dispel chance

[FrankTrollman]

I have never seen a dispel cast with more TOTAL gams than the original spell fail. I have never seen a dispel cst with less TOTAL gems than the original spell succeed.

This leads me to believe that there is no open ended die roll involved, and that the bigger spell simply wins. Every time.

Note, the spell doesn't seem to care about how many extra gems are spent, only how many total gems are spent. So a Burden of Time with zero extra gems would need 41+ extra gems to dispel (because a base Burden of Time has 70 gems in it, and the base Dispel has only 30 astral Pearls in it).

Note2, it looks like it's the total gems you actually spent, so if you have been casting spells out of a magic bonus site, it's that much cheaper to dispel them as well.

Note3, this is probably why the minimum Dispel is 30 pearls, as that is coincidentally the minimum cost of any Global Enchantment (Stellar Brilliance, as it happens).

-Frank

[GriffinOfBuerrig]

Are you sure?! That would mach the dispel MUCH weaker, than i though.

[Truper]

Accoring to Kristtofer O:

"There is an openended six side die added to the gem input of every global and dispelling attempt."

I tried to find a definative statement of the way dispelling works, but the above quote was the best I could come up with.

[Gargoyle]

FrankTrollman said:
I have never seen a dispel cast with more TOTAL gams than the original spell fail. I have never seen a dispel cst with less TOTAL gems than the original spell succeed.

-Frank

I have yet to cast either, so I just may need to try so I can see what your talking about. But how do you know how many gems were used by the enemy in an enchantment?

[Shmonk]

That's the "joy" of casting Dispel, it would seem (my first time casting it in a game, results later today). You start asking yourself, how much did he put into that global initially, just the base gem cost, or some extra gems. And if so, how many extra gems should I "waste" to ensure it gets dispelled.

At least that's how I see it.

[Shmonk]

I hope this is not the case. Because I agree, that would make Dispel much weaker than I thought, if it counts TOTAL gems and not extra gems.

<< crosses-fingers >>

[WraithLord]

FrankTrollman said:
I have never seen a dispel cast with more TOTAL gams than the original spell fail. I have never seen a dispel cst with less TOTAL gems than the original spell succeed.

This leads me to believe that there is no open ended die roll involved, and that the bigger spell simply wins. Every time.

Note, the spell doesn't seem to care about how many extra gems are spent, only how many total gems are spent. So a Burden of Time with zero extra gems would need 41+ extra gems to dispel (because a base Burden of Time has 70 gems in it, and the base Dispel has only 30 astral Pearls in it).

Note2, it looks like it's the total gems you actually spent, so if you have been casting spells out of a magic bonus site, it's that much cheaper to dispel them as well.

Note3, this is probably why the minimum Dispel is 30 pearls, as that is coincidentally the minimum cost of any Global Enchantment (Stellar Brilliance, as it happens).

-Frank

Wow, If that is accurate it really makes dispel quite weak.
I wonder how come it's not in the manual or something.
A confirmation from the Devs would help a lot.
@Truper, can you tell us where did you get this information regarding dispel chance?- Does it agree with your experience?

[WraithLord]

There is an explanation oed6 math in Sunray's site.
For some reason though I can read the whole document but when it get's to the part of giving the formula (p(n)= ...) it is left blank. Maybe it's a problem with open office...

Also I found some interesting discussion in the old ibm strategy forums.
It looks like it's about dominions PPP. It also seems to back Truper's explanation.

I admit I'm completely puzzled here.

[Turin]

FrankTrollman said:
I have never seen a dispel cast with more TOTAL gams than the original spell fail. I have never seen a dispel cst with less TOTAL gems than the original spell succeed.

This leads me to believe that there is no open ended die roll involved, and that the bigger spell simply wins. Every time.

Note, the spell doesn't seem to care about how many extra gems are spent, only how many total gems are spent. So a Burden of Time with zero extra gems would need 41+ extra gems to dispel (because a base Burden of Time has 70 gems in it, and the base Dispel has only 30 astral Pearls in it).

Note2, it looks like it's the total gems you actually spent, so if you have been casting spells out of a magic bonus site, it's that much cheaper to dispel them as well.

Note3, this is probably why the minimum Dispel is 30 pearls, as that is coincidentally the minimum cost of any Global Enchantment (Stellar Brilliance, as it happens).

-Frank

this is wrong, I just tested it in sp. First I cast a well of misery(80 total gems) , then I dispelled it with a 20gem powered dispel.

[WraithLord]

Turin said:
this is wrong, I just tested it in sp. First I cast a well of misery(80 total gems) , then I dispelled it with a 20gem powered dispel.

Yes! I was somewhat disappointed with dispel in light of FrankTrollman's explanation.
Thank You Turin for testing this.