Dispel Check[]
Should the dispel check be its own category?
--Countess Terra 11:48, 13 February 2006 (PST)
- It couldn't hurt to have a dispel category. The article links to all the spells though, so I'm not sure it's necessary. -- Alec Usticke 14:01, 13 February 2006 (PST)
AoE dispelling[]
As an anonymous user tried to adjust this part of the article to what he thought was default behavior, (see below comment he added)
- "The ability modifier used is intelligence for spells that came from the wizard spellbook, charisma for spells that came from the bard/sorcerer spellbooks and wisdom for spells that came from the Cleric/Paladin/Druid/Ranger spellbook"
I will address that this part of the dispelling is handled by script and due to engine limitations is not able to account for some of the things for which the hard-coded dispel commands account. The script involved for area of effect dispelling is x0_i0_spells.WhiZard 11:56, April 7, 2010 (UTC)
Rolling a 20[]
i couldn't find a answer browsing the wikia but that's probably because it's a silly question, but will a 20 roll dispel things above it's DC limit? lol i feel dumb but i just have to know :) i know the "dice roll" article says something about a 20 roll not doing a auto "hit" when a skill check is involved. but dispel check doesn't use a skill check right [skill as in player skills]? delete this please if it's a total insane question ;) --Pimpernell 16:17, July 22, 2011 (UTC)
Is dispell check 11+CL or 12+CL?[]
Who determined that the DC is 12+CL? I mean, I don't see an error in stating that DC is 11+CL but with tie not dispell the effect. How did you determined that *this* is a bug and thus it must be 12+CL? Pointing that it works this way on other checks - SR (is there any else?) isn't really proof. Some effects stacks and some not as well, some itemproperties too. 77.92.213.119 01:56, June 24, 2012 (UTC)
- Since this is semantics, the driving force was what the game put on the left side of the equation (before DC) and on the right side. The number of instances of DC did demonstrate a pattern that fit the assumption that tie goes to the left side in enough cases that dispelling already was commented as tie goes to the dispeller. In that case the DC would need to be raised by one to preserve accuracy. If the equation were flipped then there might not have been the initial comment of tie goes to the dispeller. I have not diagnosed the SR roll intently enough to see how it regards ties, but there may be a correspondence. WhiZard 13:13, June 24, 2012 (UTC)
- Thats what I thought. So basically, part of the formula were claimed to be wrong on the purpose the check here on the wiki matched with other checks where tie = success. Which is strange, thought that this wiki describes default behavior which in this case is different than how its described. YouKnowWho77.92.213.119 17:56, June 24, 2012 (UTC)
- I mean. From DnD SRD its clear that formula should be 11 + CL. Description in NWN is also 11 + CL. Bioware never confirmed it and neither anyone digging in nwn sourcecode proven the used value. So either there is a bug in formula and its 12+CL. Or the bug is in the fact that tie is failure. Or the tie behavior is intented by Bioware - we don't know that. In my opinion, and the way it works here on this wiki, it should be 11+DC and the article about dispell check should note that tie is not success which is probably bug. That is, unless someone found in source code the value of 12 (that would explain it) or get this info from certain Bioware developer. AgainMe77.92.213.119 08:01, June 25, 2012 (UTC)
- The group that did the coding for dispels is not likely the group that produced the description. The description likely was what WoTC approved. The coding, likely was not as heavily regulated. Since you brought up DnD, the 3.0 SRD is clear that the tie goes to the left side. Whether the coders missed this part of the description or did an off by one error in the calculation or even used a > instead of >= inequality, is up to speculation. The end result is that the coders were effectively one point off from what the description writers were describing. WhiZard 21:10, June 25, 2012 (UTC)
- Just FYI, in game engine code whats added to the effect caster level is not 12 but 11. 77.92.213.119 18:36, January 26, 2013 (UTC)
DC?[]
Is there a DC involved in the dispel check? The individual spell articles indicate that the roll opposes a DC but this article makes no mention of the term. Doesn't DC automatically imply a saving throw of some sort vs. effect or skill? I guess I am confused by the phrase "attempt to avoid a harmful effect" in reference to the effect's owner losing its buffs by virtue of a successful d20 roll. I thought I understood how dispelling was calculated until I noticed that the DC term was popping up and now am no longer sure of the actual mechanics and whether the typical natural roll of saving throws apply. What am I missing? TIA for clarification. --Iconclast (talk) 00:45, April 18, 2016 (UTC)
- The DC is "12 + creator's effective level".
DC does not imply a saving throw; it just implies a die roll (usually). "Difficulty class" is the difficulty of passing the die roll. If a die roll plus modifiers is at least the difficulty, then the action is successful. --The Krit (talk) 04:59, April 18, 2016 (UTC)
NWN EE Dispel Formula[]
According to the EE release notes, the dispel formula was corrected in NWN EE 1.74. "Dispel Check calculation now takes a tie as a remove effect, as specified in the Player's Handbook." MinuY (talk) 13:13, 30 August 2020 (UTC)