before retaliating with their own backlash scrolls/wands. (The matter is further skewed in the UMDer's favor by the fact that if they timed their wand uses correctly, they could force unpassable Concentration checks every time the mage tried to cast anything. It'd become a souped-up Counterspell. It still could be, even at the low end of my proposed CL changes.)

That's why I think the CL of the Backlash should have some influence on the spell's damage output. It's probably not fair to apply CL limits on a failed save (though I'm not categorically opposed to that notion either!), but it should definitely be present on successful saves.

Also: Why single out (Wall of) Greater Dispel? Wouldn't it make sense to increase all dispel caps by the same value? (... And maybe add a +5 to Disjunction/Disjoin Magic for consistency?)

Well, the server had previously increased the caps on all dispel spells by +5, but this was generally rolled back due to player complaints. As for Disjunction, it has no caster level cap to beat the defender's caster level. Thus, it need not be adjusted.

The player complaints were probably about PvE, which you already explicitly singled out as an exception to your proposal. (I, for one, would enjoy having more reasons to consider slotting Lesser Dispel and Dispel Magic, or even using spells like Blackstaff.) And if all other dispels received +5s to their level caps (which, in many cases, is equivalent to an unconditional +5 to their dispel checks), it seemed fair to also give Disjunction/Disjoin a +5 to their dispel checks.

[artemitavik]

If you're going to boost dispells, then one thing really needs to happen:

Take the various dispells away from literally almost every caster mob that spam them like mad 100% of the time. Unless your wards are cast by a super-high level caster already, when one goes into any area with casters, wand-wards or trinket wards (like the shield broach) are pretty much nearly instantly gone. Places this has happened for me, merely from the number of dispells cast if not the level of dispell:

Sharptooth Orcs
Goblin cave
Yuan-ti
heck, the Kolbolds in the Hill Ruins
Gnolls
Pretty much anywhere with casters.

I understand that wands and stuff were "rebalanced" to fit PNP, but if you're going to muck with dispells even more, given the cost of wands, scroll, and elixers (though they are dispelled less) these things become even more useless.

And please don't respond with "Well just travel with a high level caster" because 1) it's not IC for everyone all the time and 2) they're not available all time time.

Please also don't respond with "well, just use level 30 elixers for everything" because at 3-6000 gold per drink, it's really just not economical when going into "Fodder enemy" fights.

[Rhifox]

I don't really see the need to boost dispels. Just removing the breach is fine. Heck, I don't even mind leaving the breach still in, but redesign what things it breaches. IMO breach should affect short term buffs only, things like elemental shield or spell mantle or displacement or mirror image. It shouldn't hit long term buffs like IMA and so on. That's the real problem with breach, it strips a character of their primary wards, which negates their ability to participate in the dungeon at all.

[DaloLorn]

If you're going to boost dispells, then one thing really needs to happen:

Take the various dispells away from literally almost every caster mob that spam them like mad 100% of the time. Unless your wards are cast by a super-high level caster already, when one goes into any area with casters, wand-wards or trinket wards (like the shield broach) are pretty much nearly instantly gone. Places this has happened for me, merely from the number of dispells cast if not the level of dispell:

Sharptooth Orcs
Goblin cave
Yuan-ti
heck, the Kolbolds in the Hill Ruins
Gnolls
Pretty much anywhere with casters.

I understand that wands and stuff were "rebalanced" to fit PNP, but if you're going to muck with dispells even more, given the cost of wands, scroll, and elixers (though they are dispelled less) these things become even more useless.

And please don't respond with "Well just travel with a high level caster" because 1) it's not IC for everyone all the time and 2) they're not available all time time.

Please also don't respond with "well, just use level 30 elixers for everything" because at 3-6000 gold per drink, it's really just not economical when going into "Fodder enemy" fights.

YYA did mention the option of keeping NPC dispels at their current power levels, so I think we're in agreement on this front. I do feel that this is the wrong approach, mind you, and would prefer a thorough reevaluation of how the server approaches spellcasting NPCs... but barring that reevaluation, keeping NPC dispels unchanged seems acceptable.

I don't really see the need to boost dispels. Just removing the breach is fine. Heck, I don't even mind leaving the breach still in, but redesign what things it breaches. IMO breach should affect short term buffs only, things like elemental shield or spell mantle or displacement or mirror image. It shouldn't hit long term buffs like IMA and so on. That's the real problem with breach, it strips a character of their primary wards, which negates their ability to participate in the dungeon at all.

When was the last time you've used a lower-circle dispel?

That being said, I agree with your sentiment about breaches. Maybe. I'd need to see a more detailed proposal for a revamped list of breachable spells first.

[Rhifox]

When was the last time you've used a lower-circle dispel?

I don't use any, because Abjuration is my prohibited school.

[YYA]

Anyhow, as it was discussed in Discord...

The damage need not be 2 points per spell level, it could be just one point per spell level, and that fortitude save for half.

So with that previous example, 92 on a failed save, and 46 on a save made. But in that case, instead of the damage being one tick per spell, I would prefer it to be one combined tick.

[yyj]

Wizards don't need more buffs

[MrSmith]

That's the real problem... strip[ing] a character of their primary wards... negates their ability to participate in the dungeon at all.

I modified the sentence a wee bit... because truer words were never said. Every action has a consequence. Boost dispels? really? For what purpose, to make hard dungeon's even harder?

Cheers!

[DaloLorn]

Wizards don't need more buffs

Then a lot of other things need nerfs.

Besides, I wouldn't consider the ability to use a CL3 scroll or a wand to deal up to 40 completely unavoidable damage (twice that if they fail their Fortitude save, though I concede that should only happen 5% of the time) to wizards a buff to them.

That's the real problem... strip[ing] a character of their primary wards... negates their ability to participate in the dungeon at all.

I modified the sentence a wee bit... because truer words were never said. Every action has a consequence. Boost dispels? really? For what purpose, to make hard dungeon's even harder?

Cheers!

In a single paragraph, you demonstrate ignorance of two key elements of YYA's proposal:

1. Only player dispels are boosted. I do not strictly agree with this part, because I'd rather change the way we use caster mobs (including dispellers) in our area design... but I see its necessity in the current environment.
2. He is also removing the primary function of the Spell Breach line (auto-dispelling breachable spells). Most spellcasting bosses cast Disjunction, which automatically dispels up to 6 breachable spells. Even if they received a +5 to their dispel checks (which isn't currently part of the proposal), the loss of the breach effect could make it a net nerf.

[YYA]

And let us think this from a more general PvE perspective, whether or not it is just regular areas of the server...

There are two types of monsters on this server, ones with large hit point pools, and ones with large hit point pools and spells that will fugue you. The current state of affairs is a result of a compromise between demands of ease and challenge, mixed in with loot envy since the loot system did not used to be the way it it is today. For example, only one person could loot a chest, in twenty minutes or so. Thus, an arcanist used to be able to just breeze through a dungeon, under invisibility, ethrealness, or stealth, kill the boss with save or die spells, loot the chests, and head over to some other area to do the same. Thus players who would slowly make their way to the Frost Giant King's room, would often find nothing... And waiting around for 20~ minutes for loot means that their own defensive spells will soon begin to wear out. It had this aspect that was, and even today would be quite unfair. Thus, players demanded those higher saves on monsters, including players of dedicated DC casters who lacked the carrying capacity of HiPSing Gishes. And then they saw that instead of save or die spells, HiPSing gishes would just empty a full spellbook salvo of thyose MIssile Storms at the boss, ignoring the high AC entirely, and thus in part the demands to further increase the HP pools of monsters, which in turn made the Avasculate spell the go to spell to use. Thus the next idea was to give bosses spells like Spell Mantles, Shadow Shields, etc, in order to make those HiPSing gishes try to Dispel the mobs with low caster levels of HiPSing Gishes. And this is when the Wands of Lesser Breach come in, because those would just strip away these magical defenses, and it didn't matter if the boss monster had multiple casts simply becase a regular wand has 50 charges. Thus boss monsters were given Death Wards, which are not Breachable in stock NWN2, and HiPSing Gishes just changed their builds to have either higher caster levels to make use of Disjunctions to dispel Death Wards and to breach potential Spell Mantles while at it, or higher damage per hit to just tank out the boss under Mirror Images and displacement. Thus we more or less arrive where are now, boss monsters with bloated hit point pools, saves up the roof, immunities left and right, and a few casts of Disjunctions in order to provide some degree of 'challenge.'


So, if we shorten the list of breachable spells to just contain the Spell Mantles, you could once again give mobs, actual dispellable spells instead of flat out immunities. If you want to spam Finger of Death at the Frost Giant King, you have to first dispel his Death Ward, make him fight inside that Cloudkill to bring down his Fortitude save, maybe even hit him with some curses, and then you cast your Save or Die spells.

And generally speaking, a big fight in a DM event against the big bad or big good, you could just give the boss base AC of 45~ and then give him some caster level 30+ Improved Mage Armor (+6) + Shield (+4) + Halo of Sand (+4) + Tortoise Shell (+9) for a total of 23 dispellable points of AC, in addition to Death Wards and Freedom of Movements, Concealment, Mirror Images etc. Thus casters of the party could make the fight considerably easier by just dispelling this big bad. You could give the boss some hired thugs with lower saves, and much less magical defenses, so arcanists could actually use their save or die spells on them, like Dominate Monster and turn the Big Bad's or Good's henchment against him, or just floor them with Wails of Banshee. Thus the fight in a DM event would not be just watching how the buffed up party members beat up a boss and call it a day. There are things players could do.



And generally speaking, with the addition of the Magical Backlash spell, there would be an actual reason not to accept buffs.

[DaloLorn]

We may not fully agree on some of the finer implementation details here, but we definitely agree on the broad strokes of what and why it should be done.