Server Totals
Wilderness - (2)
Deglos - (1)
Le'Or - (1)
Mikona - (1)
Ferrell - (1)
Elysia - (1)
M'Chek - (0)
Underdark - (0)
Visimontium - (0)
Total players: 7
Gallery
  • Winter Ball 2015
    Album name: DM Events
    Uploaded by: Ronan
    Uploaded: Sat Jan 03, 2015 4:38 pm

Links Menu

Avlis policy on: "Visible" Spell Effects (old)

Rules and Guidelines

Moderator: Dungeon Masters

PostAuthor: eNTrOpY » Tue Jun 10, 2003 10:45 pm

There is also the option of becoming a "subcontractor"

eNTrOpY
Sage
 
Posts: 1758
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2002 1:48 am
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba (GMT -6)

PostAuthor: PigLickJF » Tue Jun 10, 2003 11:26 pm

Heh, well, I don't know that I'd say "all" the spells, but I'd probably be willing to remove the visual effects from a relatively short list of spells. Of course, this is assuming Orleron et. al even want to make that change, and even then I'd need a list of the spells they want the effects removed from.

PigLick

PigLickJF
Knight of Useless Drivel
 
Posts: 68
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2003 4:35 am

List

PostAuthor: Arkaian » Wed Jun 11, 2003 12:53 am

Im going to take the time to make the ENTIRE list :) (avlis down and all)

High priority:

Premnotion
Protection from alignmnet
See invisibility/Ultravision/True seeing
Resist elements/protection from elements/Energy buffer
Clarity/LEsser mindblank/mindblank
Minor globe / globe of invounerability
Freedom of movement
Spellresistance
Aura vs alignment
Clairaudiance/voiance
Lesser/normal/greater spellmantles
legend lore
protection from spells

This is the lest of spells that carry "disturbing" visual effects for more then a moment. Others include confusion and fear, etc. They should also be removed, but everything at it's time :)
I chose to leave the floating red disk of shit out of this, since it will include alot of more scripting to remove the instant effects ?
(also it's ok, since they only last a moment)

Arkaian
 

PostAuthor: Jeffi0 » Wed Jun 11, 2003 1:00 am

I don't get why you want to remove those effects, other than See invisibility/Ultravision/True seeing, Clarity/Lesser mindblank/mindblank, Clairaudiance/voiance, Freedom of movement, and Legend Lore. Premonition is borderline, perhaps, cause it just looks so cool :) For the rest, I see no reason why they should be there... Spell Mantles and the Globes, for example, why do you think those should not be visible?
User avatar
Jeffi0
Apprentice Scholar
 
Posts: 567
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2003 12:57 am

PostAuthor: Ykirhs » Wed Jun 11, 2003 2:48 am

Jeffi0 wrote:I don't get why you want to remove those effects, other than See invisibility/Ultravision/True seeing, Clarity/Lesser mindblank/mindblank, Clairaudiance/voiance, Freedom of movement, and Legend Lore. Premonition is borderline, perhaps, cause it just looks so cool :) For the rest, I see no reason why they should be there... Spell Mantles and the Globes, for example, why do you think those should not be visible?


Oh, that's easy: Because they are Ugwy-bad-wrong, or "ub'dong."
That or they slow his FPS to sludge... I'm pretty sure anyone with a DMG or PH would be able to go through the admittedly short list of impleemented spells and sort of the ones with visible effects.

Can I put a joke with invisiblity in here?
"We used to hate people,
now we just make fun of them,
it's more effective that way."

-"Dogma" KMFDM

Ykirhs
Prince of Bloated Discourse
 
Posts: 250
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2003 4:43 pm
Location: Canada MST (GMT-6)

PostAuthor: KinX » Wed Jun 11, 2003 3:59 am

WrathOG777 wrote:Only spell animation that realy pisses me off is protection from elements seris. I can barely see my charater through that crap. It is realy annoying. It angers me soo bad I sometimes refuse to use it. Would rather eat the damn fireballs that look at that crap.

err, oh sorry, wrong board, I will go back to R&R now...


heh, i rarely use stoneskin 'cos then you can't see how beautiful my armour is...
Never argue with an idiot, they'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience

Image

This statement is false
User avatar
KinX
Elder Sage
 
Posts: 4968
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2002 2:53 pm
Timezone: GMT +1

PostAuthor: eNTrOpY » Wed Jun 11, 2003 4:34 am

Jeffi0 wrote:I don't get why you want to remove those effects, other than See invisibility/Ultravision/True seeing, Clarity/Lesser mindblank/mindblank, Clairaudiance/voiance, Freedom of movement, and Legend Lore. Premonition is borderline, perhaps, cause it just looks so cool :) For the rest, I see no reason why they should be there... Spell Mantles and the Globes, for example, why do you think those should not be visible?


Because I'm a bastard and like nitpicking

eNTrOpY
Sage
 
Posts: 1758
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2002 1:48 am
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba (GMT -6)

PostAuthor: PigLickJF » Wed Jun 11, 2003 5:45 am

Actually, according to the PHB, the invulnerability globes are visible: "An immobile (hmm, are they immobile in NWN?), faintly shimmering magical sphere surrounds you...."

I wouldn't mind doing a little research to see what spells are described as having visual effects, but I'm not going to bother unless it looks like there's a chance this might happen. Then, as I said, I'd need a list of "candidate" spells from the devs, since it is really up to them which spells they think should or shouldn't be visible. Some of them are tough calls for me, while others are pretty clear-cut.

As I said, basically any of the divination spells, and most abjuration spells shouldn't. Stoneskin and barksin, in my opinion, shouldn't be visible, but it is very easy to believe they would be visible, so that one could easily go either way. I'm actually not really familiar with the NWN spell list, so beyond those I can't say much, but Arkaian's list looks about right to me (other than the globes).

PigLick

PigLickJF
Knight of Useless Drivel
 
Posts: 68
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2003 4:35 am

uhm

PostAuthor: Dhalmoh » Wed Jun 11, 2003 12:49 pm

Barkskin and Stoneskin are transmutation spells, that's why they shouldnt be removed :lol:
If they are removed, then you can remove the visual effect of Shapechange too :) would be darned nice to be a dragon without anyone knowing..

Dhalmoh
Prince of Bloated Discourse
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2003 4:12 pm

PostAuthor: Pharik » Wed Jun 11, 2003 2:34 pm

Barkskin is transmutation but Stoneskin is abjuration.

Leaving aside transmutation spells the only spells that have visible auras are Fireshield (Elemental Shield) and Globes.

Pharik
Scholar of Fools
 
Posts: 438
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2002 7:38 pm
Location: England GMT+1 (March - October)

PostAuthor: PigLickJF » Thu Jun 12, 2003 2:33 am

Just because it's transmutation doesn't mean it's visible. However, I really have no preference one way or the other. I'm not really going to bother thinking about which effects should be visible and which shouldn't be, because

A) There's no indication this is going to actually happen; and

B) Even if it is going to happen, the decision of which effects to get rid of wouldn't be up to me anyway ;)

If this is something that is actually being considered by the devs, then I'll happily join in with my opinions/suggestions. Until then, though, it's pretty pointless (well, except for the fun of debate...).

PigLick

PigLickJF
Knight of Useless Drivel
 
Posts: 68
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2003 4:35 am

PostAuthor: Moredo » Sun Jun 15, 2003 12:17 am

I think this should be implemented.. after all this is a hardcore RP server, and the spelleffects promote metagaming. It's really as simple as that.
Always consider alignment as a tool, not a straitjacket that restricts the character.
— AD&D, 2nd Edition Player's Handbook
User avatar
Moredo
CCC
CCC
 
Posts: 7396
Joined: Mon May 26, 2003 3:47 pm
Location: Norway (GMT +2)
Timezone: +2

PostAuthor: Ykirhs » Sun Jun 15, 2003 12:59 am

Actually, if you look at it another way, it promotes non-metagaming...
"We used to hate people,
now we just make fun of them,
it's more effective that way."

-"Dogma" KMFDM

Ykirhs
Prince of Bloated Discourse
 
Posts: 250
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2003 4:43 pm
Location: Canada MST (GMT-6)

PostAuthor: Dhalmoh » Sun Jun 15, 2003 1:41 am

ykrish, you can't just post that without explaining the other way...

Dhalmoh
Prince of Bloated Discourse
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2003 4:12 pm

PostAuthor: PigLickJF » Sun Jun 15, 2003 7:34 am

Well, it is only metagaming if Orleron decides that those spell effects are not actually present IC. It could be that he thinks the visual effects are fine and actually do exist in Avlis, in which case reacting to them is not metagaming at all. From the standpoint of someone trying to run a massive persistant world, I can see how this would be a very valid decision, considering the amount of time and effort that would likely go into making any changes to this issue (although, a certain very generous community member has volunteered some time to help out with it, lol ;)).

PigLick

PigLickJF
Knight of Useless Drivel
 
Posts: 68
Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2003 4:35 am

PostAuthor: Scurvy_Platypus » Sun Jun 15, 2003 7:42 am

So maybe I'm completely out to lunch here....but does this have any bearing on the issue of removing effects? I'm not a scripter really, so just shooting in the dark..

http://nwn.bioware.com/forums/viewtopic ... 3&forum=63

Scroll about halfway down and it's called :SPECIFIC VFX_ Visual Effect Remover
User avatar
Scurvy_Platypus
Scholar
 
Posts: 1212
Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2003 12:12 am
Location: Princeton, NJ. USA (GMT -5)

PostAuthor: Dhalmoh » Sun Jun 15, 2003 12:26 pm

i'm no scripter. But from what i read i got the impression what that script did was remove the visual effect of already present spells.
And in order to do so they put that script on a generic trigger.

We want to remove the effects from the spellscript...

Dhalmoh
Prince of Bloated Discourse
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2003 4:12 pm

Previous

Return to Rules

Who is online

Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], loki70