Crossfire Mailing List Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: CF: Experiments



Hwei Sheng TEOH wrote:

> Sounds good...
> 
> [snip]
> > - new spells
> [snip]
> >     Grenades - create a bomb and throw it - like a fireball, but psysical
> > grenade - wizard spell
> > holy handgrenade - priest spell (I couldn't pass up that one)
> 
> Hmmm, I don't know how this would affect game balance, but if we want to add
> grenades which are basically the bomb analog of fireball/snowstorm spells, and
> psionic equivalents of cone spells like burning hands, why not add other
> spells like `chaos storm' (cone), `chaos field' (like fireball), to complement
> existing chaos spells; `lightning storm' (cone) to make up for the lack of an
> electricity area-effect spell; `sunstorm' (like fireball), `sunflare' (cone)
> to complement the existing sunspear (Light attacks).

    The spells I'm testing with were chosen because they're trivially easy
to program.  The cone, bolt, and ball/burst code is already there.  I'm
thinking of dropping the psionic storm spells and replacing them with
something more like a smite spell (Holy Wrath) without the area effect.
    And some of the spells you mention already exist.  The chaos cone spell
is Color Spray.  The electrical area-effect is Ball Lightning.  There are
lots of spells in the game that never appear in shops.  Sunflare is a good
idea, though.  Something like that would make quick work of lesser undead,
and could blind large groups of more dangerous foes.  I think I'll add that
one in and see how it works out.

    Actually, now that you mention it, Ball Lightning might make a better
area-effect, and look even cooler than it already does, if the ball randomly
released some small lightning bolts.  I'll take a look at the code and think
about doing that.


> Of course, this might just throw the game completely off-balance... perhaps we
> should start thinking on restricting such spells so that you need to be
> attuned to a certain spellpath before you can use the more powerful versions
> of a class of spells (eg. attuned Light to get sunstorm/sunflare). Otherwise
> spellcasters that learn general spells will have too powerful a repertoire.
> Simply making the mana cost higher doesn't really help much, because a
> high-level wizard can easily collect many glowing crystals and/or magic power
> potions to get around this limitation.

    Agreed.  Low-level mages have a shorter life expectancy than kobolds,
but if they survive, they can get quite scary.  Should powerful non-attuned
spells be impossible to cast, or just unreasonably expensive?  By
unreasonable, I mean something along the lines of multiplying the spell
point cost by the spell level.

For a 5th level caster,
small fireball (level 1) would cost 7
medium fireball (level 3) would cost 30 if unattuned, 10 if attuned
large fireball (level 5) would cost 75 if unattuned, 15 if attuned

    Another possibility would be to require something like the square of the
level to cast a spell you're not attuned to.  Maybe not quite that severe,
though.  Power 1.5 (multiplying by half the level) would result in:
small fireball (level 1) would still be level 1
medium fireball (level 3) would require a level 4 caster if not attuned
large lightning (level 4) would require a level 6 caster if not attuned
large fireball (level 5) would require a level 12 caster if not attuned
sunspear (level 6) would require a level 18 caster if not attuned
bullet swarm (level 7) would require a level 24 caster if not attuned
summon fire elemental (level 8) would require a level 32 caster if not
attuned
...
destruction (level 18) would be unavailable until level 97.  And you can't
attune to it.  It's PATH_NULL.  Then again, how many casters of any level
can manage 540 spell points to cast it the other way?

    Either way, those rings of Storm, Fire, and Ice would definitely get a
lot more popular.


> >     sword of Sharpness +3
> > (dam: x2, wc: +2) (Attack: weaponmagic, death)
> > Chance of slaying outright, perhaps that's what a Vorpal Blade should do?
> 
> Hmm, if you add this, you might want to change something in the Wizard Tower
> (Lake Country) -- one of the levels has a Vorpal Blade that you probably want
> to have a death attacktype on.

    Yep.  That's the one I was referring to.  This will have to wait,
though.  Death attacks don't work for melee weapons.  Only spells and
missiles.


> [snip]
> >     I also added armour improvement, up to +(wisdom level/7) as compared to
> > weapon improvement, which can go up to +(wisdom level/5), and Enchant Armour
> > scrolls, which max out at +(total level/10).  The armour value is increased,
> > just as it is with a scroll, but it gains no weight.
> 
> Hmm, I've always wanted to be able to manually `manufacture' enchanted
> armour that has the same reduced weight as magical armour you find in
> dungeons. (So that, for example, I can `make' the same robe +2 with the
> lighter weight, rather than the heavier weight, which I think is what the code
> currently does with Enchant Armour scrolls). So a Reduce Armour Weight scroll
> will be good. :-) However, this may cause game imbalance, as high-level
> characters will be able to make extremely powerful armour too easily. Perhaps
> we can compensate by making such scrolls available only in some very difficult
> dungeons, and not in shops?

    I've been thinking about that, too.  The way I figure it is, if you find
a magical +4 armor that weighs 40% less, it's because some ancient smith
with a magical forge and a good supply of pure adamantium spent a few months
on it.  Or perhaps Mostrai willed it into existence or something.  Whatever
the story, it was created by some means not available to any player
character, regardless of level.  The Enchant Armor scrolls can toughen up
existing armor, but they can't improve on its nature and craftmanship.  The
scroll's magic makes the armor 5% thicker, and therefore heavier and
tougher, and it adds a point of magical protection.
    The change I've implemented allows priests to beg their god to toughen
up their armor instead of using those scrolls, and the god's blessing can
achieve the same effect as a scroll, without making the armor any heavier.

     Unfortunately, the magical bonus is wasted on items with no ac value,
like gloves and shoes.  Their armour value can be increased, even if it was
zero before, but (ac: 0) means it will never help your ac, even if you
enchant it up to +12.  I'm not sure whether that's good or bad, but I
suspect that allowing armor (or bracers), helmet, gloves, cloak, boots, and
shield to all be enchanted for +ac would be too unbalancing.  Unless perhaps
those Enchant Armour scrolls were a little less common.  They're already
limited to +1 per 10 levels, se even if you had some +ac armour of each of
the six types, you'd be limited to +6 per 10 levels, which seems pretty
reasonable to me, as long as you have to work for it.

    Reducing armour weight through some seperate magical process would be
tough to balance.  Anyone who wears armor, wizards and warriors alike,
wishes it was lighter.  Maybe if armour had to be prepared before it was
enchanted, and could only be enchanted as much as it had been prepared, then
more different kinds of armor improvement could be allowed:

    Prepare Armour scroll:
Sacrifice n squared diamonds to set a maximum enchantment of n.  A player
may only apply additional enchantments as long as the number of enchantments
on this armour is less than n AND less than (total level / 10)

    Enchant Armour scroll:
Improve armour value, add +1, and increase weight 5% (same as it does now)

    Lower Armour Weight scroll:
Reduce armour weight by 10%, and increase armour speed by 10%

    Improve Armour Permeability scroll:
Reduce armour penalty to spell point regeneration by 20%

    What about the Improve (stat) Bonus scrolls?  As long the player has to
give up one of the other enchantments to use an Improve (stat) scroll, I
don't see a problem with allowing those scrolls to be used on armour as well
as weapons.  If someone wants to max out one number by ignoring another, I
think we should let them.
    These changes wouldn't make armour enchantment any more powerful, just
more variable.  Except for the case of a really smart priest who uses up all
his armour enchantments on lowering weight and improving wisdom, then prays
a lot to get his god to do the ac and armour enchantments.  Still, that's
not likely to cause balance problems.  Priests can't Improve their weapons
nearly as much as warriors can, so being able to Improve their armour more
makes up for it.  And besides, collecting enough of the right scrolls and
potions to make a balance difference takes a good deal of work.


    Another thing that has been bothering me recently is the apparently
arbitrary limits of what weapons can or can't be Prepared.  A weapon is too
magical to be prepared further if it has any protection, immunity, or
bonuses to speed, ac, or sp or hp regeneration.  Bonuses to stats are fine. 
So are attacktypes.  The stat enchantments could be done with scrolls and
potions, but the rest can't be changed by players.  I recognize the need to
keep limits on weapon enchantment, but I'd like to see some more
variability.

    I propose that any magic weapon should be allowed to be improved and
personalized, subject to the following restrictions:
 1) each protection counts as an enchantment and requires an additional
sacrifice of 10 diamonds of great value to Prepare
 2) each immunity counts as two enchantments and requires an additional
sacrifice of 10 diamonds of exceptional beauty to Prepare
 3) each point of bonus to speed or ac counts as an enchantment and requires
an additional sacrifice of 10 emeralds of great value to Prepare
 4) each point of bonus to hp regeneration counts as an enchantment and
requires an additional sacrifice of 10 rubies of great value to Prepare
 5) each point of bonus to sp regeneration counts as an enchantment and
requires an additional sacrifice of 10 sapphires of great value to Prepare

    If these existing enchantments equal or exceed your maximum, you cannot
enchant the weapon.  The number of existing enchantments is the minimum
preparation level of the weapon, since successful preparation will use up
enough of your enchantments to cover what's already there.  You have to
prepare the weapon for more enchantments than it already has if you want to
improve it.

    Example: Darkblade +4
(Cha -1, Con +2) (regeneration +1) (attack: weaponmagic) (prot: poison)
(immune: drain)

    Minimum sacrifice to Prepare:
16 diamonds
10 diamonds of great value (prot)
10 diamonds of exceptional beauty (immune)
10 rubies of great value (regen)

    To add five more enchantments, for a total of nine, you'd need 81
diamonds instead of 16.

    To further limit weapon creation, since players can already create some
pretty nasty weapons, this method could be extended to include attacktypes
and existing stat bonuses.  That would mean that the Darkblade already has
six enchantments instead of four.


    As an alternative, enchantment of weapons with any magic at all could be
disallowed, but then I'd like to see more variety of enchantment scrolls,
even if the maximum number of enchantments is lowered.

-- 
            -Dave Noelle,                 dave@Straylight.org
            -the Villa Straylight,  http://www.straylight.org
Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial Email  ==  http://www.cauce.com

Disclaimer:Stop asking me what's going on!  If I knew I wouldn't be here!

Quote of the Day:
Jargon:        "Compatible"
Translation:   "Gracefully accepts erroneous data from any source."
-
[you can put yourself on the announcement list only or unsubscribe altogether
by sending an email stating your wishes to crossfire-request@ifi.uio.no]