Previous Thread
Previous
Expand All
Collapse All
Ignore Author
Reply
>We had a big discussion last night, and I think TM damage may be getting an uptweak in efficiency per mana spent. In other words, using more mana in your TM spells will increase the damage further than it was before.
This is certainly good news!
>As I lack good statistics, what % of 100% of mana possible do you generally cast TM spells at? The more info we have here the better.
I have a lot of data using 40 mana casts of many of the Necromancer TM spell list, that is about 40% of the cap depending on spell. Since casting at higher then 40 mana isnt really efficient damage wise, this pending change has my attention. Id love to see capped TM spells to REALLY bring the hurt, especially since I am spending close to 35% of my attunement (depending on room mana, of course) to cast them with 850 ranks of Attunement.
Elusive
mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur
The bows are actually a really great frame of reference for scaling damage by mana I think. Something like:
Capped mana multi-strike "shotgun" spell: Hits like HX with pulzones (in terms of total vit and damage per cast) but can't be targeted to a specific area.
Capped mana regular TM spell: Hits like LX with pulzones, or somewhere between HX-regular ammo and LX with pulzones.
70-just below cap TM spell: Hits like comp bow with basilisk arrows.
50-70: Hits like longbow with basilisk arrows.
35-50: Hits like shortbow with basilisk arrows.
15-35: Hits like shortbow with regular arrows.
5-15: Hits like sling with regular ammo.
On this kind of scaling, absolute top end TM would be strong but still not top DPS dog (no way past heavy melee weapons or some of the thrown templates). Further, the crossbows themselves have fletching ahead, so they'll still be improved (i.e., TM isn't stealing their thunder at the top end).
Very excited that this is being examined.
Capped mana multi-strike "shotgun" spell: Hits like HX with pulzones (in terms of total vit and damage per cast) but can't be targeted to a specific area.
Capped mana regular TM spell: Hits like LX with pulzones, or somewhere between HX-regular ammo and LX with pulzones.
70-just below cap TM spell: Hits like comp bow with basilisk arrows.
50-70: Hits like longbow with basilisk arrows.
35-50: Hits like shortbow with basilisk arrows.
15-35: Hits like shortbow with regular arrows.
5-15: Hits like sling with regular ammo.
On this kind of scaling, absolute top end TM would be strong but still not top DPS dog (no way past heavy melee weapons or some of the thrown templates). Further, the crossbows themselves have fletching ahead, so they'll still be improved (i.e., TM isn't stealing their thunder at the top end).
Very excited that this is being examined.
I am not a fan of this idea at all. Requiring more mana to do damage equal to weapons at end game is one thing, but then you have people not at end game potentially being shafted, as they can far easier get a heavy weapon than they can maximize a spell. Furthermore, as mana is effectively endurance for spells, what weapon are people swinging that drop them a quarter or more of their endurance per swing? As of right now, I can swing indefinately with a weapon, but I cannot throw even my personal cap spells endlessly. Again, a better option is to simply make target a true physical action so that a swing is a cast.
I think if it was comparable to weapons in that 10-50 mana would do grazing against something over your head and 50-100 mana would do light to solid damage (like using a Dagger or a Greatsword with the same skill in it) assuming you landed the blow
while something at level or under you 10-50 would be doing solid- sometimes extreme hits, and 50-100 would be like doing extreme+ constantly - since you're already dominating it, why not use the faster feint(less mana) to do capped damage over the slower capped damage of a chop(max mana)
the analogy could be better...
Tm foci doesn't really appeal to me much as something I NEED to have, but I can see the appeal of higher accuracy, mana conservation, or something that pretty much made a TM spell cyclical until mana's gone or target's dead, also just having fun with it.
Would this be something you could swap out quicky? or would there be an like a 5-10 RT invoke to fire it up?
I could also see disposable ones having more use- drive a fire rain staff into the ground and walk away while it lasts 1-2 roisaen. Things like that: disposable tremor device, tkt tornado top, things you could just toss down say good-bye as it melts into the room and walk away(probably with being set to open or having some kinda outrage or fine) - would be neat if user not maker could adjust these to group, area, creature, self settings... Room anti-lightning damage lightning rod, or rod that shoots lightning around the room, something that auto-zombifies monsters killed in a room, so on...
_________________________________
An agonizing pain fills you as you feel your tongue turn to powder in your mouth! Through a haze of uncertainty and loss, you realize that something you just said was very wrong.
while something at level or under you 10-50 would be doing solid- sometimes extreme hits, and 50-100 would be like doing extreme+ constantly - since you're already dominating it, why not use the faster feint(less mana) to do capped damage over the slower capped damage of a chop(max mana)
the analogy could be better...
Tm foci doesn't really appeal to me much as something I NEED to have, but I can see the appeal of higher accuracy, mana conservation, or something that pretty much made a TM spell cyclical until mana's gone or target's dead, also just having fun with it.
Would this be something you could swap out quicky? or would there be an like a 5-10 RT invoke to fire it up?
I could also see disposable ones having more use- drive a fire rain staff into the ground and walk away while it lasts 1-2 roisaen. Things like that: disposable tremor device, tkt tornado top, things you could just toss down say good-bye as it melts into the room and walk away(probably with being set to open or having some kinda outrage or fine) - would be neat if user not maker could adjust these to group, area, creature, self settings... Room anti-lightning damage lightning rod, or rod that shoots lightning around the room, something that auto-zombifies monsters killed in a room, so on...
_________________________________
An agonizing pain fills you as you feel your tongue turn to powder in your mouth! Through a haze of uncertainty and loss, you realize that something you just said was very wrong.
A hard RT on targeting won't work because of harnessing and camb charging etc.
<<Requiring more mana to do damage equal to weapons at end game is one thing, but then you have people not at end game potentially being shafted, as they can far easier get a heavy weapon than they can maximize a spell.>>
That's true, but the alternative is TM always sucks for everyone. Just like augmentation, warding, and every other magic skill, there should be advantages to increasing your skill in it. Right now, the only advantage to increased TM skill is an increase in "to-hit," but it makes perfect sense to have increasing skill allow for an expansion of damage too (particularly since even at end game, the mana amounts we're talking about limit the number of casts).
That said, to help newer mages, I'm sure they could also use the symbosis system and foci to allow artificially increased damage at lower mana (i.e., treating your 20 mana cast like a 60 mana cast) with restrictions they felt were necessary (foci came with a lot of them).
<<Requiring more mana to do damage equal to weapons at end game is one thing, but then you have people not at end game potentially being shafted, as they can far easier get a heavy weapon than they can maximize a spell.>>
That's true, but the alternative is TM always sucks for everyone. Just like augmentation, warding, and every other magic skill, there should be advantages to increasing your skill in it. Right now, the only advantage to increased TM skill is an increase in "to-hit," but it makes perfect sense to have increasing skill allow for an expansion of damage too (particularly since even at end game, the mana amounts we're talking about limit the number of casts).
That said, to help newer mages, I'm sure they could also use the symbosis system and foci to allow artificially increased damage at lower mana (i.e., treating your 20 mana cast like a 60 mana cast) with restrictions they felt were necessary (foci came with a lot of them).
TM should only affect your chance to hit imo. Increased ranks in weapons don't technically make you hit harder, you hit better/more accurately. More strength and a heavier weapon help make that damage higher. Again, saying that a person should cast a spell at 102 to hit like a truck on something at level isn't a fair comparison between weapons and magic at that point. A weapon will always do about the same damage to the same defenses based on the skill difference, strength/agi, and weapon stats. This is also easy to maintain for extremely long periods of time as I do not take endurance hits like I take mana hits when in combat now that Ive trained stamina up.
Under the proposed system, to have weapons hit like top end weapons at high levels, you have to have it at max capacity, which greatly limits how often you can cast, or you are stuck charging/harnessing for increased roundtimes. Both ways though dig into your harness pool eventually and you are tapped out just to have a few spells similiar to good weapons.
That isn't exactly a fair tradeoff in my opinion at high levels, and at low levels it is worse to say a low prep spell is comparable to using a le and a max prep at 2he, since at level 1 a person can simply grab a 2he at level and smash rats better than a mage would be targetting critters.
I'd like to see some kind of interaction with the foci. Placing a spell in it and then doing things with it to augment the spell, perhaps charging it periodically (doubling up on Arcana usage; maybe large foci are capable of holding 1,000 mana)
One advantage to such a get up would be to allow TM (or Debilitation maybe too) be cast in low mana rooms.
In the long term, I'd like to see the choice to use a foci and TM solely output as much damage, be as viable, as swinging a weapon.
One advantage to such a get up would be to allow TM (or Debilitation maybe too) be cast in low mana rooms.
In the long term, I'd like to see the choice to use a foci and TM solely output as much damage, be as viable, as swinging a weapon.
<<Increased ranks in weapons don't technically make you hit harder, you hit better/more accurately. More strength and a heavier weapon help make that damage higher.>>
That's true, but what kind of strength and stamina do you think you need to regularly use a 130-stone greatsword? What kind of skills do you think must be developed in order to attain those stats? There can be a middle ground in TM damage based on mana; just because a person can't quite use a 130 stone sword on the reg yet doesn't mean they're totally being screwed by the weapon system. That's just my take anyway, I'm glad there's a lot of minds thinking about the TM issue regardless.
That's true, but what kind of strength and stamina do you think you need to regularly use a 130-stone greatsword? What kind of skills do you think must be developed in order to attain those stats? There can be a middle ground in TM damage based on mana; just because a person can't quite use a 130 stone sword on the reg yet doesn't mean they're totally being screwed by the weapon system. That's just my take anyway, I'm glad there's a lot of minds thinking about the TM issue regardless.
Also, an extreme example to be sure. Say you have two mages of same guild, same stats. 0 defense. one is 1000 tm, 100 harness. One is 100 tm, 1000 harness. the 100 tm would not be able to cap a spell like Acid splash, but would be able to put about 50 mana into it. This would eat up pretty much no harness though at his level. The other mage would be able to max his spell, but probably wouldnt be able to harness the mana to get all 102 into it, and if he did would probably get one shot. Would this mean that the 100 TM mage is better off than the 1000 tm mage if the two fought?
I agree that pumping more mana into targetting spells should improve them, but if we want weapons and spells to have parity it has to be more than simply saying put this much mana into it and your hitting for roughly equivalent, for the few attacks you can get in. If targetting had a real roundtime instead of the psuedo roundtime it currently has, it would go a long way to allowing spells and weapons to be compared fairly. Then, more mana can fairly equate to a heavier weapon, or more crit weighting, whatever.
Just seems that if you want maxed tm to hit for apocolyptic strikes similar to weapons on at level critters, its not really an at level critter, and will eventually lead to weapon users becrying the OPness of target all over again. And if the critter/person isn't at level, why would we have to use full power anyways?
>As I lack good statistics, what % of 100% of mana possible do you generally cast TM spells at? The more info we have here the better.
For non-cyclic TM, I cast at min prep plus 5 mana when hunting. I honestly don't really notice much of a difference in damage done if I increase mana. As is, it just about compares to store-bought level weapons in terms of killing time.
Between casting high mana buffs and running a cyclic, I can't really spare high mana amounts for slinging spells.
I definitely think that a steeper damage curve is needed with a much higher cap for top-end mana. I like the hypothetical scale Traim posted. (Except make min-mana slightly better than sling. Nobody should have to deal with that, ever.)
For non-cyclic TM, I cast at min prep plus 5 mana when hunting. I honestly don't really notice much of a difference in damage done if I increase mana. As is, it just about compares to store-bought level weapons in terms of killing time.
Between casting high mana buffs and running a cyclic, I can't really spare high mana amounts for slinging spells.
I definitely think that a steeper damage curve is needed with a much higher cap for top-end mana. I like the hypothetical scale Traim posted. (Except make min-mana slightly better than sling. Nobody should have to deal with that, ever.)
Going back to the Original post about Foci and the possible effects...
1). % Damage increase
I see this as being a very popular choice, much like weapons people will likely chase the best damage stats.
2). Add an additional type of damage to the spell
Would this spread the damage out, or would it be extra damage? 3.1 made most spells cap out with 2 damage types because more then that actually made spells weaker.
3). Add extra force to the attack to stun/knockback enemies
This could be fun. Increasing stuns/balance loss could be an interesting way to make TM more useful, however I would need to do some tests with it to know for sure.
4). Potential tie-ins to TM based maneuvers
Interesting, would need more info on potential TM maneuvers to say much more.
5). Add bonus mana to the cast spell
Something I see as being another popular choice since increased mana generally means additional damage.
6). % chance to pierce TM barriers
Im not sure how many people would choose this over the others. From what I gather from the boards most people already run a spell stance that reduces Integrity in favor of Potency.
7). Reduction in targeting time maybe?
We have a spell feat that does this, though we only gain one second from it. Potentially powerful depending on the reduction amount, caveat if you can afford the attunement cost of the higher cast rate.
Elusive
mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur
1). % Damage increase
I see this as being a very popular choice, much like weapons people will likely chase the best damage stats.
2). Add an additional type of damage to the spell
Would this spread the damage out, or would it be extra damage? 3.1 made most spells cap out with 2 damage types because more then that actually made spells weaker.
3). Add extra force to the attack to stun/knockback enemies
This could be fun. Increasing stuns/balance loss could be an interesting way to make TM more useful, however I would need to do some tests with it to know for sure.
4). Potential tie-ins to TM based maneuvers
Interesting, would need more info on potential TM maneuvers to say much more.
5). Add bonus mana to the cast spell
Something I see as being another popular choice since increased mana generally means additional damage.
6). % chance to pierce TM barriers
Im not sure how many people would choose this over the others. From what I gather from the boards most people already run a spell stance that reduces Integrity in favor of Potency.
7). Reduction in targeting time maybe?
We have a spell feat that does this, though we only gain one second from it. Potentially powerful depending on the reduction amount, caveat if you can afford the attunement cost of the higher cast rate.
Elusive
mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur
I like the targeted magic focus proposal and would like to see something like that implemented. However, I think that Elriic's idea of simply penalizing any weapon attacks performed during targeting is an elegant solution to the issue of people doing too much DPS by attacking with a weapon while a spell is being targeted. It is the most narrowly tailored way to address the actual issue, sparing mages who just cast spells from the collateral damage of the current TM damage mechanics.
Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall rank!
Vote for DragonRealms on Top MUD Sites: http://www.topmudsites.com/vote-DragonRealms.html
Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall rank!
Vote for DragonRealms on Top MUD Sites: http://www.topmudsites.com/vote-DragonRealms.html
>>We had a big discussion last night, and I think TM damage may be getting an uptweak in efficiency per mana spent. In other words, using more mana in your TM spells will increase the damage further than it was before.
CHEERS!! Yay. The way it supposed to be where Ranks = accuracy to hit higher level stuff and #of man = more damage. YAY!
CHEERS!! Yay. The way it supposed to be where Ranks = accuracy to hit higher level stuff and #of man = more damage. YAY!
>>Umm people are not doing too much DPS. I play both a MM and a WM and can tell you that definately not doing too much DPS.
This would need some kind of metric to explain. As it is, War Mages can have an AoE cyclic going while casting straight TM while using physical weapons. Those are some nice options to have going in tandem.
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
This would need some kind of metric to explain. As it is, War Mages can have an AoE cyclic going while casting straight TM while using physical weapons. Those are some nice options to have going in tandem.
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
>>I'd like to see increases in mana pool to coincide with this change. Couple capped spells and ur toast even harnessing a bunch it doesn't take long.
IMO, I'd rather just see the caps of most TM and Debilitation spells lowered. So if a spell required 100 TM to start casting at minimum (let's say 10 mana) and 1000 TM to start casting at maximum (let's say 100 mana), keep the 100TM for 10 mana where it is, and move the 1000TM cap requirement to 30 mana. You'll still have difficulty scale as it always does, but each point can matter more.
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
IMO, I'd rather just see the caps of most TM and Debilitation spells lowered. So if a spell required 100 TM to start casting at minimum (let's say 10 mana) and 1000 TM to start casting at maximum (let's say 100 mana), keep the 100TM for 10 mana where it is, and move the 1000TM cap requirement to 30 mana. You'll still have difficulty scale as it always does, but each point can matter more.
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
>>Tigarclaw: Umm people are not doing too much DPS. I play both a MM and a WM and can tell you that definately not doing too much DPS.
Personally, I think that is more of a theoretical concern than something that players are actually doing, but it's often raised as a justification for why TM damage isn't on par with weapon damage. Adding a penalty to weapon attacks that are performed during spell preps/targeting neatly addresses the issue.
Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall rank!
Vote for DragonRealms on Top MUD Sites: http://www.topmudsites.com/vote-DragonRealms.html
Personally, I think that is more of a theoretical concern than something that players are actually doing, but it's often raised as a justification for why TM damage isn't on par with weapon damage. Adding a penalty to weapon attacks that are performed during spell preps/targeting neatly addresses the issue.
Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall rank!
Vote for DragonRealms on Top MUD Sites: http://www.topmudsites.com/vote-DragonRealms.html
>>Is that live in 3.1 because it doesn't appear to be in 3.0
I just checked, and yes the penalty is working correctly in Prime.
"I have no data yet. It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts."
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
I just checked, and yes the penalty is working correctly in Prime.
"I have no data yet. It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts."
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
>>the thought of having to throw out max mana spells to damage mobs
Ok, so don't do it? I mention a damage increase and that invariable kicks off the complaints we're making TM do less damage :sigh:
"I have no data yet. It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts."
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
Ok, so don't do it? I mention a damage increase and that invariable kicks off the complaints we're making TM do less damage :sigh:
"I have no data yet. It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts."
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
>>TM should only affect your chance to hit imo
TM uses core combat. In core combat, more skill makes you hit more often, and increases your damage up to a 200% cap. It isn't possible to change this without breaking everything. Nor would it make sense to change it. Having every bloody form of damage on its own system is how we got here in the first place!
>>Under the proposed system, to have weapons hit like top end weapons at high levels, you have to have it at max capacity,
This is how the system has worked since it was released 15+ years ago. There have been no proposed changes to it beyond increasing the amount of damage awarded by using more mana. Hearing all the mixed-up responses here has been very confusing to me :(
>>Damage scaling
The TM weapon damage today starts at about basilisk arrow quality and moves up from there. There were many reports of TM doing more damage than melee weapons at the low end (low-prep, targeting only a few seconds), and getting very little return from using max mana. I just want to see that change, so there is a reason to use more mana in your spells.
>>Adding additional damage type
This would add a new type of damage. Like ignite does for weapons, a fire foci would add fire damage to EVERY TM spell cast.
>>penalizing any weapon attacks performed
We'll just have to see how it works out in the end.
"I have no data yet. It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts."
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
TM uses core combat. In core combat, more skill makes you hit more often, and increases your damage up to a 200% cap. It isn't possible to change this without breaking everything. Nor would it make sense to change it. Having every bloody form of damage on its own system is how we got here in the first place!
>>Under the proposed system, to have weapons hit like top end weapons at high levels, you have to have it at max capacity,
This is how the system has worked since it was released 15+ years ago. There have been no proposed changes to it beyond increasing the amount of damage awarded by using more mana. Hearing all the mixed-up responses here has been very confusing to me :(
>>Damage scaling
The TM weapon damage today starts at about basilisk arrow quality and moves up from there. There were many reports of TM doing more damage than melee weapons at the low end (low-prep, targeting only a few seconds), and getting very little return from using max mana. I just want to see that change, so there is a reason to use more mana in your spells.
>>Adding additional damage type
This would add a new type of damage. Like ignite does for weapons, a fire foci would add fire damage to EVERY TM spell cast.
>>penalizing any weapon attacks performed
We'll just have to see how it works out in the end.
"I have no data yet. It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts."
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
To avoid discouragement for you Kodius, and to summarize what I believe has been the range of feedback on the specific scaling proposal (all numbers and ratios totally made up:
Status quo: TM does only "50" damage and many mages think it should do 100.
Proposal: At capped mana, GMs might make it so that instead of 50 mana, you do 100.
Comments A: That's cool because it's much better than TM damage being 50 no matter what.
Comments B: That sucks because you shouldn't have to cap a spell to get 100 damage out of TM.
I believe comments section B would fall into the category of "please do more" instead of "don't even do the Proposal."
Also, I think your foci idea was the bridge between the two groups of comments. If you increase damage scaled by mana (akin to the ranged ladder I just threw out for an idea), and then you give lower mages the options of "reaching higher" on the effective mana ladder via the use of foci with restrictions, you meet the concerns of A and you meet B around half-way. The utility of foci is not nullified by the proposal. Even if I can use TM at the cap to hit very hard, I would still love to have a focus for some of the other effects. And, for mana management reasons, it would be incredible to use a focus to have 70 mana hit like 105 at the expense of weapon use.
Acknowledging status quo TM damage, what you have proposed is (I hope) the addition of a "130 stone greatsword" option to a lot of characters currently stuck using "slings" no matter what. For what should be obvious reasons, it would be awesome if you opened up the possibility to us again of doing greatsword damage, even if it's not all of us at once. Not everyone gets to effectively use a 130 stone greatsword out of the character manager.
In other words, please go forward with the scaling and increase damage with mana use. You can develop foci and/or additional restrictions on targeting/weapon use/cyclics if it becomes needed, but I think straight up re-scaling damage via mana is the most basic and most important first step.
Status quo: TM does only "50" damage and many mages think it should do 100.
Proposal: At capped mana, GMs might make it so that instead of 50 mana, you do 100.
Comments A: That's cool because it's much better than TM damage being 50 no matter what.
Comments B: That sucks because you shouldn't have to cap a spell to get 100 damage out of TM.
I believe comments section B would fall into the category of "please do more" instead of "don't even do the Proposal."
Also, I think your foci idea was the bridge between the two groups of comments. If you increase damage scaled by mana (akin to the ranged ladder I just threw out for an idea), and then you give lower mages the options of "reaching higher" on the effective mana ladder via the use of foci with restrictions, you meet the concerns of A and you meet B around half-way. The utility of foci is not nullified by the proposal. Even if I can use TM at the cap to hit very hard, I would still love to have a focus for some of the other effects. And, for mana management reasons, it would be incredible to use a focus to have 70 mana hit like 105 at the expense of weapon use.
Acknowledging status quo TM damage, what you have proposed is (I hope) the addition of a "130 stone greatsword" option to a lot of characters currently stuck using "slings" no matter what. For what should be obvious reasons, it would be awesome if you opened up the possibility to us again of doing greatsword damage, even if it's not all of us at once. Not everyone gets to effectively use a 130 stone greatsword out of the character manager.
In other words, please go forward with the scaling and increase damage with mana use. You can develop foci and/or additional restrictions on targeting/weapon use/cyclics if it becomes needed, but I think straight up re-scaling damage via mana is the most basic and most important first step.
>As I lack good statistics, what % of 100% of mana possible do you generally cast TM spells at? The more info we have here the better.
I don't PVP (though I should probably bite the bullet already), but in PVE I rarely, if ever, bother to cast over min prep. I might harness another 10 mana if I have 3 seconds to waste, because that doesn't affect my attunement. The damage from one spell fully prepped pales in comparison to simply punching the monster in the face three times, barehanded, with half as much skill.
I doubt I would use TM at all in PVP, it doesn't seem worth it. The same mana could be dumped into a disabler that simultaneously increases my offensive and defensive advantages.
>Forgive my snark, but welcome to the life of a warrior mage.
I don't PVP (though I should probably bite the bullet already), but in PVE I rarely, if ever, bother to cast over min prep. I might harness another 10 mana if I have 3 seconds to waste, because that doesn't affect my attunement. The damage from one spell fully prepped pales in comparison to simply punching the monster in the face three times, barehanded, with half as much skill.
I doubt I would use TM at all in PVP, it doesn't seem worth it. The same mana could be dumped into a disabler that simultaneously increases my offensive and defensive advantages.
>Forgive my snark, but welcome to the life of a warrior mage.
>>When was the choice made to make TM a secondary attack option for everyone? Several years ago I rolled up two warrior mages, and they are now 150th circle each, but thank god I didn't pick moon mage at the time, I bet most of them are feeling quite sick about all this.
>>I don't want TM as a secondary option, I'm a mage, its my primary skill, I want it as my primary attack and weapons to be my secondary attack, just like my skillsets are laid out. If I have 800 ranks of TM and only 500 ranks of large edge, then I want my TM to do 800 ranks worth of damage and my large edge to do 500 ranks of damage.
i completely agree with this, have we completely forgotten that weapons teach as either secondary or tertiary for all mages?? that's the equalizer, that always was the equalizer why can i not use my TM as the damage causing tool it was created to be? i am already hampered by the fact that i learn weapons at a tert rate as a moonie, now you're telling me that my ranks in TM should be worth less simply because i can pair it with a weapon?
i like the idea of TM foci but i do not want them to be required just to be on par with weapon damage.
Damian, a voice from the distant and long-forgotten past.
AIM:DamianDR
>>I don't want TM as a secondary option, I'm a mage, its my primary skill, I want it as my primary attack and weapons to be my secondary attack, just like my skillsets are laid out. If I have 800 ranks of TM and only 500 ranks of large edge, then I want my TM to do 800 ranks worth of damage and my large edge to do 500 ranks of damage.
i completely agree with this, have we completely forgotten that weapons teach as either secondary or tertiary for all mages?? that's the equalizer, that always was the equalizer why can i not use my TM as the damage causing tool it was created to be? i am already hampered by the fact that i learn weapons at a tert rate as a moonie, now you're telling me that my ranks in TM should be worth less simply because i can pair it with a weapon?
i like the idea of TM foci but i do not want them to be required just to be on par with weapon damage.
Damian, a voice from the distant and long-forgotten past.
AIM:DamianDR
>>Can you explain why you want TM to be buffed to be on par with weapons, but you don't want this to be done via foci, which effectively allow you to use magic as a primary weapon?
Because to train magic I already have all manner of stuff in place to make it a pain, mana pools, cambrith, as NON MM you have to worry about which room has how much mana so you cant hunt in every room, come 3.1 for Augm/Utility/Warding you have to cast spell X at Y ranks not because you want the buff/its intended function but because at Z ranks thats the spell that trains.
Also IF I am to train any weapons at all, I need to be able to get a swing in now and again between all the casting and keep in mind as 2nd or 3rd skill set for magic users weapons will ALWAYS lag and as a Moon mage that goes double for defences as well as weapons.
So adding another "layer" of "to do" to cast spell X is a bit much. What guild do you play Barb or Thief? Let me ask you what do you have to do as a Barb to train your Debilitation/Inner Fire etc? would you like to Hold X item in your hand while you umm... BUFF up or "cast" your Zerks/Roars?
Because to train magic I already have all manner of stuff in place to make it a pain, mana pools, cambrith, as NON MM you have to worry about which room has how much mana so you cant hunt in every room, come 3.1 for Augm/Utility/Warding you have to cast spell X at Y ranks not because you want the buff/its intended function but because at Z ranks thats the spell that trains.
Also IF I am to train any weapons at all, I need to be able to get a swing in now and again between all the casting and keep in mind as 2nd or 3rd skill set for magic users weapons will ALWAYS lag and as a Moon mage that goes double for defences as well as weapons.
So adding another "layer" of "to do" to cast spell X is a bit much. What guild do you play Barb or Thief? Let me ask you what do you have to do as a Barb to train your Debilitation/Inner Fire etc? would you like to Hold X item in your hand while you umm... BUFF up or "cast" your Zerks/Roars?
I like a focus to up damage for more than I like having to always cast at 100+ mana, and I would imagine higher grade foci would have higher skill requirements (and rare materials) to make up for stat disparities that the biggest weapons would require. However, can we still parry with a foci(stave?). If the real draw is to prevent combining weapon attacks while targeting, is there a roundtime associated with using the foci? Would it be anything different than a script alteration that allows us to swap our weapon for foci and back again quickly? If its rather easy to swap between the two(and it should be), why not just baseline the target time to remove any potential for mixing weapons and magic together so that this argument is null to begin with, except in the case of special maneuvers like barrage?
TIGERCLAW, your argument at this point seems to boil down to 'I want to train crossbows, but I don't want to have to hold a crossbow or load it'. Mages deal in magical items; if you want to train in magical item use, expect to use magical items.
I'm really not sure why you keep repeating that the system is too cumbersome; magic users have extraordinarily fewer options or commands to worry about than do non-magic users, and again, you have stated you appreciate the depth of melee combat, why are you so scared about adding an iota of depth to magic combat?
And what guild do I play? All but Traders, Thieves, and Rangers. Barbs have to worry about stuff to use their abilities; they need to sit to meditate, and manage inner fire similarly to mana for using their forms and berserks. My barb swaps between Eagle and Dragon for melee and ranged combat, which requires more commands inputted for the swap than any other character.
You guys do realize that I never said you had to max prep a spell, right? Every point of mana harnessed still increases the damage (always has). Not everyone hunts using a 2HE. Not everyone will cast TM spells at full mana (or have to).
"I have no data yet. It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts."
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
"I have no data yet. It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts."
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
>>you have stated you appreciate the depth of melee combat, why are you so scared about adding an iota of depth to magic combat?
A) Magic 3.1 is going to get very difficult and annoying for ALL magic users. Why? You gonan be forced to cast spell X at Z ranks because that is what you need to train with. Spell A that you used to like as a buff will stop teaching at X ranks because it is Basic/Intro. Oh and umm.. research will help with that.. yet another layer? Why? Why not just leave it as is and make me stuff more mana as I get bigger but allow me to use that spell and to train some with it.
B)TM has been nerf batted to the ground 3.0. To give some of it back the proposed option is to layer another X to use it. Fine is this going to be user friendly?
Can I hold it and parry with it?
Does it have to be left or right hand?
Do I get RT for doing this? How much RT? why as preping, charging cambs, harnessing etc. already has a good long bit of wait time?
Is this thing small enough to stuff in my bag?
Can it be worn?
Do I need to try and figgure out a slot like I needed for the Foci for Rituals cus its a Staff?
How much bonus we talking about?
Will X type of Foci give flat B bonus and Y flat C bonus?
At what circle can this be used?
Does it need a Feat? Do I have to spend already limited Spell slots for this feat?
If not feat does it work off of ranks?
If not does a circle 1 get to use it and go nuke things to death as they get a Flat X bonus to dmg to TM?
C) you can take this any way you like to but you obviously do not play a Magic user and have not played one by the sound of it so you dont understand what it was like in 2.0 vs 3.0 vs what is comming in 3.1.
A) Magic 3.1 is going to get very difficult and annoying for ALL magic users. Why? You gonan be forced to cast spell X at Z ranks because that is what you need to train with. Spell A that you used to like as a buff will stop teaching at X ranks because it is Basic/Intro. Oh and umm.. research will help with that.. yet another layer? Why? Why not just leave it as is and make me stuff more mana as I get bigger but allow me to use that spell and to train some with it.
B)TM has been nerf batted to the ground 3.0. To give some of it back the proposed option is to layer another X to use it. Fine is this going to be user friendly?
Can I hold it and parry with it?
Does it have to be left or right hand?
Do I get RT for doing this? How much RT? why as preping, charging cambs, harnessing etc. already has a good long bit of wait time?
Is this thing small enough to stuff in my bag?
Can it be worn?
Do I need to try and figgure out a slot like I needed for the Foci for Rituals cus its a Staff?
How much bonus we talking about?
Will X type of Foci give flat B bonus and Y flat C bonus?
At what circle can this be used?
Does it need a Feat? Do I have to spend already limited Spell slots for this feat?
If not feat does it work off of ranks?
If not does a circle 1 get to use it and go nuke things to death as they get a Flat X bonus to dmg to TM?
C) you can take this any way you like to but you obviously do not play a Magic user and have not played one by the sound of it so you dont understand what it was like in 2.0 vs 3.0 vs what is comming in 3.1.
>>Can you explain why you want TM to be buffed to be on par with weapons, but you don't want this to be done via foci, which effectively allow you to use magic as a primary weapon?
hoping this was directed to my post, if not, apologies.
TM is my primary weapon and i should not be further penalized for learning weapons at a tert rate by nerfing my TM in order to allow it to be used in tandem with a weapon. TM was always sold as the weapon of choice for mages and i was always under the impression that a rank was a rank was a rank. the equality was in the fact that we learn weapon ranks slower and that TM has a lot more to balance vs a weapon. when you purchase your weapon, you have it physically in hand and the only other thing you have to account for is your weapon ranks (and stats but those are used in spells too so it's a wash) whereas TM has Primary magic, harnessing, mana availability, concentration (and while i know weapons use stamina, spells use both stamina and concentration), and potentially arcana. TM is equivalent to using a weapon skill so the two account for each other.
Hopefully that made sense but TM was always sold as a weapon equivalent for as long as i remember (perhaps my memory fails) for the reason that a rank is a rank is a rank.
I have seen some comments regarding adding an RT perhaps on casting the spell to fall in line with the swing of a weapon and i suppose that would be a good compromise as would requiring more mana to do comparable damage tho i would hope that some consideration would be given to the young mages who can't stuff as much mana into the spell and therefore do less damage and potentially learn less? i don't know what the right answer is but i do know that i am very disenchanted with TM and what it does for me currently as compared to my actual weapon skill. i am however, happy to hear that some headway is being made in TM damage.
Damian, a voice from the distant and long-forgotten past.
AIM:DamianDR
hoping this was directed to my post, if not, apologies.
TM is my primary weapon and i should not be further penalized for learning weapons at a tert rate by nerfing my TM in order to allow it to be used in tandem with a weapon. TM was always sold as the weapon of choice for mages and i was always under the impression that a rank was a rank was a rank. the equality was in the fact that we learn weapon ranks slower and that TM has a lot more to balance vs a weapon. when you purchase your weapon, you have it physically in hand and the only other thing you have to account for is your weapon ranks (and stats but those are used in spells too so it's a wash) whereas TM has Primary magic, harnessing, mana availability, concentration (and while i know weapons use stamina, spells use both stamina and concentration), and potentially arcana. TM is equivalent to using a weapon skill so the two account for each other.
Hopefully that made sense but TM was always sold as a weapon equivalent for as long as i remember (perhaps my memory fails) for the reason that a rank is a rank is a rank.
I have seen some comments regarding adding an RT perhaps on casting the spell to fall in line with the swing of a weapon and i suppose that would be a good compromise as would requiring more mana to do comparable damage tho i would hope that some consideration would be given to the young mages who can't stuff as much mana into the spell and therefore do less damage and potentially learn less? i don't know what the right answer is but i do know that i am very disenchanted with TM and what it does for me currently as compared to my actual weapon skill. i am however, happy to hear that some headway is being made in TM damage.
Damian, a voice from the distant and long-forgotten past.
AIM:DamianDR
>You guys do realize that I never said you had to max prep a spell, right? Every point of mana harnessed still increases the damage (always has). Not everyone hunts using a 2HE. Not everyone will cast TM spells at full mana (or have to).
Of course; I think it's foolish to assume everyone needs to be using CHOP with a 2HE all the time. The argument is that using TM should be on equal damage footing with a 2HE, and the assumption should NOT be that everyone will be using TM and weapons simultaneously. Or, if they do, synergize them appropriately, instead of simply putting TM damage as low as it seems to be.
I'd rather enjoy holding a foci in one hand and relying on my magics, and then switching back to a blade. Thematically it jives.
Of course; I think it's foolish to assume everyone needs to be using CHOP with a 2HE all the time. The argument is that using TM should be on equal damage footing with a 2HE, and the assumption should NOT be that everyone will be using TM and weapons simultaneously. Or, if they do, synergize them appropriately, instead of simply putting TM damage as low as it seems to be.
I'd rather enjoy holding a foci in one hand and relying on my magics, and then switching back to a blade. Thematically it jives.
Jhalia you obviously don't pvp. I guess you don't understand that in most cases in PvP you have to cast at max mana. Also, you have to cast disablers at max mana at level, and hope that your opponent doesn't outclass you by a bit in the given spell contest, because if they do then you can effectively waste almost half your attunement on 1 disabler and have it not do squat.
Like its been said, crossbows require bolts...Which can be bought and stored. TM requires for most folks, good attunement skill, and a good mana room, plus more time for harnessing unless you want to run out of ammo extremely fast. Do crossbows require ammo skill? and a good room that supports the best crossbow ammo? kinda wondering...Also i'm just wondering, can somebody effectively use phys damage barriers AND magic damage barriers to thwart your crossbow or whatever range skills? No but they can use heavy armor WHICH snap, also includes TM spells.
Like its been said, crossbows require bolts...Which can be bought and stored. TM requires for most folks, good attunement skill, and a good mana room, plus more time for harnessing unless you want to run out of ammo extremely fast. Do crossbows require ammo skill? and a good room that supports the best crossbow ammo? kinda wondering...Also i'm just wondering, can somebody effectively use phys damage barriers AND magic damage barriers to thwart your crossbow or whatever range skills? No but they can use heavy armor WHICH snap, also includes TM spells.
This is an interesting idea, but I think there are a few things to keep in mind.
TM Foci
If this is what it takes to allow TM to be as good as weapons, then I suppose it's necessary, even though I loathe the idea. But I have a few ideas on this score. I think great care has to be taken to allow those who signed up to the WM guild for the ability to do the advertised combination of sword and spell, and who have put years, sometimes more than a decade into doing this to still have the type of guild focus that they signed up for. Because right now, TM combined with weapons is just poorly done.
1) Let's not make this an all-or-nothing proposition. I see a number of interesting possibilities for tiers of bonus that the system can provide that can allow maximum playability and choice for how people want to cast.
- Focus in one hand, other one free - full bonus, magic as powerful as weapons.
- Focus in one hand, weapon in other, but not attacking - Small penalty to full bonus, with off-hand weapon skill allowing this to be trained down. Warrior Mages would be able to train this down completely either based on an innate ability or Summoning skill.
- Focus in one hand, weapon in the other, attacking - large penalty to bonus, but still allowing some slight bonus for the fact that the mage made the effort to use the focus. This penalty can be trained down with off-hand weapon skill, with a bonus to WMs either based on an innate ability or Summoning skill.
2) Create non-stick foci. Orbs, bracers, diadems. Worn items would require both hands free to get full bonus.
3) Allow the permanent ritual foci to act as TM foci. I want it all inside one item.
4) I would like to eventually see weapon-based foci, which would have significant bonuses to the Off-Hand skill use to negate penalties (and higher caps on max train-down), but only be able to be crafted in such a way that they were inferior as both a weapon and a focus compared to others for balance purposes. This could be due to different materials needing to be used, or compromises made in the structure of the weapon to integrate whatever matrix is needed for the focus to work.
5) Don't make me Harry Potter. I don't like Harry Potter, and I'll refuse to use this system if it forces me to look like that. I don't want to be doing anything ridiculous or campy like waving my wand like a fool. Pointing it is sufficient, with verbiage. No more.
TM as a Primary Weapon
Finally, at least, this appears to give us a mode that TM can be allowed to stand on its own, and be equal, without the (I believe unnecessary) requirements of having DPS be lower to accomodate weapon use.
If we're talking about making TM equal to weapons, though, there's a point that I feel needs to be made. TM is more difficult to use than weapons. It has the disadvantage of needing to be aimed that bows do, combined with the mana requirement meaning you can't use it at its max forever, have to worry about room power for most guilds, and have various accoutrements/other actions needed to make it really efficient, like cambrinth or harnessing. Compared to aimed ranged weapons, the most direct comparison, you can't be debilitating while you're aiming. It also requires more skill and game knowledge to manage mana use and such, and also takes away from the resource that powers one's defensive capabilities, like buff spells.
Basically what I'm saying is that, in order to be worthy of the difficulty of using it, TM needs to be better, rank-for-rank than basic weapon attacks that don't have all of those requirements. Otherwise it's just an inferior way of dealing damage. I think, a given hit, all things being as equal as possible should be, in relative strength: weapon attacks < TM attacks < weapon attacks against a debilitated foe.
TM + Weapon DPS
Personally, I think the idea that TM needs to be nerfed because it can be combined with weapons is mostly a myth, based on the differences in ranks due to skillsets. Unless you've deliberately hindered training in one, they'll never be close together (unless you're, uh, maybe a Bard?), and the failure to listen on this score highlights a possible example of the GM's being out of touch with how the game is actually being played. I think the impact of skillset differences is being underestimated. Essentially the only time you can do it is when you're powerful enough that it doesn't really matter anyway. When you can barely hit something? You use whatever is your primary skillset because everything else misses.
But I know this is an argument that I won't win. I just wanted to state this for the record.
TM Foci
If this is what it takes to allow TM to be as good as weapons, then I suppose it's necessary, even though I loathe the idea. But I have a few ideas on this score. I think great care has to be taken to allow those who signed up to the WM guild for the ability to do the advertised combination of sword and spell, and who have put years, sometimes more than a decade into doing this to still have the type of guild focus that they signed up for. Because right now, TM combined with weapons is just poorly done.
1) Let's not make this an all-or-nothing proposition. I see a number of interesting possibilities for tiers of bonus that the system can provide that can allow maximum playability and choice for how people want to cast.
- Focus in one hand, other one free - full bonus, magic as powerful as weapons.
- Focus in one hand, weapon in other, but not attacking - Small penalty to full bonus, with off-hand weapon skill allowing this to be trained down. Warrior Mages would be able to train this down completely either based on an innate ability or Summoning skill.
- Focus in one hand, weapon in the other, attacking - large penalty to bonus, but still allowing some slight bonus for the fact that the mage made the effort to use the focus. This penalty can be trained down with off-hand weapon skill, with a bonus to WMs either based on an innate ability or Summoning skill.
2) Create non-stick foci. Orbs, bracers, diadems. Worn items would require both hands free to get full bonus.
3) Allow the permanent ritual foci to act as TM foci. I want it all inside one item.
4) I would like to eventually see weapon-based foci, which would have significant bonuses to the Off-Hand skill use to negate penalties (and higher caps on max train-down), but only be able to be crafted in such a way that they were inferior as both a weapon and a focus compared to others for balance purposes. This could be due to different materials needing to be used, or compromises made in the structure of the weapon to integrate whatever matrix is needed for the focus to work.
5) Don't make me Harry Potter. I don't like Harry Potter, and I'll refuse to use this system if it forces me to look like that. I don't want to be doing anything ridiculous or campy like waving my wand like a fool. Pointing it is sufficient, with verbiage. No more.
TM as a Primary Weapon
Finally, at least, this appears to give us a mode that TM can be allowed to stand on its own, and be equal, without the (I believe unnecessary) requirements of having DPS be lower to accomodate weapon use.
If we're talking about making TM equal to weapons, though, there's a point that I feel needs to be made. TM is more difficult to use than weapons. It has the disadvantage of needing to be aimed that bows do, combined with the mana requirement meaning you can't use it at its max forever, have to worry about room power for most guilds, and have various accoutrements/other actions needed to make it really efficient, like cambrinth or harnessing. Compared to aimed ranged weapons, the most direct comparison, you can't be debilitating while you're aiming. It also requires more skill and game knowledge to manage mana use and such, and also takes away from the resource that powers one's defensive capabilities, like buff spells.
Basically what I'm saying is that, in order to be worthy of the difficulty of using it, TM needs to be better, rank-for-rank than basic weapon attacks that don't have all of those requirements. Otherwise it's just an inferior way of dealing damage. I think, a given hit, all things being as equal as possible should be, in relative strength: weapon attacks < TM attacks < weapon attacks against a debilitated foe.
TM + Weapon DPS
Personally, I think the idea that TM needs to be nerfed because it can be combined with weapons is mostly a myth, based on the differences in ranks due to skillsets. Unless you've deliberately hindered training in one, they'll never be close together (unless you're, uh, maybe a Bard?), and the failure to listen on this score highlights a possible example of the GM's being out of touch with how the game is actually being played. I think the impact of skillset differences is being underestimated. Essentially the only time you can do it is when you're powerful enough that it doesn't really matter anyway. When you can barely hit something? You use whatever is your primary skillset because everything else misses.
But I know this is an argument that I won't win. I just wanted to state this for the record.
