Expanding on a discussion here (http://www.sorcerers.net/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=008185;p=3).

Generally I haven't much used save-or-else spells in BG2. But I'm thinking I should try. Anyway, I know there are many fans of Finger of Death out there. And I can't really understand why it's worthwhile using a level 7 slot on this spell. My question is really - why do people seem to rave about Finger of Death rather than Feeblemind?

Consider:
The effect of Finger of death is intant death of the enemy. The effect of feeblemind is to make the enemy incapable of doing anything. This effect is permanent and means that once the fight is over you can whack the enemy at your leisure until he's dead. As a result feeblemind does exactly the same thing as finger of death unless an enemy casts heal, greater restoration, or a sucessful dispel magic. In my experience the AI will hardly ever cast of these spells, although I admit that with mods Feeblemind may suffer here.

Both spells have a save at -2. The distinction is that for Finger of Death the target saves against death, whereas for feeblemind he saves against spells. For enemies that use the fighter saving throw table (which is an awful lot of the enemies) the save against death is 3 points lower (easier) than the save against spells. Enemies who use the fighter or cleric save tables are always more likley to fail against Feeblemind than against Finger of Death. Rogues of level 13 or higher and all wizards are more likely to fail against Finger of Death. There is clearly an advantage for Finger of Death with wizards, but high level wizards don't have such great saves anyway. A level 18 fighter needs 5 to save against finger of death and 8 to save against feeblemind. A level 18 wizard needs 8 to save against feeblemind and 12 to save against finger of death. Feeblemind has broad applicability while Finger of Death is specialized for use against mages.

While Finger of Death does do some damage upon a sucessful saving throw it's 10 hp on average. Nice for spell disruption, but Magic Missile does more damage. I can get spell disruption with a small chance of death from a level 1 chromatic orb spell, which is tons cheaper than Finger of Death. Obviously it has a much worse save, but if spell disruption is what you need Finger of Death is a waste of time.

Feeblemind is only level 6. So mages will always have more slots for it, and it can be placed in a spell trigger. This allows insta-casting of 3 feebleminds at once (or greater malison and 2 feebleminds) to force an enemy to save three times or be dead. The only way to do the same with Finger of Death is to use a Chain Contingency. And I don't see how Finger of Death can ever beat Abi Dalzim's in a Chain Contingency.

I'm not sure about immunities, but I think only death ward protects against Finger of Death, and I don't think anyone is immune to feeblemind. Perhaps this is where I'm missing some information.

Can anyone explain to me the benefits of using a 7th level spell when a 6th level one would seem to do the same thing a little better?

Both spells have a save at -2. The distinction is that for Finger of Death the target saves against death, whereas for feeblemind he saves against spells
In a non-modded game, Finger of Death also requires the target to save vs. spell with a -2 penalty. But if you have installed Improved Anvil, then yes, Finger of Death spell is tweaked to require the target to save vs. death (with no penalty). The change has made the spell more effective against mages but less fearsome against clerics and fighters.

So the save for Finger of Death (in a unmodded) is against SPELLS! I really thought it was against death. I would think that's a bug pure and simple, after all the manual says:
"Save vs. Paralyzation, Poison, and Death Magic: This is used whenever a character is affected by a paralyzing attack (regardless of source), poison (of any strength), or certain spells and magical items that otherwise kill the character outright (as listed in their descriptions)."

If Finger of Death isn't a a spell that kills the character outright, I don't know what is!

So my distinction between FoD and Feeblmind is incorrect? The saves are identical for the two spells?

I don't think anyone is immune to feeblemind. Wouldnt Chaotic Commands offer protection?

The statement "I don't think anyone is immune to feedblemind" is not true in this form. Although I've played BG2 long ago, I believe that Undead are a good example of creatures immune to most enchantment magic. (It would be logical, but BG2 isn't always logical, it has bugs etc.) And IIRC, there are several other creatures as well, who have native immunity to this kind of spells and magical attacks.

Yes, Finger of death requires the target to save vs. Spell in a non-modded game. Strangely enough, even in the AD&D 2nd edition players handbook, the spell's description says that it requires save vs. spell.

Nonetheless, I agree with you that save vs. death fits better with the nature of this spell and this is one of the two reasons for which I have tweaked the spell (in Improved Anvil mod) to require save vs. death.

Well the statement is true in that I do in fact think that no-one is immune. :) Chaotic commands shouldn't make you immune - feeblemind certainly isn't mentioned in the description of CC and feeblemind changes your intelligence stat (so it's a stat drain) rather than messing up your mind. But what it should so is beside the point. I don't know if CC protects against feeblemind.

I'm almost certain that the undead are vulnerable to both Finger of Death and Feeblemind.

Edit:This page (http://members.chello.nl/~j.vanthull/BG2SR/Main.htm) says that enemies that are immune to feeblemind are limited to:
-Devas, Planetars, Fallen Devas and Fallen Planetars
-Mordekainens swords
-Chaotic Commands
-Greenstone Amulet
-Potion of Clarity
-Enraged Barbarians and Berserkers

Undead are vulnerable to the spell.

Meanwhile the things immune to Finger of Death appear to be
-Devas, Planetars, Fallen Devas and Fallen Planetars
-Shambling Mounds
-Avoid Death HLA
-Death Ward
-Hindoo's Doom +4
-Otiluke's Resilient Sphere

At any rate, from what I can tell immune enemies are few and far between for both spells. Death Ward and Chaotic Commands are rearely cast by enemies.

[ October 10, 2006, 22:21: Message edited by: ister ]

I always thought that since it is a magical effect of killing the target, save vs spells is appropriate. (and a penalty is nice to make it sound more powerful then lower lvl Disintegrate) Resisting FoD:it is more like a magical defense, to be able to resist the magical calling of the death, to preserve one's soul. We debated this A LOT in other forum sites, believe me. If we allow save vs death for Finger of Death, then some people will want a save vs breath for fireball/lightning bolt type spells, which will open a huge can of worms. (to be short, fireball and lightning bolt are magical blasts produced by a magical spell. Therefore, magic resistance applies, and it requires a save vs spells:those who have studied the spells exclusively will know how to act against a fireball better. A dragon's breath weapon is different, though, first, it is not a spell, it can not be blocked by MR, it is much like a real, big explosion, or being dropped to lava etc. you can make a save vs breath weapon. Hope these make sense to you, because they do to me. Thank you! :p )

WoB on the other hand, directly copies the effect of a dreadful wail of the banshee, in which the general toughness of the body is tested. That's why mages have a hard time against it.

Anyway, interestingly, FoD works with most undead in BG2, while logic tells me it should not. It only works against living and requires a save vs spells (no penalty) in IWD. Obviously, it is not that hot in IWD. (then again, there are not that many tough enemies in IWD like in BG2 who can easily resist the spell) You can kill pretty much anything with FoD in BG2 though, even golems will fall to it after 3-4 Lower Resistance before hand. :thumb:

Well the manual description for save vs. breath says nothing about spells, whereas the description for save vs. death specifically says that magical spells that cause death are included. But that's besides the point. As far as I know golems and undead are equally vulnerable to feeblemind and finger of death. So why use a 7th level spell when a 6th level spell does the job just as well?

Saving Throws work in a descending order type of system. So Saving Vs Death comes before Save vs. Magic. Even though the Death affect comes from a magical spell. Save vs. Magic actually is more of a catch all for anything else that isn't covered rather than anything else so by the set up of the base game that would mean that BG2 screwed up giving it a Save vs. magic instead of a Save vs. Death.

As for Fireball and LIghtning Bolt. While they may be magical Blasts they are not of the nature of a breath weapon. You'd be better off argueing Cone of Cold as a Breath Weapon than Fireball or Lightning bolt.

As you have pointed out. Breath Weapons work fundamentally different from spells like Fireball and Lightning bolt.

Kind of messed up that FoD works on undead though. they should be immune to such affects.

Demons are immune to Feeblemindedness.

IIRC, feebleminds is lvl 5 spell, not 6. :shake: I know, I know, and I still prefer FoD. Because it is cool! I point my finger and kill the target! Instantly! :thumb: In pen&paper D&D I can also create zombies from the corpses slain by FoD, after the combat is ended. :evil:

As for save vs breath discussion, it is said somewhere in the rules that it shows the pyschial stamina and agility and is used in situations where quick movement is the factor. (kinda like 3e's reflex saves) So it is natural that some 3e experienced players may assume it should be used against explosive spells.

EDIT:

@starwalker

Aye I know the descending order of the saving throw priority, it is stated exclusively in DM guide and Player's Handbook, but then they do not agree on this rule themselves:those same books tell us that FoD requires a save vs spells. Then, Flesh to Stone spell will require save vs petrify? But it requires save vs spells, apparently. I think it is a magical 'spell' effect and should be somewhat different than a medusa's super natural petrfying gaze. (it bypasses MR and requires a save vs petrification/polymorph, while the 6th level 'spell' requires a save vs spells and may be blocked by MR, and spell protection spells as it is a spell!) :confused:

:lol:

[ October 11, 2006, 08:28: Message edited by: Silverstar ]

Heh. Guess your right. Just looked in the book. We always used death for our Finger of Death spells so we were doing it wrong. OH well. Can still learn new things right?

You were right, I couldn't find any traces of a protection on two undead creature files I quickly selected and checked.
feeblemind certainly isn't mentioned in the description of CC and feeblemind changes your intelligence stat (so it's a stat drain) rather than messing up your mind.That's true, but it's still in Enchantment school, so in my interpretation, it applies its effect via enchantment magic. (And not e.g. a physical damage to the brain). And I would fancy undead to be immune to enchantment magic, but actually it's more "realistic" if we talk about specific spells, instead of classification. In this case, however, I wouldn't have made Feeblemind an enchantment spell, but something else. (E.g. necromantic, which causes decay in the brain, which is reversible i.e. can be dispelled.)

By the way, I can confirm that Chaotic Commands protects against Feeblemind. (Protection from opcode is present.)

Heh. Guess your right. Just looked in the book. We always used death for our Finger of Death spells so we were doing it wrong.
Let me quote myself from one of my earlier posts in this thread:

Strangely enough, even in the AD&D 2nd edition players handbook, the spell's description says that it requires save vs. spell.

Nonetheless, I agree with you that save vs. death fits better with the nature of this spell
My point is that not only I was aware of what is written in the book, but I also mentioned it here.

Still, I think the book has gone wrong here and the descending priority order for saving throws should be taken as the base. Save vs. death is the correct one, IMO.

Personally, if FoD used a save vs death (unmodified), I would not bother to use the spell in most cases, fighters can resist it at high levels, and clerics can resist it easily even in lowest levels. Only mages are suspectible to it, BUT they generally have spell protections up, and by the time you dispel them, they should be already dead. So all in all, I prefer the original version of the FoD, save vs spell, at -2 penalty for a spiffy house rule, for my..umm, own tastes. Right. :roll: Sorry Sikret! :p

Finger of Death (when requires save vs. death) is a nightmare for every mage even those of very high levels.

And I don't agree that if you dispel a high level enhanced mage's first wind of protection spells, he is already dead. Enhanced high level mages (specially those in IA) have several cards in their sleeves for you. A successful FoD may save your skin against such high lvel mages.

Furthermore, enhanced enemy mages also cast this spell against your mages; and requiring the PC mage to roll a save vs. death makes the battle much more challenging. This was my second reason for the tweak. PC mages will equally face the danger of FoD in Improved Anvil.

I think this is the reason I prefer IWD style saving throws, ie will, fortitude and reflex. if I had magical powers, and create a fireball, how would you tell the difference between a natural fireball? They are both rapidly expanding pockets of super heated air, there is no difference other than what caused them. If anything, if FoD is affected by MR then it should be subject to a save vs spells. Its a magical ripping out of a soul, if you stop the magic you stop the effect.

I dont like the way the game sometimes nerfs spells that could otherwise be so useful. Take ray of enfeeblement (okay this happened in IWD2 but bear with me, its on the subject of spells and silly immunities). I enfeebled the big ogre near the wandering village, great he was useless. Tried the same thing on a little cold wyrm that was barely sentient, didnt work. Why? Why should a living breathing creature with muscles be immune to an enfeeblement spell? its not an outsider, its not very old or anything, why cant I just make it weak and useless?

I'll bet the same spells wont work on any dragons in BG2, they probably wont work on irenicus or any of the other bosses either. Really hate it when they provide you with a useful spell, then realize they have made it too useful and nerf in all situations where it could actually help.

:thumb: Nice then Sikret, if you wish to limit FoD only to killing mages, and if your AI uses it against PC mages, that's great coding and modding, I must say. But I prefer to use FoD against pretty much anything who is not a mage in my games. :shake:

WoB, on the other hand, is the ultimate mage killer, it is so superior than FoD against mages, it affects multiple targets AND bypasses spell protections (turning, deflection etc.) Add a GM before hand, and watch the mages die. :evil: I want to try this in G3 mod which puts you against an army of mages, literally there were twelve or more mid level mages in that final fight. :p A WoB could make things a lot easier! :roll:

@Proteus_za

Interesting debate about fireballs and other explosions, allow me to tell you my idea:

For example, high level mages are so magical, they have excellent save vs spells. Their natural affinity to magic, great knowledge and powerful aura protect them from most harmful spells. An arch-mage can save himself from the most damaging burst of a fire ball by a simple gesture, perhaps he just moves his hand and is not affected by the blast's whole power as his magical aura and aptitude shields him (which is still not a sure thing, but a good chance) This is a cool idea, I do not think wisened, white-hair&beard stuff arch-magi actually roll flat, or dodge fireballs by their agility when they roll a save vs spells against a fireball, he stands there, cool-headed, and the spell just fails to affect him completely. (he takes half damage)

Ofcourse, when a dragon breaths fire, or an alchemical explosive is lit, the mage in question should work hard to avoid fatal damage, if it is even possible. Or you have a smoldering corpse, perhaps even unressurectable. :p

Silverstar, thanks for reminding me that feeblemind is 5th level. To some extent I think that weakens the case for feeblemind, as it takes up a slot that could be filled with breach or lower resistance.

Sikrit, xyx's page is pretty explicit on who is immune to feeblemindedness, and it does not list demons. Is his page wrong, or am I misreading it?

To both of you, why do you prefer Finger of Death over Feeblemind? Is it the cool graphic effect, or role playing? To me the spell looks like a waste of time, especially now that I know that it's save vs spells and not death.

FoD forcing a save vs spells actually makes it more powerful, as most monsters have fighter levels, their save vs spells is worse. It is weak against mages, true, but devastating against clerics and thieves and fighters. Oh, and it also has -2 penalty:that's one cool spell, after a GM, save vs spell at -6 or die:even Firkraag will fall to it %50 of the time, and this is a BIG chance of killing him out right if you ask me.

Right, but Feeblemind has the exact same save penalty (-2) and works just as well against all enemies. Feebleminded Firkraag is every bit as dead as Finger of Deathed Firkraag. But you can get Feeblemind much earlier, and feeblemind doesn't use up a spell slot that could be filled with a Mordekainen's sword. So why use Finger of Death instead of Feeblemind?

Style. And, well, the target falls down and doesn't clutter up my targeting :)

I haven't seen the page you mentioned, but if it doesn't list demons as immune to feeblemindedness, then it is incomplete in this respect. Demons are immune.

As for why I prefer FoD, one reason is that in my game, it requires save vs. death (because I have installed my Improved Anvil).

Fair enough.

I found the demonic immunity at the link (http://members.chello.nl/~j.vanthull/BG2SR/Main.htm). It's RINGDEMN. Demons are immune to charm, confusion, feeblemind, panic, poison and polymorph.

On the other hand, shambling mounds are immune to kill effects but are not immune to feeblemind.

I prefer Finger of Death over Feeblemind. But it's really more about, um, aesthetics than anything else. I relish the image of the spellcaster standing tall and dark, pointing at the opponent, droning awful necromantic magic of FoD. :cool: *cues dramatic sounds*

My PC is a Dirgesinger bard. FoD was practically made for this disturbed character and his fixation on grave, death. Then again he only gets to cast a limited number of spells - those reflecting the theme of his weakening/cursing powers. Feeblemind is one of them.

Strange than Shambling mounds are immune to slaying effects of FoD. I do not think any other creature (except major bosses, ofcourse) are immune to it.

Then again I never had trouble with Shambling Mounds, to be fair. Can they be disintegrated? :evil:

Dirgesinger bard...that is cool. One of the coolest kits. FoD suits him well. (you have P&P spell progression for bards, eh? Nice!)

Cool pic for a dirgesinger! (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/libris_gallery/84714.jpg)

Silverstar :wave:

That picture made its way over to my collcetion. Thanks, good sir.

Aye, the Dirgesinger is an intriguing kit. My favourite. Kudos to the G3. His appreciation for the finality of life, melancholy etc. makes him a credible option for a Bhaalspawn, I say.

Though I use EoU to have him cast them highlevel spells.