Talk: Spell resistance

Article name

Can you please add (effect) to the title as there is a spell called Spel Resistance too. Thank You. -- Pstarky 18:23, 13 Jun 2005 (PDT)

• Done. -- Austicke 18:28, 13 Jun 2005 (PDT)

• I'm getting rid of "(effect)" since most people looking for spell resistance will want this page. I'll add a disambig notice at the top for the remaining people. --The Krit 23:13, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Breaches and lowering spell resistance

Got a question: does mord's and greater spell breach stack for lowering SR? -- 148.177.1.213 December 2005

• Lesser and greater breaches do not stack for lowering spell resistance, so I would assume Mord's does not stack either. --The Krit 04:20, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Will spell breach remove/lower the spell resistance acquired from equipment worn? If so, if I hotkey a ring with the SR enchantment, get breached, I can just unequip then reequip to restore my original SR, right? --Iconclast 04:59, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

• Yes, breaches lower spell resistance from items. No, you cannot simply re-equip your ring to restore your original spell resistance. --The Krit 04:13, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Ratings

Where can I find of list of OC monsters SR ratings? -- 208.58.35.50 November 2006

Stacking

Should there be a note somewhere about stacking with spell focus? That does happen, right? Yt2005 20:35, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

• What do you mean? Spell focus has nothing to do with spell resistance. --The Krit 20:49, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Spell list

Is there a list of spells which are, or are not affected by spell resistance? --99.252.188.33 May 24, 2010

• I would like a list of this as well Profesor323 05:05, February 12, 2011 (UTC)

• A category containing spells that have a spell resistance check might be easy to come up with. (There could even be a category per class, which is likely more useful.) Similarly, I could whip up a category for spells that do not check spell resistance. The problem, though, is that someone looking for this list is probably looking for offensive spells to use against creatures with a high spell resistance. For this circumstance, the former list (yes to spell resistance) would not be that helpful, while the latter list (no to spell resistance) would be so full of buffs that it may be tough to pick out the offensive spells. Does this seem like an accurate assessment to others? --The Krit 22:50, June 10, 2011 (UTC)
• It has been one year since the last post in this section. Does someone who understands the details of the game mechanics know how do identify which specific spells do not check for spell resistance although one might think they do? Please make a list and add it to the content. Thank you. 74.194.39.157 23:58, April 28, 2012 (UTC)The Tower

Technicalities to the spell resistance check and area of effects

The spell resistance check is intended for spells of spell level 0 through 9. All spells above this range can only be stopped by EffectSpellImmunity() (spell mantles and SR are not used outside the 0 - 9 range). Though no level 10 spells that make a spell resistance check exist, one can use area of effects to have the AoE identify itself as a different spell after casting that spell. For example if one cast wall of fire and then epic warding, then only immunity to epic warding (or SPELL_ALL_SPELLS) would be able to resist the wall of fire and SR and spell level absorption would not help; this is because epic warding is a level 10 spell. The fact that epic warding came from a feat does not matter here, as the area of effect does not identify itself as coming from a feat, even though it is taking on the identity of a spell ID used by a feat. If instead a spell with no spell level (like shadow daze) was cast after wall of fire, then even EffectSpellImmunity() would not help creatures entering the wall of fire. WhiZard 02:16, June 10, 2011 (UTC)

• So probably the same bug (or at least same root cause) that makes, for example, blade barrier rather ineffective if turn undead is used after casting? (Turn undead resets the caster level to 0, or something like that.) --The Krit 22:37, June 10, 2011 (UTC)

• The caster level also comes from the last spell/ability but for turn undead that would be the level of the class on whose level up the feat was taken. Thus a pure cleric without level drain would have the same caster level after casting turn undead as he would after casting blade barrier. What would be different is the spell level for blade barrier would change from 6 to 1 after using turn undead (as that has an innate level of 1). If you had a paladin 3/Cleric 27 who first got turn undead on the paladin level, then you would see a caster level decrease from 27 to 3. I have just tested this ability from many different usages and am not seeing any evidence of the caster level being set to zero for area of effects. WhiZard 22:02, June 11, 2011 (UTC)

• I might have gotten the details wrong. I thought it was specifically blade barrier and turn undead, but maybe it was something with a mix of classes involved. :? If my memory improves, I'll (double check on my own computer then) post the correct details for what I was trying to recall. --The Krit 23:49, June 11, 2011 (UTC)

• Here is a separation of commands as to how they react in area of effects

Commands referring to the spell that created the area of effect

GetSpellId()

GetSpellEffectId()

GetSpellSaveDC()

Commands referring to the last cast spell

GetCasterLevel()

ResistSpell()

Commands that lose track of the spell referent

WillSave()

ReflexSave()

GetReflexAdjustedDamage()

FortitudeSave()

WhiZard 17:29, June 12, 2011 (UTC)

• I guess the above statement concerns a standard player character who is not being given extraneous feats through item properties. If you happen to be looking at a monster that was given the feat outside of leveling up with a leveling package or a monster that was assigned a special ability (which default to 0 caster levels if the level is unsettable in the toolset, i.e. user type 2), then I can see how using such abilities would set caster levels to zero for area of effects. WhiZard 22:26, June 11, 2011 (UTC)

• Would adding this information to the article be a positive or negative? Or to put it another way, is there any reason to make this information readily available other than for the purpose of telling people how to bypass spell resistance (such as in the wall of fire / epic warding example)? It is not my intent to suppress knowledge, but if adding this to the article would only (or mostly) serve to aid people in circumventing the game's intent, then maybe not adding it to the article (the middle ground between "suppression" and "promotion") is the best option. --The Krit 20:26, July 6, 2011 (UTC)

• The substituting use is already largely described in quite a few wiki pages. Perhaps simply adding the line "due to game limitations, spell resistance checks for area of effects and other persistent spells are regarded as from the last cast spell of the creator" and a similar line to the caster level article. WhiZard 02:04, July 8, 2011 (UTC)

• That appears to provide the relevant information to those who stumble upon this quirk, without being obvious directions for losers to intentionally take advantage of it. I think I like it. --The Krit 20:14, July 8, 2011 (UTC)

Fireball

I assume the added comment that got rid of AoE was referring to normal fireballs rather than delayed blast (which I have found to be misreporting on SR checks if another spell is cast before the explosion). When I wrote AoE I was thinking of the object AoE by which AoE scripts fired. This would correspond also to the intent of the custom content note (excluding normal fireballs, but demonstrating a quirk in the AoE specific scripts (generated by the AoE object) as already caused by darkness). The change here, though somewhat clarifying, seems to cast doubts on delayed blast fireball, as it does nothing for a time until the explosion. I have no qualm whatsoever with the change made to caster level. I guess I consider spells like fireball as spells having an AoE rather than being an AoE like the AoE object created by spells like delayed blast fireball. WhiZard 21:59, July 28, 2011 (UTC)

• Right, if I had meant something other than fireball, I would not have called it "fireball". Think like the average reader instead of someone who knows the technicalities of the game for a moment -- "area of effect" for most readers is going to mean "affecting an area (rather than an individual)", not "area of effect object". (Not to mention that many readers are not going to realize that area of effect objects exist.) It comes down to not reading words that are not there -- "fireball" does not mean "delayed blast fireball", nor does "area of effect" mean "area of effect object". Also, I don't see the doubt you're seeing for delayed blast fireball -- it does nothing until the explosion, but the explosion does not occur until some time has passed. If people are actually getting confused by the current wording, we could expand "after some time has passed" to "after some time has passed since casting", but I would think that would be implied. --The Krit 23:02, July 28, 2011 (UTC)

• I was finding it odd to term the intended, and perhaps only, effect as "new". WhiZard 02:09, July 29, 2011 (UTC)

• Hmmm... I was trying to draw a distinction from ongoing effects, but using the word "initiate" might be good enough for that. I've dropped the word "new". --The Krit 20:24, July 29, 2011 (UTC)

As for the custom content note, right I missed that. It affects delayed commands as well, doesn't it (despite what the current note says)? If not my change can be simplified. --The Krit 23:02, July 28, 2011 (UTC)

• Custom content note is only for the scripts of the area of effect (on enter, on heartbeat, and on exit), not for any delayed commands nor even scripts independent of spells. It is a truly bizarre coincidence. Thus I am reverting your edit with a slight modification for clarity. WhiZard 01:03, July 29, 2011 (UTC)

• Revert? There was nothing worth keeping? :( No, not really upset, but something tells me there is still room for improvement. I'll shelve this for a bit though so I can look at it with fresh eyes later. --The Krit 20:26, July 29, 2011 (UTC)

• I guess some of the linking could be put back, but the oddity of this SR issue only happening in an AoE script (and in game only in darkness) caused a huge number of play-testings to try to duplicate in any similar situation (from factions to independent scripts), and have been absolutely stumped to find it occurring nowhere else. I took your edit as more of a changing the description to include many of the play-testing types that I had already sorted through. If you care to look through, the symptoms of this bug are obvious: either look for SR checks that display a succeeded message yet report failed to the script, or look for circumstances where a SR check message -not the spell levels absorbed message- is displayed on a creature with a standard mantle and spell resistance. WhiZard 21:41, July 29, 2011 (UTC)

• With all the recent activity here, it is possible that what I wrote and what I thought I wrote are not the same thing. ;) Which is one reason I think I should come back later with a fresh perspective. --The Krit 23:57, July 29, 2011 (UTC)

• ShaDoOoW and I have been going into depth concerning ResistSpell() on the BioWare forums. Due to the complexity and number of obscure weird cases (including a discussion on limitations of exploits) I am not linking this discussion here. What was shown demonstrably is that SignalEvent() has no bearing, and the flukes of darkness are caused due to another bug (which is easily corrected to the point that I had accidentally partially corrected it when setting up a response system). In any case darkness can never register spell immunity, because it is checking the Area of Effect's last cast spell (which is non-existent). I am thus soon going to be removing the custom content note from this article and fixing related darkness articles, giving one day for disagreeing responses. WhiZard 03:48, November 10, 2011 (UTC)

• So you jumped to conclusions again? :) Yes, it would make sense to test this for multiple kinds of areas of effect, rather than just testing it for darkness and assuming that any abnormalities cannot be caused by darkness specifically. I might have to see about making more time for testing some of the claims being made on NWNWiki. --The Krit 18:38, November 10, 2011 (UTC)

• Thing is my tests had three AoEs that were being tested, an altered wall of fire and invisibility sphere were used for comparison both with hostile signal and darkness using the hostile signal, the non-hostile signal, and no signal. WhiZard 19:18, November 10, 2011 (UTC)

• That makes it odder. :( --The Krit 23:24, November 11, 2011 (UTC)

Using a feat

"using a feat to cast a spell bypasses these defenses"

Can someone clarify casting spells from feats?

Does this mean casting a maximized or empowered fireball can bypass spell resistance? Or is this just Feat spells like Hellball? 97.85.168.22 00:05, July 22, 2012 (UTC)

• One cannot use maximize spell to cast fireball. Rather, one can make use of maximize spell when casting fireball. Maybe a subtle difference, but an important one.
  Tell you what, take a look at fear (feat) then report back if you understand what it means to use a feat to cast a spell. --The Krit (talk) 01:25, July 22, 2012 (UTC)

So Shadow Dancer's Shadow Daze is a Feat Spell and not effected by SR. Any spell granted by a feat including the Epic spells would ignore SR. So I have two questions:

1. Is there a category on the wiki of Feat spells?
2. On Arelith RP server someone said a 32 SR was easily overcome by a trick so I thought the maximize feat casting was the trick. They won't tell the trick and say it's not an exploit so what is this method?

--97.85.168.22 21:32, July 27, 2012 (UTC)

• For 1, there is Category:Feats, but no breakdown as to which are "spells" because technically many of them are spells. (For example, starting at the beginning of the alphabet, the following are technically scripted as spells: animal companion, arrow of death, barbarian rage, bard song, blinding speed, bull's strength, cat's grace, construct shape, contagion, craft harper item, create undead, and curse song.)
  For 2, The only "tricks" I know of are to either lower that opponent's spell resistance (with a breach or Mordenkainen's disjunction) or use spells that do not check spell resistance (e.g. great thunderclap). --The Krit (talk) 23:33, July 27, 2012 (UTC)

20 roll

Hello, can level 1 wizard penetrate high SR if he rolls 20 against SR?

Exemple (20 +1 (level) vs. SR 30) will he penetrate?

85.163.103.218 13:25, August 18, 2012 (UTC)Firefox

• No. (See dice roll.) --The Krit (talk) 14:57, August 18, 2012 (UTC)

Feat and user type usage (custom content)

After seeing the disabling consequences in monster abilities and item properties, would it be better to move the notes about automatic failure from feats and invalid return from user type 2 and 4 down to the custom content section? There are four abilities that are not standard spells that actually use the SR check effectively, and it might be better to have these four listed in the general notes where the disabling cases currently are. The four are cure critical wounds (others), evil blight, hell inferno, and planar rift. WhiZard (talk) 18:25, December 24, 2012 (UTC)

• I've added the last two to the article, but cure critical wounds (others) and evil blight are categorized under spells, so would fall under "spell resistance works for spells". --The Krit (talk) 21:03, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

Frequency of SR check(s)for persistent AoE?

For a persistent spell like acid fog, how often is the SR checked... just once when the initial cast is made against whichever foe is within spell range or in regular intervals like OnHeartbeat? Does it matter whether an opponent is beyond spell range (or out of perception) and then later, while the effect still is active, enters the AoE? I was also interested in whether leaving, moving a distance away and then re-entering a persistent AoE caused any re-rolls for the potential target creature. TIA for any clarification. --Iconclast (talk) 15:15, August 17, 2014 (UTC)

• It depends on the spell, but given BioWare's typical scripting, there are probably only two cases: either spell resistance is checked OnHeartbeat or spell resistance does not apply to the effects applied OnHeartbeat. When you enter the area of effect, BioWare gives no consideration to whether or not you've entered it in the past (which is one reason fear auras can be nasty). --The Krit (talk) 22:54, September 6, 2014 (UTC)

Spell penetration feats + crafted magic

Do spell penetration feats such as Spell Penetration, Greater Spell Penetration and Epic Spell Penetration, work with crafted magic (ie would a Wand of ILMS, caster level 13, have a spell penetration of 19 with ESP?)

49.199.145.201 02:36, May 16, 2020 (UTC)

• Crafted items gain nothing special from their creators. On the other hand, sometimes the user of an item (regardless of whether or not the item was crafted) can influence things with feats. I don't know, though, if spell penetration falls into this category. --The Krit (talk) 03:33, May 16, 2020 (UTC)