|
anti | Sat 18-Sep-10 04:34 AM |
Member since 23rd Dec 2005
175 posts
| |
|
#2801, "High int vs neurological disruption"
|
Hello there.
As I take it, the higher int - the less chance to get paralysed by neurological disruption. So, resist mental spell/commune helps, too, right?
But what about svs para? Do they work too?
How it works exactly? For example, I have felar or a giant with low int, and I'm going to fight transmuter. How shall I prepare myself?
I've been trying to getting eq with - svs para, but even -60 svs para didn't work well enough.
Shall I gather eq svs mental instead?
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
RE: High int vs neurological disruption,
Daevryn,
19-Sep-10 11:25 AM, #1
RE: High int vs neurological disruption,
anti,
19-Sep-10 11:44 AM, #2
RE: High int vs neurological disruption,
Daevryn,
19-Sep-10 02:00 PM, #3
Thanks a lot, now it's all clear! (nt),
anti,
19-Sep-10 03:24 PM, #4
Saves vs Spell help too, no? nt,
vargal,
20-Sep-10 01:39 AM, #5
RE: Saves vs Spell help too, no? nt,
Daevryn,
20-Sep-10 08:05 AM, #6
| |
  |
anti | Sun 19-Sep-10 11:44 AM |
Member since 23rd Dec 2005
175 posts
| |
|
#2805, "RE: High int vs neurological disruption"
In response to Reply #1
|
Ok, thanks!
Also, a bit more precise questions: 1. What is better for the giant to save his big butt from getting held - helm with -10 vs para, or resist mental -7? 2. Helm with -19 vs para or illithid head charm? 3. Resist mental -7 or illithid head charm?
Thanks again, sorry if I'm annoying, but really trying to understand how it works. Because I always thought that low int increases chances on successful paralysis and resist mental somehow compensate those things?
|
|
|
|
    |
Daevryn | Sun 19-Sep-10 02:00 PM |
Member since 13th Feb 2007
11117 posts
| |
|
#2806, "RE: High int vs neurological disruption"
In response to Reply #2
|
To the best of my knowledge, saves vs. mental is not helpful in this case.
Resist mental isn't useless (it cuts down the damage, for example) but if you want to be held less, your best answer is always more save vs. paralysis.
|
|
|
|
      |
anti | Sun 19-Sep-10 03:24 PM |
Member since 23rd Dec 2005
175 posts
| |
|
#2807, "Thanks a lot, now it's all clear! (nt)"
In response to Reply #3
|
|
|
      |
vargal | Mon 20-Sep-10 01:39 AM |
Member since 07th Apr 2004
384 posts
| |
|
#2810, "Saves vs Spell help too, no? nt"
In response to Reply #3
|
This message contains no text.
|
|
|
|
        |
Daevryn | Mon 20-Sep-10 08:05 AM |
Member since 13th Feb 2007
11117 posts
| |
|
#2811, "RE: Saves vs Spell help too, no? nt"
In response to Reply #5
|
I don't think so, no. Maybe vs. secondary effects.
|
|
|
|
|