PDA

View Full Version : Please implement more arcane spells to supplement melee



Aspenor
01-21-2008, 08:12 AM
Keen edge? True Strike? Where are they????

Keen edge...self explanatory.

Change true strike to be a progressive bonus per 4 caster levels, for 1 minute per caster level, capping at +5 at 20.

Give us options, options, options!!!

Greater magic weapon, anybody?? Please??

MIND BLANK??? Level 8 spell, hello? We need more, this is a classic. ***?

Aesop
01-21-2008, 08:27 AM
I'd perfer true strike as a 6 sec buff. I don't mind the progressive aspect of it to discourage melees from taking a single level of caster to gain a +20 to hit. maybe 5+5 per 4 levels max +20 at level 16

Aesop

Aspenor
01-21-2008, 08:32 AM
I'd perfer true strike as a 6 sec buff. I don't mind the progressive aspect of it to discourage melees from taking a single level of caster to gain a +20 to hit. maybe 5+5 per 4 levels max +20 at level 16

Aesop

I don't see it being all that useful as such a short buff. It wouldn't be overpowering to make it +1 to hit from levels 1-4, from 5-8 make it +2, 9-12 make it +3, 13-16 make it +4, and 17-20 make it +5 to-hit. 1 min per caster level just like most buffs, either that or 6 seconds per caster level just like haste, but a static 6 second buff wouldn't be too long....

unless you meant 6 seconds per caster level then that'd be alright in my book. it just can't be a one cast then woof...over.

dragnmoon
01-21-2008, 08:40 AM
I don't see it being all that useful as such a short buff. It wouldn't be overpowering to make it +1 to hit from levels 1-4, from 5-8 make it +2, 9-12 make it +3, 13-16 make it +4, and 17-20 make it +5 to-hit. 1 min per caster level just like most buffs, either that or 6 seconds per caster level just like haste, but a static 6 second buff wouldn't be too long....

unless you meant 6 seconds per caster level then that'd be alright in my book. it just can't be a one cast then woof...over.

They should keep it short since the spell it is based on is only good for 1 attack

Aspenor
01-21-2008, 08:43 AM
They should keep it short since the spell it is based on is only good for 1 attack

But the 1 attack gets an unnamed +20 bonus.

I'm proposing lowering it to a progressive bonus based on caster level. Make it longer to compensate.

In a realtime MMO combat system the one round system isn't useful. Rebalancing is necessary.

llevenbaxx
01-21-2008, 08:51 AM
I think the should add the +20 for a 1st level casting and only extend the duration as caster level goes up. That way it would be specifically useful cast at level 1 like its supposed to be. Eliminating the early usefulness of Truestrike by changing it to an all out progressive type spell is just a cheap shot at Splash and other MC casters who might otherwise make good use of the spell in a closer to PnP type implimentation. Very lame imho.

Aesop
01-21-2008, 08:54 AM
I don't see it being all that useful as such a short buff. It wouldn't be overpowering to make it +1 to hit from levels 1-4, from 5-8 make it +2, 9-12 make it +3, 13-16 make it +4, and 17-20 make it +5 to-hit. 1 min per caster level just like most buffs, either that or 6 seconds per caster level just like haste, but a static 6 second buff wouldn't be too long....

unless you meant 6 seconds per caster level then that'd be alright in my book. it just can't be a one cast then woof...over.

well no I'm thinking of 6 sec you could get off 1-2 Ray or Touch spells... of course this would work best if they implemented Touch Attacks

Now there is another effect I believe called Sure Shot that gives a +1/x levels that lasts 1 rnd/level that may be what you want... thikn its in the Complete Adventurer

I'll check

Aesop


hmmm... maybe its complete Mage... unfortuanately I can't find my complete mage

Aspenor
01-21-2008, 08:58 AM
I think the should add the +20 for a 1st level casting and only extend the duration as caster level goes up. That way it would be specifically useful cast at level 1 like its supposed to be. Eliminating the early usefulness of Truestrike by changing it to an all out progressive type spell is just a cheap shot at Splash and other MC casters who might otherwise make good use of the spell in a closer to PnP type implimentation. Very lame imho.
Hehe well if you wanna be picky about it they can just change the name of the spell :rolleyes: I'm just advocating for the concept of more arcane spells to help melee-caster types.

MysticTheurge
01-21-2008, 09:58 AM
Hehe well if you wanna be picky about it they can just change the name of the spell :rolleyes: I'm just advocating for the concept of more arcane spells to help melee-caster types.

True Strike is self only anyway.

I'd prefer it to remain true to the D&D source. If they made the duration something like 6 seconds per level, that would be fine, I guess. But a lower bonus, longer duration spell... there are other things for that.

Most of the other spells that would help here fall into the "Spells you cast on weapons" category. And DDO doesn't seem to have the tech to do that yet.

EspyLacopa
01-21-2008, 10:08 AM
I've seen True Strike as that spell you cast when you want this next attack to hit, no matter what.

Might be useful if you really want to make something sit (via Trip perhaps?), but its AC is ludicrously high.

EinarMal
01-21-2008, 10:11 AM
True Strike is self only anyway.

I'd prefer it to remain true to the D&D source. If they made the duration something like 6 seconds per level, that would be fine, I guess. But a lower bonus, longer duration spell... there are other things for that.


Yeah one attack, or even 6s, would make it pretty worthless in DDO given the number of mobs that you face. Even as a level 1 spell, casting the thing every 6s would be insane in the amount of spell points you would burn through not to mention the time it would take.

Maybe just even 1s per caster level (and you can extend it) would balance it out for DDO real time combat. So, you would be looking at +20 to-hit that would last close to what an action boost would for the cost of 20 spell points extended.

Aspenor
01-21-2008, 10:12 AM
True Strike is self only anyway.

Fine :) I want to cast it on myself, anyway

dragnmoon
01-21-2008, 10:16 AM
In a realtime MMO combat system the one round system isn't useful. Rebalancing is necessary.

Wish they did that with Smite Evil

EinarMal
01-21-2008, 10:18 AM
Wish they did that with Smite Evil

Yeah they should totally change that to work on a reasonable cool down, however, they still need to implement more melee boosting spells and they should be adjusted for non-round based combat and the increase in number of encounters.

Aspenor
01-21-2008, 10:18 AM
Wish they did that with Smite Evil

I am an advocate for a timer-based smite evil instead of the uses per day for DDO. :)

EspyLacopa
01-21-2008, 10:19 AM
casting the thing every 6s would be insane in the amount of spell points you would burn through not to mention the time it would take.

Maybe just even 1s per caster level (and you can extend it) would balance it out for DDO real time combat. So, you would be looking at +20 to-hit that would last close to what an action boost would for the cost of 20 spell points extended.

That's why it's 6 second duration instead of 1 attack. I think you missed the point of the spell. It's designed to give your character a means to hit something nearly guaranteed *once*. Not 2 rounds, not even 1 round. Once.

In DDO, since monsters frequently are more stronger, they made it so that we can hit several times. That is done for most likely two reasons.

Inflated power of monsters
Trouble of designing a buff that vanishes after you hit something. Currently, there is no such buff or debuff in the game.Both are solid reasons for why it's in as it is.

Hvymetal
01-21-2008, 08:33 PM
That's why it's 6 second duration instead of 1 attack. I think you missed the point of the spell. It's designed to give your character a means to hit something nearly guaranteed *once*. Not 2 rounds, not even 1 round. Once.

In DDO, since monsters frequently are more stronger, they made it so that we can hit several times. That is done for most likely two reasons.

Inflated power of monsters
Trouble of designing a buff that vanishes after you hit something. Currently, there is no such buff or debuff in the game.Both are solid reasons for why it's in as it is.

Hmmm, using that logic I feel the devs need to look at the way Smite Evil is currently working. The sad fact is we have examples of both ways currently in the game, it's hard to use one as a precident when you also have precidents for it being a 1 cast = 1 swing.

EspyLacopa
01-22-2008, 05:25 AM
Hmmm, using that logic I feel the devs need to look at the way Smite Evil is currently working. The sad fact is we have examples of both ways currently in the game, it's hard to use one as a precident when you also have precidents for it being a 1 cast = 1 swing.
Smite Evil, PnP:

She adds her Charisma bonus (if any) to her attack roll and deals 1 extra point of damage per paladin level.
Smite Evil, DDO:

She adds her Charisma Modifier x 2 to her attack roll (that uses the best attack bonus in a normal Attack Sequence) and deals extra damage based on her paladin level. A Paladin with 12 Charisma (+1 modifier) and BAB 0 would add 2 (1 x 2 + 0) to the attack roll. A Paladin with 20 CHA (+5 modifier) and BAB 10 would add 30 (5 x 2 + 20) to the attack roll (because the 4th attack is at BAB+10 = 20)

Instead of giving Smite Evil more uses per day, they made it a good deal more powerful.

Hvymetal
01-22-2008, 06:06 AM
Check how many Paladins actually successfully use Smite Evil. I have it but don't use it much. I would be all for this if things were evened out and worked similarly to each other, the other solution is to of course put Smite Evil on a timer based upon Paladin level.

EinarMal
01-22-2008, 06:16 AM
That's why it's 6 second duration instead of 1 attack. I think you missed the point of the spell. It's designed to give your character a means to hit something nearly guaranteed *once*. Not 2 rounds, not even 1 round. Once.

In DDO, since monsters frequently are more stronger, they made it so that we can hit several times. That is done for most likely two reasons.

Inflated power of monsters
Trouble of designing a buff that vanishes after you hit something. Currently, there is no such buff or debuff in the game.Both are solid reasons for why it's in as it is.

This is a wierd post, it sounds like you are saying that true strike is already in the game and you are explaining why it works like it does....but it's not??? You left out one other factor that makes the longer duration more reasonable the number of encounters. In PnP you face 4 encounters a day, and mobs can be killed in one hit (or close to it). In PnP you would use true strike to land a ray spell/sneak attack as a caster or arcane trickster. That mob would probably be dead or very seriously injured. In DDO, you face many fights, and one hit will typically just make them angry from a caster trying to melee. There is a big difference between the two and that is why, IN MY OPINION, the spell duration should be adjusted.

EspyLacopa
01-22-2008, 06:22 AM
Check how many Paladins actually successfully use Smite Evil. I have it but don't use it much. I would be all for this if things were evened out and worked similarly to each other, the other solution is to of course put Smite Evil on a timer based upon Paladin level.
I always use them on mine. Especially on evil aligned Bosses.


There is a big difference between the two and that is why, IN MY OPINION, the spell duration should be adjusted.
And I'm pointing out that a duration of 6 seconds is already an adjusted duration!

EinarMal
01-22-2008, 06:40 AM
I always use them on mine. Especially on evil aligned Bosses.


And I'm pointing out that a duration of 6 seconds is already an adjusted duration!

Yeah I know but a 6s spell would be useless in DDO, when you factor in the spell casting animation, then having to move to a mob to swing, and that costing 10 spell points. The time loss out of fighting would make your DPS decrease by using the spell. It just wouldn't work. If they put it in like that it would be very seldom used or even carried, even by a battle caster type.

I could see 10 seconds, and allowing extend, this would make it 20s like an action boost and would be usable for 20 spell points. I still like putting caster level in there though so something like 10s + 1s (every 3 caster levels).

EspyLacopa
01-22-2008, 06:52 AM
I could see 10 seconds, and allowing extend, this would make it 20s like an action boost and would be usable for 20 spell points. I still like putting caster level in there though so something like 10s + 1s (every 3 caster levels).
Which would end up being even MORE broken than the original Fighter Action Boost. Imagine a 15Barb/1Wiz. With a Magi item, that's an easy 150 spellpoints, for 7 spurts of 20 seconds each that grant +20 attack. That, good sir, is far too powerful.

EinarMal
01-22-2008, 06:55 AM
Which would end up being even MORE broken than the original Fighter Action Boost. Imagine a 15Barb/1Wiz. With a Magi item, that's an easy 150 spellpoints, for 7 spurts of 20 seconds each that grant +20 attack. That, good sir, is far too powerful.

The thing you seem to fail to realize is that most good full BAB melee builds hit on a 2 already, they don't need more to-hit. They wouldn't even bother casting it, you still miss on a 1 regardless. So whether there first swing is 38 or 58 makes very little difference with most mobs in the game, very few have AC above the low 30's.

If you are worried about splash builds then base the duration solely off of caster level 6s +1s (level). In the end no smart Barbarian is going to gimp their build and lost mighty rage for essentially an action boost they don't need.

Or make it a level 2 spell since you have increased the power of it by messing with the duration. It really isn't that hard to prevent what you are describing (although you are over estimating the problem). It would be more likely a rogue might do something like that than a full BAB melee.

EspyLacopa
01-22-2008, 06:59 AM
The thing you seem to fail to realize is that most good full BAB melee builds hit on a 2 already, they don't need more to-hit. They wouldn't even bother casting it, you still miss on a 1 regardless. So whether there first swing is 38 or 58 makes very little difference with most mobs in the game, very few have AC above the low 30's.
Then why, pray tell, did they bust Fighters Attack Boost from a +10 bonus down to a +5 bonus?

EinarMal
01-22-2008, 07:02 AM
Then why, pray tell, did they bust Fighters Attack Boost from a +10 bonus down to a +5 bonus?

Because mobs use to have higher AC but they were reduced across the board. The nerf makes no difference at this point. Most fighters/barbarians leave power attack on 24/7 and only miss most mobs on a 2. Very few mobs in the game have an AC above the low 30's at this point, that was not always the case.

FYI basing any logical arguements/conclusions based on Turbine's nerfing pattern is dubious at best. They boost toughness because you know Dwarfs were hurting for hit points and reduce paladin divine favor because you know paladins are the most uber class in the game right now....errr on second thought.

EspyLacopa
01-22-2008, 07:09 AM
Because mobs use to have higher AC but they were reduced across the board. The nerf makes no difference at this point. Most fighters/barbarians leave power attack on 24/7 and only miss most mobs on a 2. Very few mobs in the game have an AC above the low 30's at this point, that was not always the case.

FYI basing any logical arguements/conclusions based on Turbine's nerfing pattern is dubious at best. They boost toughness because you know Dwarfs were hurting for hit points and reduce paladin divine favor because you know paladins are the most uber class in the game right now....errr on second thought.

Alright. Different approach: If actual melee based builds won't use it due to not needing that kind of massive attack bonus. . .who is going to use it?

Hvymetal
01-22-2008, 07:18 AM
Alright. Different approach: If actual melee based builds won't use it due to not needing that kind of massive attack bonus. . .who is going to use it?
Honestly I believe the Battle Wiz's and Sorc's will as a cheap version of Tensors for less sp and still allowing spell casting.... One more reason I believe if implimented it should remain +20 for 1 strike....

EinarMal
01-22-2008, 07:25 AM
Alright. Different approach: If actual melee based builds won't use it due to not needing that kind of massive attack bonus. . .who is going to use it?

Battle casters like Aspenor's build and others. Characters that do not have full BAB, weapon focus/greater weapon focus, favored enemies, 50 str Barbarians. Most people wouldn't splash just for this, I can't see a lot of Bards taking a level of wizard for this spell for example (and they don't really need to to-hit either with Bard songs).

I am fine with a short duration but you have to make it usable given the number of encounters and speed of the game. Stopping to cast a spell in combat is a big deal, you have to make it worth the time to bother.

Mostly the only people that would use it would be "battle caster" builds (Like Wiz 13/Fighter1). Their to-hit due to BAB for them, especially if they try to go with power attack, usually is around +25 at best. For them the spell would be useful as an alternative to tensers or divine power.

If you factor in extend maybe make it something like 1s + (1s every 2 caster levels). To me extended the thing needs to last for 20 seconds or it won't be that usable. Keep in mind in most cases you can't get that many swings in given that you have to interupt combat, then move to the mobs and swing. I am also fine with reducing the bonus to +10 or something to compensate for that.

Keeping up 6s buffs is such a pain in the *** that it would not be worth it. Anything under 30s is painful to try and cast, so it would still be painful.

EinarMal
01-22-2008, 07:27 AM
Honestly I believe the Battle Wiz's and Sorc's will as a cheap version of Tensors for less sp and still allowing spell casting.... One more reason I believe if implimented it should remain +20 for 1 strike....

I have 15 clickies of divine power (and you can buy as many as you want on the AH for very little) I buy them on the cloak slot so have 4-5 cloaks with 3-5 uses on them... So, your arguement really makes no sense given how easy it is to get "free" divine power pretty much 24/7 for every fight between shrines already. It would just allow you to dump clickies and use your own spell points instead.

MysticTheurge
01-22-2008, 07:35 AM
I have 15 clickies of divine power (and you can buy as many as you want on the AH for very little). So, your arguement really makes no sense given how easy it is to get "free" divine power pretty much 24/7 for every fight between shrines already. It would just allow you to dump clickies and use your own spell points instead.

Now this is a little silly.

True Strike and Divine Power are completely different effects.

One gives you a bonus to-hit, the other changes your BAB. While superficially those might seem the same, there are actually some pretty significant differences.

EinarMal
01-22-2008, 07:40 AM
Now this is a little silly.

True Strike and Divine Power are completely different effects.

One gives you a bonus to-hit, the other changes your BAB. While superficially those might seem the same, there are actually some pretty significant differences.

Well the +6 strength is irrelevant because you should have an item. The intent of use is the same, to increase the chance you swing and hit a mob with power attack on. The downside to BAB increase is often you actually attack SLOWER because of the stupid animations.

The only time you use the divine power clicky is when you have trouble hitting mobs, it is used by battle casters as a bonus to hit so I don't think it is silly to compare them at all.

The goal is to hit something on 2+ first swing, otherwise you are not really going to be able to compete much at all as a front line melee against the "big boys". So, the itterative increasing attack bonus from Divine Power really isn't much of a factor. If you can get to 30+ on the first swing you are in pretty good shape. With Divine Power that +25 to-hit becomes +32 or so and you are in the ballpark on the first swing for most mobs.

I can see how +20 would be overpowering for 20 seconds. I think +10 would be much less so, I would rather it last longer for less of a bonus personally. The game is too dynamic for a 1 time or 6s duration spell to be usable in my opinion. I am fine with scaling both by level bonus +5 + (1 per 4 levels) and duration 1s + (1s per 2 levels).

Aspenor
01-22-2008, 07:50 AM
Which would end up being even MORE broken than the original Fighter Action Boost. Imagine a 15Barb/1Wiz. With a Magi item, that's an easy 150 spellpoints, for 7 spurts of 20 seconds each that grant +20 attack. That, good sir, is far too powerful.

That's exactly why I suggested a modified spell, even with a different name, that gives a progressive bonus as caster levels increase.

I don't have all those handy Arcana books for DnD, and all I have is the SRD at work to look at on Word. I might be able to find a similar spell to what I am proposing if I spent enough time paging through one of those suckers....I just happened to choose True Strike....

Aspenor
01-22-2008, 07:57 AM
And nobody is gonna comment about magic weapon? Greater magic weapon??? MIND BLANK!!?!?!?! Protection from spells???? Spell Mantles? Spell Turning????

EspyLacopa
01-22-2008, 07:58 AM
And nobody is gonna comment about magic weapon? Greater magic weapon??? MIND BLANK!!?!?!?!
Magic Weapon/Greater Magic Weapon: May be implemented around the same time as proper Holy Sword implementation.
Mind Blank: I sure hope so, cause it'd be far more than just a melee style buff.

EinarMal
01-22-2008, 08:00 AM
And nobody is gonna comment about magic weapon? Greater magic weapon??? MIND BLANK!!?!?!?!

At this point any spell is a good spell....:D Mind blank would be awesome, how about mirror image while we are at it or ghostly visage?

EspyLacopa
01-22-2008, 08:11 AM
At this point any spell is a good spell....:D Mind blank would be awesome, how about mirror image while we are at it or ghostly visage?
If we're asking for new spells. . .how about Wall of Iron, or Confusion? Or, or. . .Reverse Gravity!
If you want a great melee style buff. . .Iron Body spell. Gives the caster DR 15/Adamantine, without any special material component.

Aesop
01-22-2008, 08:12 AM
The people who it would be nmost useful for are high level archer based characters using slaying arrows and improved precise shot...

of course those are the characters that will already have the effect via the Arcane Archer enhancement

the next group would be casters... and really this group would only really find it useful if Touch Attacks were implemented.

a six second timer with a one shot maximum casting a ray effect like Polar Ray or Disintegrate

maybe even have true strike increase the percent chance for a critical on touch spells would be good... but really not very necessary

Other than that I don't think it would be much of a highly used thing except in rare circumstances.

what I'd really like is
Mirror Image: creates a couple of duplicates that take some of the aggro for the caster while active. so that if a caster throws a high damage effect the mobs go after one of the duplicates first ... This could also be a detaunt like diplomacy with the Duplicate having a Taunt with a base score equal to Caster Level + Casting Modifier

Aesop

Yshkabibble
01-22-2008, 08:31 AM
True strike should just be one attack period, not a duration.

Also, as has been mentioned elsewhere, The best thing to improve the balance between melees and casters is to implement a touch AC for ray attacks. This way melees who are most often the target at point blank range, will have a chance to avoid the damage.

Aspenor
01-22-2008, 08:42 AM
If we're asking for new spells. . .how about Wall of Iron, or Confusion? Or, or. . .Reverse Gravity!
If you want a great melee style buff. . .Iron Body spell. Gives the caster DR 15/Adamantine, without any special material component.

Doesn't Iron Body slow your movements??? Or am I mistaken?

EinarMal
01-22-2008, 08:57 AM
True strike should just be one attack period, not a duration.



Then they should not bother with the dev time for the spell, I will just keep using my 42s (+7 to hit) divine power clickies.

EspyLacopa
01-22-2008, 08:58 AM
Doesn't Iron Body slow your movements??? Or am I mistaken?
Oh, it does. It also gives a 50% arcane spellcasting failure.

MysticTheurge
01-22-2008, 09:07 AM
Then they should not bother with the dev time for the spell, I will just keep using my 42s (+7 to hit) divine power clickies.

Yes, cause +7 to hit for 42 seconds and +20 for one attack are the same thing. :rolleyes:

True Strike would be, as has already been said, most useful if they actually implemented touch attacks for Rays and the like.

Mercules
01-22-2008, 09:23 AM
They could implement it as a swing. You hit the spell in the hotbar and like a special attack it does a swing and detracts the proper amount of SPs. 10 SPs for a +20 to hit something would be worthwhile. They might want to have a melee version and a ranged version. Why use it? Arcane Archer build with Improved Precise shot using a Destruction bow on normally hard to hit targets. If he can line them up, one casting of this can drop all the mob's AC by 4, just like that. It's situational, but more useful than say, Cause Fear.

EspyLacopa
01-22-2008, 09:25 AM
Yes, cause +7 to hit for 42 seconds and +20 for one attack are the same thing. :rolleyes:

True Strike would be, as has already been said, most useful if they actually implemented touch attacks for Rays and the like.
Which would have the nifty side benefit of nerfing things like Wraiths and the Ghaeles' light rays.

EinarMal
01-22-2008, 09:26 AM
Yes, cause +7 to hit for 42 seconds and +20 for one attack are the same thing. :rolleyes:

True Strike would be, as has already been said, most useful if they actually implemented touch attacks for Rays and the like.

Have you ever played a buff based melee build? To take the time cast spell-swing-wait for cooldown-cast spell-swing that would be totally useless. Unless you are only hitting things on a 20 your DPS would go way down using a spell like that no intelligent player would use it like that. Even for one swing so what, you land one swing what is that going to do to ddoflated mobs?

The orignal name of the thread "Please implement more arcance spells to supplement melee ability", it is withen that context that we are having this discussion.

The thing is again, you always miss on a 1, the +20 is generally more than you need so it sounds really powerful until you actually calculate what you need to hit on a 2, and yeah +7 is usually enough so no it's not the same +7 for 42s would be much better.

EinarMal
01-22-2008, 09:38 AM
Which would have the nifty side benefit of nerfing things like Wraiths and the Ghaeles' light rays.

I am all for touch attacks, however, that is the subject of a different thread. Oh, and add in sneak attacks once you do that to my ray spells.

EinarMal
01-22-2008, 09:40 AM
They could implement it as a swing. You hit the spell in the hotbar and like a special attack it does a swing and detracts the proper amount of SPs. 10 SPs for a +20 to hit something would be worthwhile. They might want to have a melee version and a ranged version. Why use it? Arcane Archer build with Improved Precise shot using a Destruction bow on normally hard to hit targets. If he can line them up, one casting of this can drop all the mob's AC by 4, just like that. It's situational, but more useful than say, Cause Fear.

If they did it this way at least you could use it, the problem would be with moving mobs a lot of spell points would be wasted as you sometimes don't even get rolls due to lag, movement, etc... It would be very situational.

EspyLacopa
01-22-2008, 09:42 AM
If they did it this way at least you could use it, the problem would be with moving mobs a lot of spell points would be wasted as you sometimes don't even get rolls due to lag, movement, etc... It would be very situational.
Which I'm ok with. Not all spells will be useful all the time. The more situational spells put in the game, the more situations that a caster of some sort can be prepared for after all ^_^

EinarMal
01-22-2008, 09:47 AM
Which I'm ok with. Not all spells will be useful all the time. The more situational spells put in the game, the more situations that a caster of some sort can be prepared for after all ^_^

It would be nice if they did it like that if it would only deduct spell points if you get a to-hit roll. With lag and mobs running from you all over the place it would really be costly if you deducted it when the mob lurches away from you and you don't even get the roll.

MysticTheurge
01-22-2008, 10:01 AM
They could implement it as a swing.

This means it's useless for it's most common usage in D&D (ray spells). And really makes things far more complicated than they need to be.


Have you ever played a buff based melee build? To take the time cast spell-swing-wait for cooldown-cast spell-swing that would be totally useless.

Right and you missed my point.

You claimed "it wouldn't be worth the dev time because I would just use DP instead." My point was that your claim (it's not worth the dev time) is unfounded because the two things would/could be used for very different things.

Yes, a longer, lesser buff is more useful to a wiz/fighter or buff-based fighter build. A higher bonus for single attacks is, as I pointed out in my post, more useful if they implement touch attacks for ray spells and the like.

EinarMal
01-22-2008, 11:13 AM
You claimed "it wouldn't be worth the dev time because I would just use DP instead." My point was that your claim (it's not worth the dev time) is unfounded because the two things would/could be used for very different things.

Yes, a longer, lesser buff is more useful to a wiz/fighter or buff-based fighter build. A higher bonus for single attacks is, as I pointed out in my post, more useful if they implement touch attacks for ray spells and the like.

Well here's the thing, this thread is about spells to help arcanes that want to melee. Touch attacks do not exist in the game, and I have heard zero mention of ever implementing this (and I am sure they are well aware of the rule). So, in the context of "spells to help melee builds" the spell would indeed be worthless as I said if you had to cast it and then get one attack at +20.

So, in this context, the spell duration is too short, or they should just not bother with the spell. For a melee battle caster, ray spells using touch attacks are irrelevant.

MysticTheurge
01-22-2008, 11:17 AM
So, in the context of "spells to help melee builds" the spell would indeed be worthless as I said if you had to cast it and then get one attack at +20.

Yes, in that context it would be useless. But mostly because the spell is "personal" and thus can only be cast on the caster.

Like I said a while ago. ;)

EinarMal
01-22-2008, 11:22 AM
Yes, in that context it would be useless. But mostly because the spell is "personal" and thus can only be cast on the caster.

Like I said a while ago. ;)

No, Asp means spells to help wizard or sorc/battle casters melee not buff others. Like the arcane psycho build and others. In addition to tensers/divine power, rage, haste, displacement, stoneskin etc....

smatt
01-22-2008, 11:23 AM
LOL, why not do all these things and then jsut simply delete all melees from the game..... :eek:

EinarMal
01-22-2008, 11:24 AM
LOL, why not do all these things and then jsut simply delete all melees from the game..... :eek:

Pfft you would really be saying this had they not dropped the ball on prestige classes like Eldritch Knight.

Aspenor
01-22-2008, 11:31 AM
Yes, in that context it would be useless. But mostly because the spell is "personal" and thus can only be cast on the caster.

Like I said a while ago. ;)

You're missing the point, MT.

Wizards don't NEED to be casting spells. When Mod 6 hits I am planning a melee wizard swinging two-handed weapons and utilizing enchantments and hold spells. It's not useless to have bonuses to-hit on a .5 BAB progression class when your primary function is to melee.

You seem to think the bonus to hit would only work for touches and rays, but it wouldn't. There are multiclass and off the beaten path builds that can use just as much, actually MORE.

EspyLacopa
01-22-2008, 11:36 AM
Pfft you would really be saying this had they not dropped the ball on prestige classes like Eldritch Knight.

Hmmmm. Eldritch Knight as an enhancement line such as Tempest and such eh?

Prereqs:
One of: Wizard Energy of the Scholar II OR Sorcerer Energy of the Dragonblooded II OR Bard Energy of Music II
Feats: Martial Weapon Proficiency(all of them!)

Benefit: +2 Caster Level for purposes of spell points, durations, damage, and spell resistance checks. +1 BAB.

Further enhancements may add further BAB, at the cost of some fashion of higher end melee enhancement, like Item Defense enhancements as well as adding a bit more to that Caster Level to make up for the further melee class levels.
What do you think?

smatt
01-22-2008, 11:46 AM
Pfft you would really be saying this had they not dropped the ball on prestige classes like Eldritch Knight.


Prestige classes ruined PnP,a nd they would ruin DDO even more then it is now. Just my opinion though..... I may be jumping the gun on the Mod 6, as I only ran the Vale area and not the quests. The question of how effective a balanced party is compared to a very caster heavy party is a complicated one that would go into many pages simply for one post. But all the peopel that mainly play caster know full well DDO has gone almsot completely caster-centric in the last 6 months. MOST melees are ad rag on a party, and a drag on resources in MOST high level content anymore. Sure if you have a self-suffcient build, and are a good player you are useful. But for a good amount of the players out there though, things are getting slimer and slimer. It is becoming far more common to see caster heavy parties with idiot casters who refuse to throw ANY buffs at all. The Devs have created a monster in that caster have become so over-powered as to become extremely arrogant. Not all I might add, but it becoming far more common. Why waste that free UNLIMITED mana buffing a class that will simply slow me down...... Why take a class into a quest that would make the quest a bit harder and take 5 or 10 more minutes? I don't blame them to be honest.... You give a man a free case of beer, what does he do? He drinks it, and he becomes a drunk idiot, then try and take those last 2 beers from him... That's what we have now... Hopefully mod 6 changes it around a bit. I dont' call for nerfing casters at all, just for creating a game where ALL the classes have true value, not nominal every once in a while value :) The Devs have created a situation taht has fosterd the arrogance of the caster classes to epic proportions, which in the end if it continues we lead to an even faster shrinking of the player base. :mad:

MysticTheurge
01-22-2008, 11:48 AM
You're missing the point, MT.

Wizards don't NEED to be casting spells. When Mod 6 hits I am planning a melee wizard swinging two-handed weapons and utilizing enchantments and hold spells. It's not useless to have bonuses to-hit on a .5 BAB progression class when your primary function is to melee.

Well if you're holding things then your to-hit is pretty much irrelevant. ;)


You seem to think the bonus to hit would only work for touches and rays, but it wouldn't. There are multiclass and off the beaten path builds that can use just as much, actually MORE.

No, I realize it would be useful in other situations as well. But as written and designed the spell is the most use for single attacks that do a lot of damage. For casters this is largely other spells that require an attack roll such as Touch or Ranged Touch spells.

It's not the only place, sure. Firing slaying arrows is also a good use. And heck you can use it on regular attacks, it's just not going to be as beneficial. Because the spell is designed to ensure that one attack hits, and so the best use for it is to make sure that attack is going to deal a lot of damage (or have other effects) when it does hit.

EinarMal
01-22-2008, 11:53 AM
No, I realize it would be useful in other situations as well. But as written and designed the spell is the most use for single attacks that do a lot of damage. For casters this is largely other spells that require an attack roll such as Touch or Ranged Touch spells.

It's not the only place, sure. Firing slaying arrows is also a good use. And heck you can use it on regular attacks, it's just not going to be as beneficial. Because the spell is designed to ensure that one attack hits, and so the best use for it is to make sure that attack is going to deal a lot of damage (or have other effects) when it does hit.

If they did do touch AC and true strike for one hit on ray spells, how would scorching ray work with sneak attacks if you had levels of rogue? Would you get those on each ray?

I am pretty sure NWN allowed for sneak attacks on orb type spells like this, but I am not sure if this is actually a standard 3.5 rule.

EinarMal
01-22-2008, 11:59 AM
Prestige classes ruined PnP,a nd they would ruin DDO even more then it is now. Just my opinion though..... I may be jumping the gun on the Mod 6, as I only ran the Vale area and not the quests. The question of how effective a balanced party is compared to a very caster heavy party is a complicated one that would go into many pages simply for one post. But all the peopel that mainly play caster know full well DDO has gone almsot completely caster-centric in the last 6 months. MOST melees are ad rag on a party, and a drag on resources in MOST high level content anymore. Sure if you have a self-suffcient build, and are a good player you are useful. But for a good amount of the players out there though, things are getting slimer and slimer. It is becoming far more common to see caster heavy parties with idiot casters who refuse to throw ANY buffs at all. The Devs have created a monster in that caster have become so over-powered as to become extremely arrogant. Not all I might add, but it becoming far more common. Why waste that free UNLIMITED mana buffing a class that will simply slow me down...... Why take a class into a quest that would make the quest a bit harder and take 5 or 10 more minutes? I don't blame them to be honest.... You give a man a free case of beer, what does he do? He drinks it, and he becomes a drunk idiot, then try and take those last 2 beers from him... That's what we have now... Hopefully mod 6 changes it around a bit. I dont' call for nerfing casters at all, just for creating a game where ALL the classes have true value, not nominal every once in a while value :) The Devs have created a situation taht has fosterd the arrogance of the caster classes to epic proportions, which in the end if it continues we lead to an even faster shrinking of the player base. :mad:

Well here is the thing, if you look at munchkin type 3.5 games, casters rule in them. If you don't keep power in check and allow for crazy items and power inflation casters tend to benefit the most in the long run. Almost all uber leet PnP builds take advantage of spell casting etc... DDO is a munchkin game, everything is bloated and over inflated, from the enhancement system, multi-classing rules, and items. So, in a situation like that it becomes rather difficult to keep casters in check, especially when the mob AI will never be all that great due to computer limitations and dev time.

MysticTheurge
01-22-2008, 12:02 PM
If they did do touch AC and true strike for one hit on ray spells, how would scorching ray work with sneak attacks if you had levels of rogue? Would you get those on each ray?

You should get sneak attack damage on each attack in a round, that would mean you'd get it on each ray.

I think. I'm always a little unclear on how often sneak attack works.


I am pretty sure NWN allowed for sneak attacks on orb type spells like this, but I am not sure if this is actually a standard 3.5 rule.

Yep, those orb spells are also range touch attacks and so also allow sneak attack damage.

KiwiPhil889
01-22-2008, 12:07 PM
... You cant tell me you're getting bored with,or sick of casting Displacement,Blur,GH and Haste,over and over again. You're wanting more variety?? pfffttt shame on you.

EinarMal
01-22-2008, 12:07 PM
You should get sneak attack damage on each attack in a round, that would mean you'd get it on each ray.

I think. I'm always a little unclear on how often sneak attack works.


Yep, those orb spells are also range touch attacks and so also allow sneak attack damage.

This would be awesome....

llevenbaxx
01-22-2008, 12:10 PM
You're missing the point, MT.

Wizards don't NEED to be casting spells. When Mod 6 hits I am planning a melee wizard swinging two-handed weapons and utilizing enchantments and hold spells. It's not useless to have bonuses to-hit on a .5 BAB progression class when your primary function is to melee.

You seem to think the bonus to hit would only work for touches and rays, but it wouldn't. There are multiclass and off the beaten path builds that can use just as much, actually MORE.

True, my WF ftr8/wiz6 would like to have another buff to get his to hit higher. That said I think we already have enough in the game to be pretty deadly in combat. I would say there shuold be no way this type of spell would remain 1st level. A strength built ftr2/wiz12(or w/e) can already be made pretty solid melee character. You shouldnt be able to have it all, with tools like this you could keep you casting stat very high(retaining all that is good about being a caster) and be able to hit just about as well as a melee with all that is out there. +5 or so to hit is like throwing +10 to you str for puposes of hitting. Add that to Tensors or a simple DP clickie and you are hitting better than some fighters and paladins out there(while standing in your 140pt/tick FW).

Im all for making custom, creative builds be viable but this would imo be pushing for too much. All the tools are already there, some sacrifices must be made.

EspyLacopa
01-22-2008, 12:40 PM
You should get sneak attack damage on each attack in a round, that would mean you'd get it on each ray.
I believe in this case it'd be similar to cases where you can hit something twice in the same time span as you normally only hit once. Like the Dual Strike feat that allows two hits after a charge, you only get the precision based damage, such as sneak attack, on one of the attacks.

Aspenor
01-22-2008, 03:40 PM
There's a lot more to discuss than the True Strike point....

Why isn't protection from spells on the level 8 spell list for mod 6? How hard could that be?

bobbryan2
01-22-2008, 03:54 PM
Keen edge would be nice, even as a self-only buff that gave you an improved critical feat of your choice for 1 min/lvl.

Go a long way to making up the fact that a pure wizard can't take improved critical until level 18 otherwise.

I'm definately all for more melee enhancing spells. Especially at low levels.

dragnmoon
01-22-2008, 04:17 PM
I believe in this case it'd be similar to cases where you can hit something twice in the same time span as you normally only hit once. Like the Dual Strike feat that allows two hits after a charge, you only get the precision based damage, such as sneak attack, on one of the attacks.

From WotC


Any spell that requires an attack roll and deals damage can be used in a sneak attack. In this case "damage" is normal damage, nonlethal damage, ability damage, or energy drain. You can sneak attack with a Melf's acid arrow spell, but not with a magic missile spell.


Ranged spells are effective as sneak attacks only at ranges of 30 feet or less (just like any other ranged sneak attack).


A successful sneak attack with a weaponlike spell inflicts extra damage according to the attacker's sneak attack ability, and the extra damage dealt is the same type as the spell deals. For example, a 10th-level rogue who makes a successful sneak attack with a Melf's acid arrow spell inflicts 2d4 points of acid damage, plus an extra 5d6 points of acid damage from the sneak attack (note that continuing damage from this spell is not part of the sneak attack). Spells that inflict energy drains or ability damage deal extra negative energy damage in a sneak attack, not extra negative levels or ability damage. For example, a 10th-level rogue who makes a successful sneak attack with an enervation spell deals 1d4 negative levels plus an extra 5d6 points of negative energy damage.


If the sneak attack with a weaponlike spell results in a critical hit, the damage from the spell is doubled but the extra sneak attack damage is not doubled (as with any sneak attack).


With spell effects that allow you to make multiple attack rolls, such as the energy orb spells or the Split Ray feat from Tome and Blood, you must treat the effect like a volley -- only the first attack can be a sneak attack.

EspyLacopa
01-22-2008, 05:39 PM
With spell effects that allow you to make multiple attack rolls, such as the energy orb spells or the Split Ray feat from Tome and Blood, you must treat the effect like a volley -- only the first attack can be a sneak attack.
So. . .I was correct.

llevenbaxx
01-23-2008, 07:52 AM
A successful sneak attack with a weaponlike spell inflicts extra damage according to the attacker's sneak attack ability, and the extra damage dealt is the same type as the spell deals. For example, a 10th-level rogue who makes a successful sneak attack with a Melf's acid arrow spell inflicts 2d4 points of acid damage, plus an extra 5d6 points of acid damage from the sneak attack (note that continuing damage from this spell is not part of the sneak attack). Spells that inflict energy drains or ability damage deal extra negative energy damage in a sneak attack, not extra negative levels or ability damage. For example, a 10th-level rogue who makes a successful sneak attack with an enervation spell deals 1d4 negative levels plus an extra 5d6 points of negative energy damage.

[/LEFT]

I would absolutely love for them to flesh this game out to this point. I forget sometimes all the different rules that make up PnP that this game still lacks. Knowing the severe casting disadvantages non-pure casters are at in this game, things like getting +2d6(and eventually +3d6) to some of my damaging spells would help to make up the slack while still being a little behind a pure. Would allow for alot more stategy in picking from my more limited spell list too. I think there are enough caster/rogue builds in the DDO to make implimenting a feature like this worth while.

I think the odds and ends game features like this are what made PnP D&D feel like such an immersive well thought out enviernment. Hopfully DDO will follow suit to at least some degree.

EspyLacopa
01-23-2008, 10:53 AM
I would absolutely love for them to flesh this game out to this point. I forget sometimes all the different rules that make up PnP that this game still lacks. Knowing the severe casting disadvantages non-pure casters are at in this game, things like getting +2d6(and eventually +3d6) to some of my damaging spells would help to make up the slack while still being a little behind a pure. Would allow for alot more stategy in picking from my more limited spell list too. I think there are enough caster/rogue builds in the DDO to make implimenting a feature like this worth while.

I think the odds and ends game features like this are what made PnP D&D feel like such an immersive well thought out enviernment. Hopfully DDO will follow suit to at least some degree.
Fun Fact #1: Scorching Ray caps out at 3 rays of 4d6 each.
Fun Fact #2: Combo Wiz11 with Rog9 in PnP for Scorching Rays that deal a total of 17d6 fire damage, at the cost of a mere lv2 spell slot.
Fun Fact #3: Greater Invis in PnP is crazy powerful for it lets a rogue get sneak attacks on everything that can't see through the invis.

EinarMal
01-23-2008, 11:14 AM
Fun Fact #1: Scorching Ray caps out at 3 rays of 4d6 each.
Fun Fact #2: Combo Wiz11 with Rog9 in PnP for Scorching Rays that deal a total of 17d6 fire damage, at the cost of a mere lv2 spell slot.
Fun Fact #3: Greater Invis in PnP is crazy powerful for it lets a rogue get sneak attacks on everything that can't see through the invis.

I am ahead of the curve on this one, working on a Wizard 11/Rogue 7/Fighter 2 build with GTWF. So, I just need turbine to un-nerf my build and allow sneak attacks on my ray spells :D

EspyLacopa
01-23-2008, 11:19 AM
I am ahead of the curve on this one, working on a Wizard 11/Rogue 7/Fighter 2 build with GTWF. So, I just need turbine to un-nerf my build and allow sneak attacks on my ray spells :D
Also implementation of the spell Greater Invisibility. It's like Invisibility, only it doesn't end when you attack something.

MysticTheurge
01-23-2008, 11:58 AM
Also implementation of the spell Greater Invisibility. It's like Invisibility, only it doesn't end when you attack something.

Which translates to pretty much non-stop sneak attacks.

EinarMal
01-23-2008, 12:08 PM
Which translates to pretty much non-stop sneak attacks.

I actually already get that on my Wizard 11/Rouge 2/Fighter 1, a quickened+heightened glitterdust at DC 28. Not quite as good but it works pretty well. Now I just need the cap to go up for more sneak damage.

MysticTheurge
01-23-2008, 12:22 PM
I actually already get that on my Wizard 11/Rouge 2/Fighter 1, a quickened+heightened glitterdust at DC 28. Not quite as good but it works pretty well. Now I just need the cap to go up for more sneak damage.

Yeah but greater invisibility moves around with you. ;)

EinarMal
01-23-2008, 12:23 PM
Yeah but greater invisibility moves around with you. ;)

Yeah don't get me wrong that would be awesome, that is why I said almost as good :p

EspyLacopa
01-23-2008, 01:18 PM
Which translates to pretty much non-stop sneak attacks.
Unless the enemy has True Seeing or some version of Blindsight.

kruggar
01-23-2008, 01:49 PM
that make me think on thing MT. why didnt they implemented greater invisibility till now?

the mechanics is there, so why not?

EspyLacopa
01-23-2008, 01:59 PM
that make me think on thing MT. why didnt they implemented greater invisibility till now?

the mechanics is there, so why not?

You saying they *have* implemented it? When?

MysticTheurge
01-23-2008, 02:08 PM
Unless the enemy has True Seeing or some version of Blindsight.

Those sneaky bastards. ;)


that make me think on thing MT. why didnt they implemented greater invisibility till now?

the mechanics is there, so why not?

If I had to guess:

There's no Flat-Footed AC. The other major benefit of Greater Invisibility is that you're constantly going up against your opponents flat-footed AC (since they can't see you). But DDO only has one AC, regular old plain-jane AC. It doesn't have Touch AC and it doesn't have Flat-Footed AC.

This means that one of the main benefits of Greater Invisibility can't be implemented. And sure they could implement it as is and just grant Sneak Attacks, but then you'd start seeing more and more "DDO needs Flat-Footed AC" threads like we're starting to get "DDO needs Touch AC" threads.

Though, I think, ideally, they could add both of those things at once and just get it over with.

EspyLacopa
01-23-2008, 02:13 PM
There's no Flat-Footed AC. The other major benefit of Greater Invisibility is that you're constantly going up against your opponents flat-footed AC (since they can't see you). But DDO only has one AC, regular old plain-jane AC. It doesn't have Touch AC and it doesn't have Flat-Footed AC.

This means that one of the main benefits of Greater Invisibility can't be implemented. And sure they could implement it as is and just grant Sneak Attacks, but then you'd start seeing more and more "DDO needs Flat-Footed AC" threads like we're starting to get "DDO needs Touch AC" threads.

Though, I think, ideally, they could add both of those things at once and just get it over with.
There's also the fact that it gives you total concealment. 50% miss chance is always nice.

Though having both Flat-footed AC and Touch AC would be nice additions. So long as they clearly and concisely explain what each is in the game.