cloak of non-detection Options

[kilolima2]

I read in the readme that the cloak of non-detection was removed from the game.

Is this because it never seemed to work in the original game?

Or to improve the tactical challenge?

cheers,

kilolima

[Sikret]

I didn't find any bug in Nondetection spell. It should work similar to the cloak (doesn't it?). I have just reduced the spell's duration dramatically to remove/modify its cheesiness.

[thetruth]

I didn't find any bug in Nondetection spell. It should work similar to the cloak (doesn't it?).

I thought I had already told you about this.

The spell non-detection grants protection from Divination spells to characters under stealth (or rings of Air Control or the SotM) but ONLY for one time.

What I mean is that if enemy casts True Sight then my thief under the effects of the spell will not be detected in the first round but the spell gets "consumed" (you get a message "protection from Illusions removed") and in the second round the enemy will be able to detect him with his True Sight.

Of course against instant Divination spells like Detect Invisibility or Oracle the spell is effective, but not against True Sight/Seeing.
So you didn't have to change its duration either

Btw I just remembered that Jaheira's Harpers Pin grants the same Non Detection of the cloak and of course a thief with UAI can use it. Maybe you should remove that ability?
(OK guys no need to exploit that now )


EDIT: Ah devSin beat me to it for some seconds

This post has been edited by thetruth: May 16 2007, 04:54 PM

[Sikret]

The spell non-detection grants protection from Divination spells to characters under stealth (or rings of Air Control or the SotM) but ONLY for one time.

What I mean is that if enemy casts True Sight then my thief under the effects of the spell will not be detected in the first round but the spell gets "consumed" (you get a message "protection from Illusions removed") and in the second round the enemy will be able to detect him with his True Sight.

Ah, I see. So, the spell's duration doesn't matter all, eh?

I can fix this bug, but I'm not sure if it is worth the attempt. Perhaps, it's better to keep the spell as weak as possible (as it is now). It's a cheesy spell after all. What's your opinion?

[thetruth]

I can fix this bug, but I'm not sure if it is worth the attempt. Perhaps, it's better to keep the spell as weak as possible (as it is now). It's a cheesy spell after all. What's your opinion?

First of all I don't think that you have to make it like the non-detection of the cloak.
When I said that it doesn't work as intended, I said it mainly because the description says that it makes the creature undetectable to "detect spells like Invisibility Purge". But at the same time these spells remove the protection and a second Inv.Purge spell could reveal the character before the duration of the spell expires.

I don't know either if it is worth the attempt to change it. But better to change its duration again to that of the original game.

[Sikret]

I don't know either if it is worth the attempt to change it. But better to change its duration again to that of the original game.

I think the duration still matters, because with the long duration, a character can cast the spell and have the possibility to ignore the first true sight attempt for a long time. With the new duration, he should make use of it as soon as possible.

@devsin

I actually know a good way to fix the spell's bug, but as I said, I'm not willing to. The spell will become cheesy if fixed.

[devSin]

I actually know a good way to fix the spell's bug, but as I said, I'm not willing to. The spell will become cheesy if fixed.

How so? I'd assume using protection from spell for the named spells, but that's not really a fix (non-detection shouldn't protect against true seeing dispelling any illusions). The school and type of invisibility spells could be changed, which really would work, but then you end up with illegal spells (as far as canon AD&D goes). Neither of these really present as a satisfactory solution.