Ineffective Spell's.

[Dundee Slaytern]

Originally posted by SixOfSpades: True on all counts, but in the difference between Wizard Eye / Farsight and a Stealthed party member, only the first of your points has any validity. And any beastie smart enough to ignore the Summons to attack the invisible party member is "smart" enough to run across the entire map to attack you without even ever having seen you. I'm pretty sure.

Again, you cannot demean the usefulness of a spell by the availability of alternative options. YES, the spell can seem to be useless at times when you have a Thief or Ranger or a Mage to cast Invisibility, but at times when those options are not available to you, the ability to cast Wizard Eye/Farsight is invaluable.

Ah, I thought we were still with the "Tanks forming a meatwall, with Cleric casting a short distance behind" scenario, in which case the Cleric would indeed need to sprint up to the front lines for the spell to do any good.

? I still am. The radius of effect of these spells are decent.

And how many Backstabbing Thieves do you fight in the game? As for low-level spells remaining useful throughout the game, how 'bout Magic Missile?

I did not state that Glitterdust becomes useless towards the endgame, and as a matter of fact, I do use Glitterdust whenever I play a party( when I do not have access to Detect Invisibility).

Backstabbing Thieves cannot Stealth in front of your face, and may only turn invisible again by the usage of Invisibility potions( or via forced scripting).

[shamrock_uk]

Originally posted by SixOfSpades: And any beastie smart enough to ignore the Summons to attack the invisible party member is "smart" enough to run across the entire map to attack you without even ever having seen you. I'm pretty sure.

Slightly off-topic, but playing tactics with a low-level party, using every means at my disposal to sneak past the rather deadly pit-fiend summoning liches (sanctuary, non-detection etc etc) they still seem to know where I am and am able to target me. Is this just cheesy scripting?

[ 02-18-2005, 04:59 AM: Message edited by: shamrock_uk ]

[JrKASperov]

liches are too smart to be fooled by invisibility.

[Link]

Yep, cheesy scripting. It's part of the "let's make things harder" routine Weimer follows. While a lot of his work is admirable to say at the least, there are also a lot of components that don't stroke with reality, or, for that same manner, reasonability.

[Assassin]

? AFAIK, Liches were able to detect invisibility before weimer got his hands on them. After all, they're supposed to be something like level 22 Undead Mages. There's gotta be some perks to being one. (Same thing with the Normal Weapon immunity)

[Link]

Invisibility, in my eyes, is one thing. Sanctuary a completely different thing. To make liches immune to spells like that is not only cheesy, it's also totally unnecessary.

[Assassin]

Well, IIRC, Sanctuary acts almost exactly like Invisibility, only... well, cast by Clerics. If a Lich can see through the Mage's invisibility, why should a Cleric's invisibility be inviolable?

[Link]

Well, I for one see Sanctuary as something completely different than Invisibility. While it may act in the same way (enemies will not attack you) the basis for Sanctuary is that although enemies might be hostile to you they cannot attack you, something different from Invisibility where enemies can attack you, but they just can't see you.

Even though the description of the spell says "as if he's invisible" I still see Sanctuary as a different thing than Invisibility altogether.

Even if we don't agree on this point, I think the debatable issue here is whether or not liches should have the power to see through Invisibility. The fact that they're undead and that they're mages is hardly an argument for them to have special abilities other than less or no restraints living mages of significant level might have. And in this I'm thinking more towards having more wisdom, intelligence, cunning and knowledge of magic than something else.

[Dundee Slaytern]

I get the general impression that Liches can see through invisibility, because AD&D says so.

[SixOfSpades]

I've always had the impression that Sanctuary is indeed different from Invisibility; Invisibility causes you not to be seen, but Sanctuary causes you not to be noticed. Rather like a "Somebody Else's Problem" field, if I may borrow from Douglas Adams.

Call me a cynic, but I'm of the belief that Liches and Dragons can see through Invisibility not from any logical innate sense, but to make them more scary / difficult. That's it. No roleplaying here, just power. Simply being a high-level Undead Mage might render you immune to Normal weapons, but there's no reason it would turn your cold, fleshless eye sockets into infrared motion detectors. Same with Dragons.

The only beings that I think should see through all forms of illusions are Illithids, simply because they're so attuned to reading the thoughts of others, it's impossible to have a thought that they cannot sense long before you can act on it. (Caveat: Confused characters should be able to sneak up on Illithids, because they're not thinking about what they're doing. But good luck trying to get an Invisible, Confused Jan Jansen wandering up to an Ulitharid and landing a Critical Quintuple.)

Liches are nasty enough with their spells, spell immunities, and weapon immunities. You can't do a damn thing to them until their PfMWs run out.

[ 02-18-2005, 03:01 PM: Message edited by: SixOfSpades ]