Gold Box Games Forums

General Category => UA Polls => Topic started by: Null Null on September 17, 2019, 02:48:41 PM

Poll
Question: Which spells do you never use and could do without?
Option 1: Bless
Option 2: Cause Light Wounds
Option 3: Protection from Good
Option 4: Protection from Evil
Option 5: Burning Hands
Option 6: Reduce
Option 7: Friends
Option 8: Shield
Option 9: Shocking Grasp
Option 10: Find Traps
Option 11: Silence 15' Radius
Option 12: Slow Poison
Option 13: Snake Charm
Option 14: Spiritual Hammer
Option 15: Invisibility
Option 16: Ray of Enfeeblement
Option 17: Strength
Option 18: Cause Blindness
Option 19: Cause Disease
Option 20: Bestow Curse
Option 21: Hold Person (mage spell)
Option 22: Invisibility 10' Radius
Option 23: Protection from Normal Missiles
Option 24: Slow
Option 25: Cause Serious Wounds
Option 26: Poison
Option 27: Protection from Evil 10' Radius
Option 28: Protection from Good 10' Radius
Option 29: Dispel Evil
Option 30: Flame Strike
Option 31: Entangle
Option 32: Faerie Fire
Option 33: Invisibility to Animals
Option 34: Charm Monsters
Option 35: Barkskin
Option 36: Cloudkill
Option 37: Feeblemind
Option 38: Energy Drain
Option 39: Death Spell
Option 40: Flesh to Stone
Option 41: Mass Invisibility
Option 42: Power Word Stun
Option 43: Fire Touch
Option 44: Mass Charm
Option 45: Otto's Irresistible Dance
Option 46: Power Word Blind
Option 47: Meteor Swarm
Option 48: Power Word Kill
Option 49: Monster Summoning
Option 50: Fireball
Title: Which spells do you never use and could do without?
Post by: Null Null on September 17, 2019, 02:48:41 PM
In response to another question, I've decided to take the Useless Spell poll. (Max of 49 to keep people from clicking everything, but there's a huge number of potentially useless spells, so I made a long list. ;) ) Which spells do you never use and could do without?
Title: Re: Which spells do you never use and could do without?
Post by: hans on September 18, 2019, 08:27:02 PM
Wow!  So, nobody but me uses Spiritual Hammer? 

It's one of my "always have" spells.  If, for example, I should meet up with a higher-type undead, that only magical weapons work on, and I haven't gotten any such weapons in the mod, yet, then a Spiritual Hammer in the hands of my Cleric/Ranger or Cleric/Fighter can make all the difference.
:violent1:
Title: Re: Which spells do you never use and could do without?
Post by: Null Null on September 18, 2019, 09:35:39 PM
I think people prefer to load up on Hold Person or Silence 15' Radius.

But hey, I didn't realize people were using Snake Charm!

Of course now I have to come up with a mod where Reduce is an important spell. ;)
Title: Re: Which spells do you never use and could do without?
Post by: Ray on September 18, 2019, 10:00:22 PM
I ALWAYS have spiritual hammer.

Some designers forget to mark which creatures are "people," but spiritual hammer gives me a magic weapon sometimes before I find any magic weapons in an adventure...and I've lost track of how many times the first gargoyle shows up before the first magic sword...
Title: Re: Which spells do you never use and could do without?
Post by: Ray on September 18, 2019, 10:01:20 PM
Also, isn't Ironskin a good option for useless spell? Or have I been overlooking something all these years?
Title: Re: Which spells do you never use and could do without?
Post by: Null Null on September 19, 2019, 06:52:40 AM
I thought someone did the math and it actually worked. Still, if you tell me it's useless, I believe you.

I figured putting ALL 126 spells would be too long (it's long enough as is at 50), so I did my best to guess and look at what people had already said. If I edit the poll, does it wipe out what's already up there?
Title: Re: Which spells do you never use and could do without?
Post by: Ray on September 19, 2019, 09:14:20 AM

There was a time when I felt like I had a solid grip on all the ins and outs of FRUA, but after all these years, I'm starting to get confused about some of the spell effects that were functional in Gold Box games but nerfed in FRUA. The way durations work when you cast a spell before combat, for instance. The pre-fight battery doesn't work nearly as well as it did in the old games. But some of the actual effects became less desirable, too. I don't remember whether Iron Skin fit that category, or not, to be honest.

I wouldn't give up my career or my family for the memory buffer I used to have, but I sure do wish it was possible to keep all three!

Title: Re: Which spells do you never use and could do without?
Post by: PetrusOctavianus on February 04, 2020, 02:23:39 AM
Power Word Blind must be the most useless spell in the history of CRPGs.
Title: Re: Which spells do you never use and could do without?
Post by: bryanw1995 on June 28, 2020, 01:24:41 PM
I used to have all of the spell effects/durations/etc memorized for everything I used in AD&D v 1, 2, 3, and 3.5...but now I've started playing bg2, nwn, and the gold box set in succession, and I've really confused myself.   So many of the spells are still similar in later versions that it just confuses things when going back to 1.0. :(
Title: Re: Which spells do you never use and could do without?
Post by: Null Null on July 06, 2020, 05:43:55 AM
Heck, you want to laugh, I was playing 5th ed D&D the other day and pooped my pants when a spectre showed up.

Apparently now if they hit you you just lose max HP until you take a rest..and you get a save.

I had to explain that in 1st ed, you had no save, and would permanently lose two levels of experience! (Unless you found a 16th level cleric, of course.)
Title: Re: Which spells do you never use and could do without?
Post by: Anne Nym on May 13, 2021, 07:59:03 AM
I yet have to use Invisibility to Animals and Protection from Good.
While I COULD think of situations a designer could add to an adventure...

Why would a party with high enough levels for their ranger to cast spells bother whether they are seen by animals or not? Most normal animals are only a threat on low levels. A ranger should be able to avoid fighting animals without that spell anyway.
Only would make sense if someone powerful uses animals as spies, like Strahd does in Barovia.

Protection from Good can make sense, but I'd bet situations where you fight good-aligned creatures are extremely rare. Most adventures are geared towards the more heroic player character types, story-wise - or am I wrong?
Would make sense in an adventure more designed for "evil" characters. "Good" creatures normally don't attack without a very good reason, so the chance that you will be ambushed by a group of "good" creatures is extremely low.
Unless you have a scenario where there are misguided "good" creatures or "good" characters who were put under a geas or something.
Title: Re: Which spells do you never use and could do without?
Post by: Andvari on May 13, 2021, 11:31:12 AM
Perhaps it indicates a shortage of dinosaur modules. :)
Title: Re: Which spells do you never use and could do without?
Post by: Null Null on May 13, 2021, 11:46:47 AM
I was gonna say that. There are a whole bunch o' dinosaur icons that never get used. I also think animals just aren't that exciting, though I'm a big-city boy and any of the country folk on here might like to argue with me. ;)

The problem (as Anne Nym so correctly points out) is that by the time you've got Hold Animal at 17th level or even Charm Person or Mammal at 13th, you've got a whole bunch of Hold Monster spells on your mage that are much more useful. So you either hack the classes to change Rangers into Druids or else have a contrived situation with a high-level ranger NPC with druid spells (as below).

I actually did have an area (in an unreleased, possibly-forthcoming mod) where you fought a whole bunch of animals and the high-level ranger NPC with the druid spells was actually vital. (PCs were 5th level or so.) Goldbox-accurate mastodons, mammoths, enormous spiders, giant mantises, rhino beetles, and even giant slugs (though you do wind up giving them dragon acid to simulate the spit attack, effectively making them easy-to-hit dragons) all work as (relatively) high-level enemies. Tigers, crocodiles, and wild boars can be mid-level enemies, and the various poisonous vermin (spiders, scorpions, and even frogs) are dangerous at low level.

Addendum: Protection from Good had one very particular use. It was effective against Tyranthraxus in Pool of Radiance--he was possessing a lawful good bronze dragon.
Title: Re: Which spells do you never use and could do without?
Post by: Olivier Leroux on May 19, 2021, 05:52:32 AM
Quote from: Null Null on May 13, 2021, 11:46:47 AM
Addendum: Protection from Good had one very particular use. It was effective against Tyranthraxus in Pool of Radiance--he was possessing a lawful good bronze dragon.

Just goes to show how weird this alignment system is, doesn't it? The body of someone good possessed by someone evil is still considered someone good, as if the "good" is in your skins and organs or something? Or is it two minds fighting inside the body? But then Protection from Evil should have been just as effective?
Title: Re: Which spells do you never use and could do without?
Post by: Null Null on May 19, 2021, 06:08:16 AM
5% chance it refers to the innate good inside the bronze dragon, as metallics are a 'good' group (especially in 1st ed).
5% chance the logic is the spell is protecting you from the dragon's attacks, its claws and bite and breath rather than the evil spirit directing it.
90% chance they didn't think this out. Remember, this is the same game where they misspelled the name of the final boss. (It was TYRANITHRAXUS on PC, remember?) ;)
Title: Re: Which spells do you never use and could do without?
Post by: Nice2GnomeYe on August 17, 2021, 02:13:05 PM
Affect Normal Fires.

So useless that the Gold Box teams didn't implement it.