Wizardslayer alterations

[timothy trotter]

maybe because they meditate often?

[Rataxes]

Originally posted by SixOfSpades: Sorry. Would have gotten back to this much sooner, but this week has really knocked me for a loop.

No problem, started a small party game with a pure human Wiz Slayer as the PC yesterday so the verdict is still out on whether he'll be a success or not

Rataxes, you are correct in that a WS is the clear winner (compared to a Fighter or Monk) when it comes to using a Normal weapon on a Mage protected by PfMW. But I must point out that this tactic is worthless against Liches, and Liches are almost more common than Mages anyway.

Don't know if that's really true, but powerful human mages (or mages vulnerable to normal weapons) are common enough throughout the entire game all the way till the end of ToB that I think this is a pretty considerable advantage.

And this is just assuming that the spell disruption ability is useless on any spellcaster you have to use magical weapons on. Not so, I think the Wizard slayers spell disruption ability is superior to both elemental damage weapons (not that the Wiz Slayer cannot utilize that as well to become even better at disrupting casters), since it sticks on the mage and passively prevents spell casting. What if your regular fighter misses? What if his attacks are unfortunately timed so that the mage can fire off a quick spell? What if the fighter is incapacitated, or confused, or killed, so that he cannot be there to actively disturb the caster? What if that pesky bug that allows the caster to keep casting despite being "interrupted" kicks in?" That one has allowed more than one mage to keep casting spells in the face of a fighter equipped with an elemental damage weapon, but it does not bypass the Wiz Slayers spell disruption ability. There are many small factors and circumstancial details to consider that makes the elemental damage weapon solution not quite as solid or reliable as the Wizard Slayers innate spell disruption. He hits a spellcaster five times and he's crippled, hit him ten times and the spellcaster is rendered nearly harmless. A regular fighter with an elemental damage weapon would have to constantly hit the spellcasters till he dies, which could take several times as long as it takes for a WS to score ten hits, depending on the number of stoneskin spells he has in storage and what elemental protection spells he has active.

I admit that all of these problems fade as you progress in levels, gain more abilities and better items, but as the spell disruption capabilities of the regular fighter begins to catch up with the Wiz Slayers, the Wiz Slayers innate MR starts to become considerable enough that it will give him the edge over regular fighters when it comes to magical defense. Insect Plague you say? Useless on Liches, blocked by MR, tricky to make it stick on an invisible mage, overall I think the Wizard Slayers spell disruption on hit is preferable.

When More importantly, the easier way to handle Wizards is to concentrate on defense (or lure their non-spellcasting friends away from them) and until all their good spells are gone, and in this vein, the Monk and pure Fighter are easily better than the Wizard Slayer.

Easier yet is to send in waves of summons wouldn't you agree? At least for me, MR isn't used primarily to suck an enemy mages spell supply dry, since you can usually summon enough cannon fodder to do that job better, but to protect against anything that would be blocked by MR once already in the heat of battle.

Regarding WSs "not needing" good MR items, which can then be shared among the party: It is much more important to have a simgle person with 100% MR than three people with 65% each. There are almost NO fights in the game where you have to take your entire party up against a dangerous spellcaster--the only one that I can think of right now is Deirex.

I disagree, though my playing style doesn't usually involve specializing any member of the party to the degree that they have only one use ("spell absorber" or "tank" or "trap setter", etc). I would rather all of my fighters who are going up close against spell casters have decent protection against magic than have one with total immunity and the rest completely vulnerable. You can't always be sure that your tank will be the target of all melee attacks or that all spells will be cast at your spell absorber, and are battles where you have that choice really that tough in the first place? I prefer an even distribution of both power and protection, though I realize that having a preference like that is going to work to the advantage of the Wiz Slayer.

I know Tactics Firkraag has a Lower Fire Resistance ability, and perhaps he does even in standard BG2 as well (given the brevity of most Dragon fights, it might not have come early enough in his script to have been seen much). Given the choice of a Potion that will heal 27 hitpoints and a Potion that will render me immune to any future Fire damage, darn right I'll take the latter of the two.

Strange, I've fought improved Firkraag many times and never experienced that. I usually cast Prot from Fire on everyone and unless they get hit with Remove Magic, that always keeps them safe from the breath attack for the entire fight.

As I said, I've never played a Monk, so I can't go into the niceties of Monk vs. Wizard Slayer melee prowess, but I do know that they are at least comparable, which is more than I can say for their Magic Resistances during almost the entire game.

Yes there is a period between levels 14-30 or so where the Monk has considerably higher MR, if that difference overpowers the other advantages a Wiz Slayer has over the Monk is so highly dependant on cirumstances and the situation that I don't think anything definite can be said. What is definite is that the Wiz Slayer eventually gets better protection against magic than the Monk.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but my figures say that a Wizard Slayer of equivalent EXP would have 45% innate Magic Resistance. Do you, Rataxes, actually hold that the inability to use Rings, Cloaks, Amulets, Gauntlets, Belts, and almost every single type of Potion there is, for at least 3/4ths of the game, is actually worth having a Magic Resistance lower than what any Paladin could get just for killing a Dragon and using a sword that would be quite useful even if it didn't confer MR?!?

I believe he would have 50% innate resistance at that point, and yes I do think that 50% MR is better than the total sum of bonuses those five item slots can potentially provide for a fighter. Especially when you consider that additional MR makes more difference the more you already have. Going from 50% to 70% makes more of a difference than going from 0 to 20% for instance. Protective spells can in most situations in the game be as useful as potions, so I don't think this restriction truly hurts as much as it seems either other than in some special cases, but we've been through that before. Paladins have slower level progression and thus at any given time less HP, worse THAC0, fewer HLAs. can not achieve Grand Mastery and will thus have fewer ApR (especially if forced to use a two-hander). Just the fact that the Wizard Slayer is a fighter kit gives him the edge over a Paladin in many aspects, same thing with Monks, only the Wizard Slayer has even more of an edge over the monk in those same aspects.

[ 04-16-2005, 03:07 PM: Message edited by: Rataxes ]

[K2Grey]

I might be wrong or misremembering, but I believe that Lower Fire Resistance is actually an ability of ToB Firkraag, and not SoA Firkraag or Tactics Firkraag.

[SixOfSpades]

Originally posted by SimDing0: Why should a Monk be better at dealing with (resisting) spellcasters than a Wizard Slayer? That seems somewhat counter-intuitive.

Indeed, I can think of no reason why a Monk should be better against spellcasters than a Wizard Slayer, but the unfortunate fact is that they are.

I am currently taking the integral of both the Monk's and the Wizard Slayer's MR curves, to get a definitive measurement of who has the higher overall MR, and by how much. I don't know if I'll be able to provide any pretty visuals, but at least I can produce the numbers. Results soon.

[Rataxes]

"This warrior has been specially trained by his sect to excel in hunting and attacking spellcasters of all kinds."

The in-game kit description makes no mention of his stand-out magical defenses. He specializes in attacking mages, a task he performs better than any other pure warrior class or kit, and particularly monks. Which AD&D description implies that Wizard Slayers should have better defense against magic than monks? I sure don't think there is any such text in the game or in the manual.

SixOfSpades, I know as well as you that the Monk will win that round, but MR is far from the only thing to consider.

[ 04-16-2005, 09:27 PM: Message edited by: Rataxes ]

[SixOfSpades]

Originally posted by Rataxes: SixOfSpades, I know as well as you that the Monk will win that round, but MR is far from the only thing to consider.

We shall see. In the meantime, the hard facts on MR in the game:
A character who has 100% MR from day one (of BG1) will have an MR score of 800,000,000. This is from the calculation of (their MR x the number of EXP during which the character has that MR).
A Monk with no items will have an MR score of 483,600,000. This is equal to an average MR of 60.45%, over the entire saga.
A Wizard Slayer with no items will have an MR score of 318,749,000, or 39.84% average MR.
In order to equal the Wizard Slayer's overall MR score, a Paladin would need to obtain Carsomyr (disregarding any other items / effects) at 1,625,020 EXP, which is roughly halfway through Level 13--a feat of which I imagine all experienced gamers are capable. Of course, this calculation would only hold true if the Paladin always kept Carsomyr equipped, but since better weapons are virtually nonexistent, I don't think this is an unreasonable assumption.

I think the Wizard slayers spell disruption ability is superior to both elemental damage weapons (not that the Wiz Slayer cannot utilize that as well to become even better at disrupting casters), since it sticks on the mage and passively prevents spell casting. What if your regular fighter misses? What if his attacks are unfortunately timed so that the mage can fire off a quick spell? What if the fighter is incapacitated, or confused, or killed, so that he cannot be there to actively disturb the caster? What if that pesky bug that allows the caster to keep casting despite being "interrupted" kicks in?"

What if charging up into melee range leaves your Wizard Slayer open to Imprisonment? What if your WS's Normally-enchanted attack penetrates PfMW and Stoneskin, but not Mirror Image? That just means that you spend half a round scorching yourself on Fireshields while the wizard finishes his Time Stop, and since his spellcasting odds are probably still 100%, he's got three rounds in which to fry you with some Sunfires, or immobilize you with a Symbol: Stun, which your much-vaunted MR will almost certainly NOT block. Granted, a regular Fighter is vulnerable to all of these eventualities as well, therefore see next rebuttal.

There are many small factors and circumstancial details to consider that makes the elemental damage weapon solution not quite as solid or reliable as the Wizard Slayers innate spell disruption. He hits a spellcaster five times and he's crippled, hit him ten times and the spellcaster is rendered nearly harmless. A regular fighter with an elemental damage weapon would have to constantly hit the spellcasters till he dies, which could take several times as long as it takes for a WS to score ten hits, depending on the number of stoneskin spells he has in storage and what elemental protection spells he has active.

Yes, ten hits from a WS will completely incapacitate any spellcaster (I wonder how long for, though--I've never seen a quote on the duration of Spell Disruption), but so will being out of spells, or at least good spells. Yes, getting in a few quick hits with a WS is theoretically the fastest way to take out a spellcaster....but does that make it the best?
1) Almost any spellcaster that appears alone is easily taken care of by causing him/her/it to waste spells on a target that is either immune or expendable.
2) Almost any spellcaster that appears with backup from the other classes is easy to isolate from said backup, thus leaving you back in Case 1.
I aim for efficiency in my games, I save spells and potions for when I need them. If I can beat a Mage by simply waiting & wasting him out, and then going in for the kill when he's reduced to Magic Missiles, why on earth should I bother with a True Sight + Pierce Magic + Breach? Sure, the old Wait & Waste isn't as fast or glamorous as running up and tickling the Mage under his armpits, but it sure is safe. All you need is one magic-immune party member (for which the Monk has been proven to be the very best there is) and a place for him to stand, preferably out of Sunfire range from the target. And against a Lich, that's precisely what you're going to have to do anyway, Wizard Slayer or no Wizard Slayer.

Incidentally, I should point out that immunity to a certain element only makes the person immune to damage: Their spells will still be disrupted if they are hit with a damage type to which they are immune. Unless, of course, they keep right on casting due to the bug that you mention, but unfortunately I lack any real data on that.

I admit that all of these problems fade as you progress in levels, gain more abilities and better items, but as the spell disruption capabilities of the regular fighter begins to catch up with the Wiz Slayers, the Wiz Slayers innate MR starts to become considerable enough that it will give him the edge over regular fighters when it comes to magical defense.

Only when you're more than halfway through the game. During the first half, it's the Fighter who likely has the better MR, and that's only when disregarding mod items.

Insect Plague you say? Useless on Liches, blocked by MR, tricky to make it stick on an invisible mage, overall I think the Wizard Slayers spell disruption on hit is preferable.

As I said, WSs are just as screwed as anyone else when it comes to Liches, so I hardly think that's relevant. Most spellcasters that I have seen have very little MR, if at all. Ever try casting Insect Plague or Creeping Doom on one of your own party members?

I disagree, though my playing style doesn't usually involve specializing any member of the party to the degree that they have only one use ("spell absorber" or "tank" or "trap setter", etc).

I guess NPCs like Edwin are a no-go for you, then. And who ever said anybody had to have only one specialization? In the party I described above (Level 30 Berserker), I have three "magical Tanks": I have a Dwarven Priest of Helm who is my main Tank (AC of -15 or some such), but can also ignore just about any spells chucked his way because his Saves are so darn low. My Swashbuckler is one heck of an archer, and also has all of her elemental resistances except Acid close to 100%, and is immune to most immobilizing spells. My Bard is, well, a rather useless Bard, but he does have 100% Magic Resistance when he's singing. I would be very happy to send any of these against any spellcaster in the game.

You can't always be sure that .... all spells will be cast at your spell absorber,

Of course you can, don't be silly. Even if you don't Ring of the Ram Kangaxx into the corner so that he can't see the party members that you leave near the door, he will still focus on enemies in order of proximity.

Yes there is a period between levels 14-30 or so where the Monk has considerably higher MR, .... What is definite is that the Wiz Slayer eventually gets better protection against magic than the Monk.

Levels 14-30, you say? Let's talk in terms of EXP.
From 1,350,000 to 7,250,000 EXP, the Monk has higher MR. That's 74% of the entire game.
From 7,250,000 to 7,500,000 EXP, the two are tied.
From 7,500,000 to 7,750,000 EXP, the Wizard Slayer is a whopping 1% ahead.
And for the last 250,000 of the game, the Wizard Slayer increases that lead to 6%.
Granted, the installation of an EXP cap remover and a Level 50 ruleset would benefit the Wizard Slayer greatly in this regard, but it was my understanding that these calculations were to exclude mods.

I believe he [a Level 30 Wizard Slayer] would have 50% innate resistance at that point, and yes I do think that 50% MR is better than the total sum of bonuses those five item slots can potentially provide for a fighter.

Now that I've actually gone nuts with Shadowkeeper and made the complete tables, a WS of that level would actually have 54% MR, so your guestimate was closer. Even so, a Fighter at that point in the game can have 35% MR, simply by equipping items, which brings up another important point: The Fighter's access to item slots means greater versatility in preparing for a certain type of encounter. If the party Thief scouts ahead and reports a big group of Golems, the Fighter can switch out those MR items in favor of things like AC and immunity to Poison. Not so the Wizard Slayer--he's stuck with Magic Resistance, 24/7. (At least he's far better off than the Monk in that regard, though--but then the Monk has nice AC and immunity to Poison anyway.)

[K2Grey]

Two things...

1) Spell disruption effect only works with melee weapons? I thought it worked with darts too. And it definitely should pierce Mirror Image.

2) Lots of battles, you fight a mage and other enemies simultaneously (Improved Gromnir, Ascension Finale) so you don't have the luxury of waiting them out. Granted, Kharun the Black is reasonably easy to kill and does nothing in his Time Stops, but Sendai is annoying.

3) Who came up with the idea of making liches immune to Breach, and why did Weimer decide to take a step further with putting Spell Immunities in Chain Contingencies

[Assassin]

1) Spell disruption effect only works with melee weapons? I thought it worked with darts too. And it definitely should pierce Mirror Image.

MAges with PfMW on also invariably have PfNM on, which will block all Darts. Not to mention that PfMW will block all magical darts.

3) Who came up with the idea of making liches immune to Breach, and why did Weimer decide to take a step further with putting Spell Immunities in Chain Contingencies

That was part of making Liches immune to spells 1-5, which is in vanilla (unmodded) BG2. Weimer decided to put the Spell Immunities in there as part of his 'let's survive as long as possible' plan for all Mages/Lichs.

My main beef with the WS is that the WS, AFAIK, has to hit with his weapon before he can cause the spell disruption, right? Well, if my fighters can hit the darn Mage, the game's probably over for him. I mean, my Mages are usually in counter-battery fire, using Remove Magic/Breach on enemy spellcasters before focussing on the enemy fighters. In that sense, once the Mage is hittable, he's going down quick. After all, nothing disrupts spellcasting quite like death does. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

[ 04-17-2005, 01:00 PM: Message edited by: Assassin ]

[shamrock_uk]

Originally posted by Assassin: MAges with PfMW on also invariably have PfNM on, which will block all Darts.

I was under the impression that these could not co-exist? Or is this more scripted cheese...?

[K2Grey]

You can't stack PfMW with PfN Weapons, but you can stack PfMW with PfN Missiles.

I wouldn't say that all mages with PfMW will have PfNM though, in fact I think that's a rarity.