Talk: Spells

Spell chart

Is there already a bonus spell chart somewhere on this Wiki based on caster attributes?

Although it doesn't say in the in game description, doesn't Sorcerers get their spells 1 level later than Wizards.

-- Chrominium

• We could add something like this to the Sorcerer and Wizards category. -- Pstarky 10:24, 11 Oct 2005 (PDT)

• Can we have a spell bonus sub-category? It will show a table (as well as some description) for the spell bonus depending on the casting attribute. This applies to all classes that can cast spells. -- Chrominium 06:19, 23 Oct 2005 (PDT)

• I have added a "Sorceror spells per level" chart. Brick Thrower 10:35, 23 Oct 2005 (PDT)

• That was on my list of things to do but it wasn't what I mean. I was talking about the number of bonus spells you can get (per levl) depending on the casting atributes. ie 14 WIS would give a Paladin 4th level spell. 16 WIS would give an extra +1 (+3 WIS) and thus gives 1 bonus spell for level 1 spells/ Actually I don't actually know if my table is correct. Can I create my own new articles or do I have to be an admin to do that? -- Chrominium 11:20, 23 Oct 2005 (PDT)

• Anyone can create a article and/or edit a article, that is the great thing about wiki. No need to ask the admin. If anyone see something wrong or think it could be done better, it will be pointed out (hopefully on the discussion first). It easy to edit the article or move/rename the article afterwards. -- Pstarky 11:30, 23 Oct 2005 (PDT)

Innate level and immunity

IS Innate level is used to determine all spell based calculations? So if a bard were to cast Ice storm on someone who was immune to all level 4 spells or lower it wouldn’t work even though for a bard it’s a level 6 spell? This is my understanding of it but I could be wrong. It might be a good idea to have an innate level article. --EmpireGuard 07:02, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Scrolls

I read a FAQ somewhere regarding which spells could be found in scroll form and/or bought from stores and those which were not. Does anyone think it would be a good idea to mention this in the spell description? Harleyquin 02:20, 6 January 2006 (PST)

• Sounds like good information to have. I imagine a module creator could make any spell into a scroll, but the default list would still be helpful. Perhaps it should simply be a list in the scroll article? -- Alec Usticke 02:45, 6 January 2006 (PST)

• A little late in replying, but the only (non-epic) spell for which BioWare did not create a scroll is war cry. --The Krit 19:48, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Subcategories

Instead of creating a sub-subcategory for each spell level, would it be a good idea to sort each subcategory (e.g. category:bard spells) by spell level? I think I can create a template that would make this relatively simple to pull off. --The Krit 02:00, 28 March 2008 (UTC) (Link updated. --The Krit 20:04, 14 February 2009 (UTC))

• If you know how to do that, that would be great Programmer 12:53, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

• I made a spell template that can be applied to all spells. (I did heal (spell) and stoneskin to make sure it looks ok.) You should be able to apply the template to each spell article — except the epic spells — then delete all the category lines in the articles themselves. It will take a while to add the template to all the spells, but once that's done, maintenance (future changes) of the spells will be much easier. To get a preview of what the categories by level will look like, see [[:category:druid spells by level]]. (I'm leaving the category uncreated until we decide if this is a good idea or not.) --The Krit 03:58, 1 April 2008 (UTC) (Old link dewikified. --The Krit 20:04, 14 February 2009 (UTC))

• I'm not sure yet if the spells by level feature actualy works. Could you demonstrate? Programmer 14:21, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

• Just check the [[:category:druid spells by level]] link The Krit posted (and asked you to take a look at) and you will see that it works (so far for the 3 spells which have the new template applied). Gruftlord 14:25, 4 April 2008 (UTC) (Old link dewikified. --The Krit 20:04, 14 February 2009 (UTC))

• Yes I have seen that page, I created it myself, but I'am not sure if this is what we want. My original intention was to put every spell cast by a class on a seperate catagory page, the template puts everything on the same page again, which was what I originaly tried to fix. Programmer 14:31, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

• Hmmm.... You might have needed to preview the category page to see it before it was created. I forgot that I changed my account to always preview. If I had remembered, I would have created that page. (The only reason I didn't create it earlier was because if the idea gets turned down, it's one more thing to delete.) --The Krit 15:06, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

• Can't we fix the Template:Spell so that a seperate category is used for each level? Programmer 14:40, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

• I wouldn't call it a "fix", but it can be done. (One category per spell level seems to me like too many categories for too few articles.) --The Krit 15:06, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

• Well I don't like the 200+ spells on a single category page either. Meabee we can find some middle ground, like mage/wizzard spells categorised per level and other classes everything on a single spell class page? Programmer 07:56, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

• There are not 200+ spells in the sorcerer/wizard spell category. Yes, 186 is close to 200, but it is most definitely less than 200. --The Krit 20:15, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

• I would like to have it on one page, but listed by lvl. I think this is more clear than a new page for every spelllvl.

Btw The Krit: how does the further sorting work within a given spell-lvl? alphabetically? Gruftlord 14:47, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

• It should go alphabetically within a spell level. In theory, at least. If that's not how it works out in practice, I'll find a way to make it so. That is, provided we go with the template. --The Krit 15:06, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

• I've updated the template to use existing categories for now, to make it easier to see what it does as it gets applied to the spells. (Because non-existent categories cannot be seen without previewing.) After all the spells have been moved to the template and we come to a consensus about how the categories should be handled, I'll apply that decision to the template. --The Krit 20:15, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

• I removed the sorting by level code from the template for now so that the category listings look better while the spells get moved to the template. Once I finish going through the spells, I'll change the template back and we can decide which option we like better. --The Krit 15:18, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Subcategory decision time

All the non-epic spells are on the template (finally), so it's time to decide which way we want to go with this. To summarize the above, I believe the two proposals are:

1. For each class, have a category with all of that class's spells in alphabetical order, plus have a subcategory for each spell level, as in [[:Category:Arcane Spells level 3]].
   
   
2. For each class, have a category with all of that class's spells broken down by level (with the spells in alphabetical order within levels), as in category:sorcerer/wizard spells.
   Note: If we go this way, I was thinking of renaming the categories to something like "Sorcerer/wizard spells by level", but that is not the main issue at the moment.

I currently have the template set up to demonstrate both options. Which do people like better? (I prefer the second approach because I think the first approach leads to too few articles per category.) --The Krit 12:33, 7 January 2009 (UTC) (Link updated and old link dewikified. --The Krit 20:04, 14 February 2009 (UTC))

vote option #2. Mysticjester 09:02, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

i second the second option :D Gruftlord 14:08, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Call this a mid-vote tally. I see 3 votes for the second option (Mysticjester, Gruftlord, and myself), and 1 vote for the first option (Programmer, even though that preference was stated before both options could be fully seen). Anyone else who wants to express a preference, please do so. If nothing changes in the next two weeks or so, I'll adjust the categories accordingly (which includes deleting the categories that would no longer be used). --The Krit 14:59, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Categories updated. --The Krit 20:05, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Spell schools

I was thinking about adding a new spell School category that lists all spells from all classes, rather than just Wiz/Sor. It would be useful for those who want to see what school it is best to have Immunities to, or focuses in if they plan on cross classing. I also think it might be a good place to add small notes to see what spells can be made using, Craft wand, brew potion, Empowered, Extended…etc. I think the best way to do this would be to have a Key up the top something like

Empowerable spells = (EP) Brewable Spells = (BR) ...etc

Just have those symbols next to each spell as appropriate or if easier have Non-Empowerable (if the list is much shorter). However I think it might be better to have this in the Hints and tips for player’s section. Anyway let me know what people think.--EmpireGuard 01:12, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

I have made up the list Spell school list -- EmpireGuard 8 September 2008

nice work.  :-) Mysticjester 08:54, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Why not make the existing lists include the other spells? This doesn't look like something that really needs a new page. Just put the non-wizard spells in italics or something so that wizards can more easily tell which spells they'd be giving up by specializing. --The Krit 22:01, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

As for combining this list with notations for metamagic and item creation, I have to wonder who is going to look under "spell school" to find out what spells can be brewed into potions. --The Krit 22:01, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

yes I think I have to agree with you I did want to change the individual lists but wanted some confirmation on what people think on that. I’m happy to move all the info into their individual schools. Then change the spell school list into something else like “spell school tips” and move it over to the tips category then add that key. That might be more appropriate. --EmpireGuard 9 September 2008

can you separate the spells by class & then level instead of just by level? i'm going mainly off of how i use the list which is to see what spells a particular character (or build idea) with a particular class can use. Mysticjester 04:47, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Link to fixes

This was brought up in talk:flame arrow, and I thought it deserved a more central (more visible) location. A while ago, several articles in this category had links added to a package of fixes on the Vault, specifically Script, Spell fix compilation by ILikeKillAndYou. I thought it was a nice addition at the time, but it turns out that it does more than just fix spells, so now I am undecided. (One not-fix it does is change flame arrow so that it makes only one spell resistance check, even though there is no indication that BioWare ever intended only one check. I have not looked at the list of changes to see if there are others.)

The question that is open for discussion here is whether or not those links should be kept. While the package does fix some things, someone following a link to fixes is likely going to be surprised (at best) that the fixes come with some other changes. Giving a warning about this in each place where this package is linked would just add clutter to the articles, in my opinion, and I don't see a warning on the flame arrow page being any better in terms of keeping the wiki neat, focused, and informative. So what to do?

For reference (and so they don't have to reiterate their positions here), the participants in the earlier discussion were MrZork (concerned about the lack of warning that fixing BBoD implied changing flame arrow), myself (a little leery of misdirecting visitors by calling the package merely "a fix"), and ShaDoOoW (current maintainer of the package and fully in support of keeping the links as they are). If you want more details about their positions, see Talk:Flame arrow#Multiple spell resistance checks. Anyone else have thoughts to add? --The Krit 02:46, October 9, 2010 (UTC)