Previous Thread
Expand All
Collapse All
Ignore Author
Reply
If I cast 212 and then 214 on a target, other people get the TD loss from 212.
If I cast 214 and then 212 on a target, other people do NOT get the TD loss from 212.
I know why this happens from MY perspective, because 214 also gives a TD drop (and so they cancel out), but can it be fixed to not remove the TD drop for other people?
| NOVAESKYE |
| If I cast 212 and then 214 on a target, other people get the TD loss from 212. |
| If I cast 214 and then 212 on a target, other people do NOT get the TD loss from 212. |
| I know why this happens from MY perspective, because 214 also gives a TD drop (and so they cancel out), but can it be fixed to not remove the TD drop for other people? |
I don't follow. Previously, you couldn't cast Bind (214) then Interference (212) on the same target, as the magic would clash and only Bind would remain active. So there would no be TD pushdown since 212 wasn't active. I don't understand your comment about 214 giving a TD drop, since it doesn't.
However, I've updated both Interference (212) and Mass Interference (217) to not clash with Bind (214). Feel free to cast the spells in any order.
GameMaster Estild
Cleric/Empath Team
"Previously, you couldn't cast Bind (214) then Interference (212) on the same target, as the magic would clash and only Bind would remain active. So there would no be TD pushdown since 212 wasn't active. I don't understand your comment about 214 giving a TD drop, since it doesn't." -- Estild
Correct.
So I suppose another way of fixing it was to make 214 remove 212 on a creature :P
Basically, just as I said, you can do 212 + 214 and your hunting partner would gain the benefit of the TD pushdown of 212 and the DS loss from bind.
However, if you did 214 first and then 212.. you do not get that TD pushdown.
Basically, you create a situation where to use both spells together you have to use them in a specific order. This promotes 'advanced knowledge' of how the spells work together which is cool, but meh.
I haven't tested it yet, but thank you for the change you made :)
Correct.
So I suppose another way of fixing it was to make 214 remove 212 on a creature :P
Basically, just as I said, you can do 212 + 214 and your hunting partner would gain the benefit of the TD pushdown of 212 and the DS loss from bind.
However, if you did 214 first and then 212.. you do not get that TD pushdown.
Basically, you create a situation where to use both spells together you have to use them in a specific order. This promotes 'advanced knowledge' of how the spells work together which is cool, but meh.
I haven't tested it yet, but thank you for the change you made :)
"I don't understand your comment about 214 giving a TD drop, since it doesn't." -- Estild
Oh, I get it now what you're saying.
Unless I'm just not paying attention properly (which is possible).. I, the caster, receive a TD pushdown when I cast bind on a target (the pushdown occurs at the same time as the cast of 214; I think it remains for me only for the duration of 214).
I dunno. I'd have to go back and look. I haven't really been playing GS much lately and so I'm just trying to make sense of what I was seeing (in that 212 + 214 gave one result but 214 + 212 gave a completely different one).
Oh, I get it now what you're saying.
Unless I'm just not paying attention properly (which is possible).. I, the caster, receive a TD pushdown when I cast bind on a target (the pushdown occurs at the same time as the cast of 214; I think it remains for me only for the duration of 214).
I dunno. I'd have to go back and look. I haven't really been playing GS much lately and so I'm just trying to make sense of what I was seeing (in that 212 + 214 gave one result but 214 + 212 gave a completely different one).
(Mind you, I haven't tested any of this since Estild posted to the effect of 'Feel free to cast the spells in any order')
Previously, when you cast 212 at a target and successfully warded, the target suffered from a TD loss (as well as the various other detrimental effects of the interference spell). When you cast 214 at a target that was under the effect of 212/217 the 212/217 effect was immediately dispelled (as part of the text of 214 resolving).
And, as you stated, you can not (or could not) cast 212 on a target that is suffering from being bound via 214. I imagine this was to prevent abuse of circumventing the above mechanic.
I had always supposed the overall intent of this previous design was to keep the DS loss effect of Bind from overlaping with the DS loss of 212 (creating an even larger DS loss than the generous one the Bind status already generates). I suppose that was no longer deemed a concern.
I'll have to play with all this some time soon and see how it turns out.
"The abuse of greatness is when it disjoins remorse from power" - William Shakespeare
Previously, when you cast 212 at a target and successfully warded, the target suffered from a TD loss (as well as the various other detrimental effects of the interference spell). When you cast 214 at a target that was under the effect of 212/217 the 212/217 effect was immediately dispelled (as part of the text of 214 resolving).
And, as you stated, you can not (or could not) cast 212 on a target that is suffering from being bound via 214. I imagine this was to prevent abuse of circumventing the above mechanic.
I had always supposed the overall intent of this previous design was to keep the DS loss effect of Bind from overlaping with the DS loss of 212 (creating an even larger DS loss than the generous one the Bind status already generates). I suppose that was no longer deemed a concern.
I'll have to play with all this some time soon and see how it turns out.
"The abuse of greatness is when it disjoins remorse from power" - William Shakespeare
