PDA

View Full Version : Spell changes needed [suggestion]



Ustice
06-15-2008, 12:18 PM
This subject comes up from time to time, but I thought that it was time to do it again. This is by far a comprehensive list, but instead are the ones that I use.

All "Symbol of" spells:
The timer is way too long. When other AOE spells had their cool-down timers reduced, these didn't. Also, their cool-down timers are linked. These problems make these spells very difficult to use effectively and hardly worth taking (especially more than one at a time). Please concider lowering the cool-down timer, and seperating the times on these great spells as they are some of the only enchantment spells that a cleric has access to (other than command, greater command). These spells are supposed to have high material component costs. These materials should be added to keep the spells in check.

Word of Recall:
One location? Really? Still? Why not have it at least allow us to teleport to our bind point if not to any tavern? If you did that, then a mass word of recall spell would be helpful as well.

Blade Barrier:
I know that it is being worked on, but it deserves mention here.

Summon Monster:
Can we get some options please? Also, is there still a need to have the timer last so long? Now that the AI is fixed so that it won't break the mobs, it would be nice to have more than one pet. Separate times would be great too.

Flame Strike / Fire Storm:
The casting times on these spells is ridiculous. By the time that the spell is cast, either the mob has moved or it is dead. They should have about the same casting time as Fire Ball.

Unyielding Sovereignty:
Okay, so it isn't a spell, but the timer is a little silly. Why aren't these faith-based Enhancements using Turning Attempts? That is the mechanic used for most of the stuff in PnP, and it keeps things balanced. Abilities like this should use 2 turning attempts (maybe 3) instead of a timer.

Greater Teleport: (added at the suggestion of bobbryan2 (http://forums.ddo.com/showpost.php?p=1751566&postcount=4))
New locations need to be added. It has been several mods since there have been anything added to this list. Also we need to be able to cast this in public areas.

Cone of Cold: (added at the suggestion of Borror0 (http://forums.ddo.com/showpost.php?p=1751593&postcount=6))
Casting time is too low, and there are a lot of misfires.

Persistant effect spells, such as Glitterdust: (added at the suggestion of bobbryan2 (http://forums.ddo.com/showpost.php?p=1751593&postcount=12))
These should inflict new saving throws every few seconds to creatures that remain inside the effect. This currently works for Cloudkill.

Web: (added at the suggestion of bobbryan2 (http://forums.ddo.com/showpost.php?p=1751621&postcount=12))
This spell should not prevent melee attacks. Creatures inside should be entangled, slowed, and have a dexterity penalty.

Protection from Evil: (added at the suggestion of winsom (http://forums.ddo.com/showpost.php?p=1752115&postcount=19))
Range of this spell should be brought in line with protection from energy, and other spells that are "touch" range in PnP.

Good Hope: (added at the suggestion of winsom (http://forums.ddo.com/showpost.php?p=1752291&postcount=21) and MysticTheurge (http://forums.ddo.com/showpost.php?p=1752398&postcount=23))
Good Hope spell is unique among the morale bonus spells in that it grants a bonus to Ability Checks. The DDO tool-tip says bonus to abilities, yet no bonus that I can see is being given in the game.

At the very least Good Hope should be granting this bonus to resist trip, sunder, and stunning blow attacks as these are STR or DEX-based ability checks. I beleive there should also be +2 DC to added to our offensive ability attacks too, such as trip, sunder, stunning blow as these DDO checks are ability contests of our STR verses the monsters. Stunning Fist and Quivering Palm and other monk abilities could be considered wisdom ability checks and could be given the enhanced DCs, but that is not as definate.

It should also probably affect people's ability score for the purpose of meeting minimum requirements, such as those presented by levers or runes. In reality, those things would be ability checks in D&D, they're just static-value checks in DDO.

_____________________________

As a side note on casting times, I hate it when I am casting a spell with a long casting time, and I get hit causing me to lose the spell, but my character still goes through the motions. Can we get this to disrupt the casting animation, since we have already lost the spell (and the mana), it would be nice to try casting another before being eaten. Thanks.

MrCow
06-15-2008, 12:20 PM
Can we get this to disrupt the casting animation

Tumble. :p

Ustice
06-15-2008, 12:24 PM
Does that work if we have no tumble skill and just hop? (It still needs to be fixed.)

bobbryan2
06-15-2008, 12:28 PM
This subject comes up from time to time, but I thought that it was time to do it again. This is by far a comprehensive list, but instead are the ones that I use.

All "symbol of" spells:
The timer is way too long. When other AOE spells had their cool-down timers reduced, these didn't. Also, their cool-down timers are linked. These problems make these spells very difficult to use effectively and hardly worth taking (especially more than one at a time). Please concider lowering the cool-down timer, and seperating the times on these great spells as they are some of the only enchantment spells that a cleric has access to (other than command, greater command).

Word of Recall:
One location? Really? Still? Why not have it at least allow us to teleport to our bind point if not to any tavern? If you did that, then a mass word of recall spell would be helpful as well.

Blade Barrier:
I know that it is being worked on, but it deserves mention here.

Summon Monster:
Can we get some options please? Also, is there still a need to have the timer last so long? Now that the AI is fixed so that it won't break the mobs, it would be nice to have more than one pet. Separate times would be great too.

Flame Strike / Fire Storm:
The casting times on these spells is ridiculous. By the time that the spell is cast, either the mob has moved or it is dead. They should have about the same casting time as Fire Ball.

Unyielding Sovereignty:
Okay, so it isn't a spell, but the timer is a little silly. Why aren't these faith-based Enhancements using Turning Attempts? That is the mechanic used for most of the stuff in PnP, and it keeps things balanced. Abilities like this should use 2 turning attempts (maybe 3) instead of a timer.

As a side note on casting times, I hate it when I am casting a spell with a long casting time, and I get hit causing me to lose the spell, but my character still goes through the motions. Can we get this to disrupt the casting animation, since we have already lost the spell (and the mana), it would be nice to try casting another before being eaten. Thanks.

You forgot Greater Teleport.

:)

Ustice
06-15-2008, 12:33 PM
You forgot Greater Teleport.

Well, I did say that it wasn't comprehensive. :) I mostly play a cleric. Feel free to add to the list. Heck, I will even update it.

Borror0
06-15-2008, 12:54 PM
Cone of Cold needs to stop mis-firing... -_- Fastening wouldn't be a bad idea, but I can live with it.

bobbryan2
06-15-2008, 01:02 PM
Well, I did say that it wasn't comprehensive. :) I mostly play a cleric. Feel free to add to the list. Heck, I will even update it.

Cool, they also need to fix the longstanding bug of being unable to cast it in public places, necessitating finding a raid zone to zone into to teleport people to the Twilight Forge and the like.

Borror0
06-15-2008, 01:25 PM
Cool, they also need to fix the longstanding bug of being unable to cast it in public places, necessitating finding a raid zone to zone into to teleport people to the Twilight Forge and the like.

Not so much of a pain now, with Subterrane.

MysticTheurge
06-15-2008, 01:25 PM
Cool, they also need to fix the longstanding bug of being unable to cast it in public places, necessitating finding a raid zone to zone into to teleport people to the Twilight Forge and the like.

I thought they just added the Subterrane to fix this. ;) :D

Borror0
06-15-2008, 01:29 PM
I thought they just added the Subterrane to fix this. ;) :D

Too slow.:D

winsom
06-15-2008, 01:32 PM
Protection from Evil needs a longer casting Range

Persistant Cloud spells should have the same casting time (animation) as other offensive spells (faster)

Persistant Effect spells, such as Glitterdust, should inflict new saving throws every few seconds to creatures that remain inside the Effect. This currently works for Cloudkill. Why not other spells?

The Web spell should not prevent melee attacks.

bobbryan2
06-15-2008, 01:33 PM
I thought they just added the Subterrane to fix this. ;) :D

There's that word 'fix' again... talking about work arounds and band-aids.

:)

Ustice
06-15-2008, 03:06 PM
Protection from Evil needs a longer casting Range

Persistant Cloud spells should have the same casting time (animation) as other offensive spells (faster)

Persistant Effect spells, such as Glitterdust, should inflict new saving throws every few seconds to creatures that remain inside the Effect. This currently works for Cloudkill. Why not other spells?

The Web spell should not prevent melee attacks.

Protection from Evil by the PnP rules is Touch, so this was by design.

Persistent AoE spells have a longer casting time by design. I don't agree with the decision, but it is consistent.

I will add the other two though.

MysticTheurge
06-15-2008, 09:54 PM
Persistent AoE spells have a longer casting time by design. I don't agree with the decision, but it is consistent.

Unless something's changed about Wall of Fire, it is most certainly not consistent.

Some Persistent AoE spells have longer casting times and some don't.

MrCow
06-15-2008, 10:09 PM
Persistant Effect spells, such as Glitterdust, should inflict new saving throws every few seconds to creatures that remain inside the Effect. This currently works for Cloudkill. Why not other spells?

Cloudkill has never granted a new save for critters inside of it. You have to drag things out and get them back in to force a new save (and if you know they are taking 1d2 CON damage per tick it is sometimes worth it).

Ustice
06-15-2008, 10:15 PM
I thought that the devs said that they were standardizing this. Like I said, I mostly play a cleric, so I don't know about the non-cleric spells. If that is the case, I can add it. Any opinions on this?

sirgog
06-15-2008, 10:43 PM
Cloudkill has never granted a new save for critters inside of it. You have to drag things out and get them back in to force a new save (and if you know they are taking 1d2 CON damage per tick it is sometimes worth it).

I think the OP is referring to the possible instant-kill of low HD foes by CK.

I know that's happened to me a few times on SC hard.

bandyman1
06-15-2008, 11:27 PM
Protection from Evil needs a longer casting Range

Persistant Cloud spells should have the same casting time (animation) as other offensive spells (faster)

Persistant Effect spells, such as Glitterdust, should inflict new saving throws every few seconds to creatures that remain inside the Effect. This currently works for Cloudkill. Why not other spells?

The Web spell should not prevent melee attacks.

Not sure I agree with this. According to the spell discription, if you fail your save, you're entangled in the webbing. Now the spell doesn't specificly state that you can't melee, but it doesn't state that you can either. And I don't see how it'd be possible to, when you're emeshed in a sticky net. I've always ruled that melee was impossible for any PC entangled in my own campaigns.

winsom
06-16-2008, 12:58 AM
Protection from Evil by the PnP rules is Touch, so this was by design..

Many "Range: Touch" spells in D&D have the extended range in DDO. Why is Protection from Evil different from the others?

Mage Armor, Resist Energy, Invisibility, Blur, Bear’s Endurance (and the others), Displacement, Bestow Curse, Protection from Energy, Heroism, Greater Heroism, and True Seeing are also touch range.


. I've always ruled that melee was impossible for any PC entangled in my own campaigns.

Entanglement has specific penalties in the rules (check the glossary) and the prevention of close-range attacks is not among them. The Web spell does more than entangle though. Admittedly it is a complicated spell to understand, but it does say exactly what it does. It also slows down all creatures inside (they use strength checks to move) and if the creature fails it save it can not move from it's spot. The reflex save is only supposed to determine if the creature is allowed to slowly move (save success) or if it has to break-free first before it can slowly move. In DDO all creatures within a Web spell, even those that save, should have slowed movement, similar to a Solid Fog spell (perhaps not as slow). DDO currently allows creatures to zoom through a Web spell on a successful save. That should not be allowed.

DDO seems not to have all of the technology to make Web work correctly, but it currently works too good in some ways and not good enough in other ways. For instance, creatures near the center of the Web should not be able to aim ranged spells or make ranged attacks and we should not be able to target them either. Sufficient webbing material creates an obstruction to vision -- both ways. The Web area is supposed to be a lot larger than it is in DDO, so this "center" area would be significantly larger. DDO probably can't do this. I'm not saying it should.

Web should not prevent melee attacks. It should give a penalty to dexterity and attacks, as per the Entanglement rules.

Web should not prevent spell-casting based on the saving throw. It is supposed to be a concentration check but I suggest that DDO uses a Constitution check as monsters probably do not have concentration scores. It is too powerful for a reflex save (with no spell resistance) to prevent enemy spell-casting and attacks.

It seems that the fiends in the new Subteranne area are simply immune to Web. Turbine's solution to DDO Web being "too powerful" is to make certain creatures immune when they should not be. That is a game balance problem. I don't like to have my caster's spells automatically resisted by non-named monsters. (it doesn't tell me "Immune" either, so I have to wonder why Web isn't working) They should fix the spell and take away the immunities. I'd be happy if the uber-fiends were -2 attack, -4 DEX and half movement while within the Web (even on a sucessful save this should happen).

Ustice
06-16-2008, 06:23 AM
Many "Range: Touch" spells in D&D have the extended range in DDO. Why is Protection from Evil different from the others?

Mage Armor, Resist Energy, Invisibility, Blur, Bear’s Endurance (and the others), Displacement, Bestow Curse, Protection from Energy, Heroism, Greater Heroism, and True Seeing are also touch range.

Added


Entanglement has specific penalties in the rules (check the glossary) and the prevention of close-range attacks is not among them. The Web spell does more than entangle though. Admittedly it is a complicated spell to understand, but it does say exactly what it does. It also slows down all creatures inside (they use strength checks to move) and if the creature fails it save it can not move from it's spot. The reflex save is only supposed to determine if the creature is allowed to slowly move (save success) or if it has to break-free first before it can slowly move. In DDO all creatures within a Web spell, even those that save, should have slowed movement, similar to a Solid Fog spell (perhaps not as slow). DDO currently allows creatures to zoom through a Web spell on a successful save. That should not be allowed.

DDO seems not to have all of the technology to make Web work correctly, but it currently works too good in some ways and not good enough in other ways. For instance, creatures near the center of the Web should not be able to aim ranged spells or make ranged attacks and we should not be able to target them either. Sufficient webbing material creates an obstruction to vision -- both ways. The Web area is supposed to be a lot larger than it is in DDO, so this "center" area would be significantly larger. DDO probably can't do this. I'm not saying it should.

Web should not prevent melee attacks. It should give a penalty to dexterity and attacks, as per the Entanglement rules.

Web should not prevent spell-casting based on the saving throw. It is supposed to be a concentration check but I suggest that DDO uses a Constitution check as monsters probably do not have concentration scores. It is too powerful for a reflex save (with no spell resistance) to prevent enemy spell-casting and attacks.



Added. Most mobs will not need a concentration skill due to their already inflated constitution scores.

winsom
06-16-2008, 07:57 AM
Good Hope spell is unique among the morale bonus spells in that it grants a bonus to Ability Checks. The DDO tool-tip says bonus to abilities, yet no bonus that I can see is being given in the game.

At the very least Good Hope should be granting this bonus to resist trip, sunder, and stunning blow attacks as these are STR or DEX-based ability checks. I beleive there should also be +2 DC to added to our offensive ability attacks too, such as trip, sunder, stunning blow as these DDO checks are ability contests of our STR verses the monsters. Stunning Fist and Quivering Palm and other monk abilities could be considered wisdom ability checks and could be given the enhanced DCs, but that is not as definate.

GrayOldDruid
06-16-2008, 08:30 AM
All "Symbol of" spells:
The timer is way too long. When other AOE spells had their cool-down timers reduced, these didn't. Also, their cool-down timers are linked. These problems make these spells very difficult to use effectively and hardly worth taking (especially more than one at a time). Please concider lowering the cool-down timer, and seperating the times on these great spells as they are some of the only enchantment spells that a cleric has access to (other than command, greater command).

Yes!!! I got symbol of Stunning and Symbol of Weakness - cooldown is 1:45 - and casting one locks out the other. Ding Dang It!!! Even leaving the cooldown where it is, separate the timer so we can at least cast two or five different symbols.


Word of Recall: (added at the suggestion of wisdom (http://forums.ddo.com/showpost.php?p=1752115&postcount=19))
One location? Really? Still? Why not have it at least allow us to teleport to our bind point if not to any tavern? If you did that, then a mass word of recall spell would be helpful as well.

<sarcasm>What?? No... someone may actually USE the spell then.... what are you thinking??</sarcasm>



Flame Strike / Fire Storm:
The casting times on these spells is ridiculous. By the time that the spell is cast, either the mob has moved or it is dead. They should have about the same casting time as Fire Ball.

Hear!! Hear!! Actually no point in using these spells unless they're against enemy archers who stand still long enough. May include CometFall or Meteor strike, you know the one I'm talking about... Doah...


Persistant effect spells, such as Glitterdust: (added at the suggestion of bobbryan2 (http://forums.ddo.com/showpost.php?p=1751593&postcount=12))
These should inflict new saving throws every few seconds to creatures that remain inside the effect. This currently works for Cloudkill.

Yep! Should be the same as firewall, cloudkill, acid fog... may include Dancing Sphere and Hypnotic Pattern as well. If you stay inside the effect, you should have to make periodic checks to avoid its effects.


Web: (added at the suggestion of bobbryan2 (http://forums.ddo.com/showpost.php?p=1751621&postcount=12))
This spell should not prevent melee attacks. Creatures inside should be entangled, slowed, and have a dexterity penalty.

Okay, here I will say What the H E double hockey sticks are you thinking??? Beef up the ranger spell "Brambles" or "Snare" for that. Web is casting a Super Sticky Spider Web - have you seen something stuck in a spider web? Attacking is the last thing it can do... why? Cause its freakin' stuck in the web. It takes a lot of strength and/or time to break free. It is working like it should. I'd like to see a 'greater web' with higher DC and STR check required to avoid or get out of it. Of course, attacks against someone in a web should help free them quicker too - hacking at the victim also hacks at the web. Piercing probably wouldn't though... Slashing and bludgeoning would.



As a side note on casting times, I hate it when I am casting a spell with a long casting time, and I get hit causing me to lose the spell, but my character still goes through the motions. Can we get this to disrupt the casting animation, since we have already lost the spell (and the mana), it would be nice to try casting another before being eaten. Thanks.

Oh, yeah... I've noticed that if I get hit while casting... oh, symbol of persuasion, I still complete the whole casting process only to be totally disappointed that it didn't go off... I finished casting!!!

MysticTheurge
06-16-2008, 09:41 AM
A bunch of stuff about web.

If you fail your save against web, you can then attempt to break free by spending "1 round and making a DC 20 Strength check or a DC 25 Escape Artist check." If you take an action, you cannot attempt to break free. The DDO system just assumes that you want to do try to break free and therefore you cannot take actions until you make a save. Which is reasonable, since there's no way for the interface to really ask you which you want to do.


Good Hope spell is unique among the morale bonus spells in that it grants a bonus to Ability Checks.

It should also probably affect people's ability score for the purpose of meeting minimum requirements, such as those presented by levers or runes. In reality, those things would be ability checks in D&D, they're just static-value checks in DDO.

Ustice
06-16-2008, 10:03 AM
If you fail your save against web, you can then attempt to break free by spending "1 round and making a DC 20 Strength check or a DC 25 Escape Artist check." If you take an action, you cannot attempt to break free. The DDO system just assumes that you want to do try to break free and therefore you cannot take actions until you make a save. Which is reasonable, since there's no way for the interface to really ask you which you want to do.


If you are not moving and casting a spell or attacking, I would disagree. Movement implies trying to free yourself. The important thing is that movement should prevent other actions.

As for Good Hope, it might be better to just make it a +2 Ability boost, and be done with it. (It'd make Bards more popular too.)

TreknaQudane
06-16-2008, 10:17 AM
Good Hope: (added at the suggestion of winsom (http://forums.ddo.com/showpost.php?p=1752291&postcount=21) and MysticTheurge (http://forums.ddo.com/showpost.php?p=1752398&postcount=23))
Good Hope spell is unique among the morale bonus spells in that it grants a bonus to Ability Checks. The DDO tool-tip says bonus to abilities, yet no bonus that I can see is being given in the game.

At the very least Good Hope should be granting this bonus to resist trip, sunder, and stunning blow attacks as these are STR or DEX-based ability checks. I beleive there should also be +2 DC to added to our offensive ability attacks too, such as trip, sunder, stunning blow as these DDO checks are ability contests of our STR verses the monsters. Stunning Fist and Quivering Palm and other monk abilities could be considered wisdom ability checks and could be given the enhanced DCs, but that is not as definate.

It should also probably affect people's ability score for the purpose of meeting minimum requirements, such as those presented by levers or runes. In reality, those things would be ability checks in D&D, they're just static-value checks in DDO.



Some times Ability means Ability Score, other times it means what you can do. Good Hope is nothing more than a Mass Heroism. It should NOT give +2 to DC's or Stats . The wording is bad, not the spell.

MysticTheurge
06-16-2008, 10:59 AM
If you are not moving and casting a spell or attacking, I would disagree. Movement implies trying to free yourself. The important thing is that movement should prevent other actions.

My point is that there isn't a sophisticated enough interface in DDO to really handle this properly. Suggesting that if you try to move you should make saves and be unable to take action but if you don't move you should be able to act is a bit far fetched. Not only would be incredibly complicated to program, it'd be very hard for people not well-versed in the D&D rules to understand.


Some times Ability means Ability Score, other times it means what you can do. Good Hope is nothing more than a Mass Heroism. It should NOT give +2 to DC's or Stats . The wording is bad, not the spell.

No. The wording is not bad. Good Hope gives a +2 bonus to ability checks. Or it should. Many of the things that should be ability checks in DDO have been modified to function slightly differently. The suggestion is that good hope should still affect those things.

The obvious example is trip (et al.) DCs. In DDO, these are flat DCs. In D&D, it's a contested ability check. Therefore in D&D, Good Hope would give you a +2 bonus to your effective trip "DC" (in other words, the roll you make to trip someone). And therefore, it makes sense that in DDO, Good Hope should give you a +2 bonus to the static DC for tripping.

My point was that things like breaking a door, pulling a stuck lever and so on, would also probably be ability checks in D&D, where in DDO they're just "ability score requirements." Thus I was suggesting that for those purposes, Good Hope should also give you a bonus in order to meet those requirements.

There are plenty of things it shouldn't affect, because yes it's not actually an ability score bonus, just an ability check bonus. Thus, it shouldn't be giving you more HPs, affecting the save DCs for your spells, and so on. But it should apply the bonus to things which really ought to be ability checks and simply aren't because DDO doesn't have ability checks.

Ustice
06-16-2008, 11:44 AM
My point is that there isn't a sophisticated enough interface in DDO to really handle this properly. Suggesting that if you try to move you should make saves and be unable to take action but if you don't move you should be able to act is a bit far fetched. Not only would be incredibly complicated to program, it'd be very hard for people not well-versed in the D&D rules to understand.

True, to pull off, it would require editing the animations so that the legs would move (but slowed) and the arms would flail like we do now. Then you could see that the character is struggling.


No. The wording is not bad. Good Hope gives a +2 bonus to ability checks. Or it should. Many of the things that should be ability checks in DDO have been modified to function slightly differently. The suggestion is that good hope should still affect those things.

The obvious example is trip (et al.) DCs. In DDO, these are flat DCs. In D&D, it's a contested ability check. Therefore in D&D, Good Hope would give you a +2 bonus to your effective trip "DC" (in other words, the roll you make to trip someone). And therefore, it makes sense that in DDO, Good Hope should give you a +2 bonus to the static DC for tripping.

My point was that things like breaking a door, pulling a stuck lever and so on, would also probably be ability checks in D&D, where in DDO they're just "ability score requirements." Thus I was suggesting that for those purposes, Good Hope should also give you a bonus in order to meet those requirements.

There are plenty of things it shouldn't affect, because yes it's not actually an ability score bonus, just an ability check bonus. Thus, it shouldn't be giving you more HPs, affecting the save DCs for your spells, and so on. But it should apply the bonus to things which really ought to be ability checks and simply aren't because DDO doesn't have ability checks.

True, I guess this is a more complicated fix. Not that it shouldn't be fixed though... I would like to see ability/skill checks on the levers and runes and the like, actually.

Lorien_the_First_One
06-16-2008, 12:26 PM
All "Symbol of" spells: The PnP flavour suggests the longer cool down, but it just doesn't play well here... At the very least put them on seperate timers, I can't figure out why they should be linked at all.

Word of Recall: No, leave it at one location, that's the purpose of the spell. It is not teleport. That said, its a LOUSY point. You should either be able to pick a point, or get a better point (something the equiv of the Port Hole that actually has a reason for you to go there)

Good Hope: I think they meant "skill checks" not ability checks as skills def do get the +2 boost.

Pretty much everything else on your list I agree with.

Ustice
06-16-2008, 01:01 PM
Word of Recall: No, leave it at one location, that's the purpose of the spell. It is not teleport. That said, its a LOUSY point. You should either be able to pick a point, or get a better point (something the equiv of the Port Hole that actually has a reason for you to go there)

While the spell isn't as versatile as Teleport, it does allow for more than one location in the world.

Per d20SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/wordOfRecall.htm):


Word of Recall
Conjuration (Teleportation)
Level: Clr 6, Drd 8
Components: V
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Unlimited
Target: You and touched objects or other willing creatures
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: None or Will negates (harmless, object)
Spell Resistance: No or Yes (harmless, object)

Word of recall teleports you instantly back to your sanctuary when the word is uttered. You must designate the sanctuary when you prepare the spell, and it must be a very familiar place. The actual point of arrival is a designated area no larger than 10 feet by 10 feet. You can be transported any distance within a plane but cannot travel between planes. You can transport, in addition to yourself, any objects you carry, as long as their weight doesn’t exceed your maximum load. You may also bring one additional willing Medium or smaller creature (carrying gear or objects up to its maximum load) or its equivalent per three caster levels. A Large creature counts as two Medium creatures, a Huge creature counts as two Large creatures, and so forth. All creatures to be transported must be in contact with one another, and at least one of those creatures must be in contact with you. Exceeding this limit causes the spell to fail.

An unwilling creature can’t be teleported by word of recall. Likewise, a creature’s Will save (or spell resistance) prevents items in its possession from being teleported. Unattended, nonmagical objects receive no saving throw.

In the description of the Teleport spell, the definition of "very familiar" is given (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/teleport.htm).


Familiarity
“Very familiar” is a place where you have been very often and where you feel at home.

I would say that the sanctuary would be any of the possible bind-points. If you want to simplify it, then the current bind-point, but I would say that the bind-point could be added one mod/update behind the release of that point. So for instance, the new town would be unavailable until the next update/mod. Alternately, there could be a list of the bind points that you have used. the Portable Hole could still be an exception if that is desired.

Also, the spell should work like Greater Teleport is that it should allow for more than the caster to be teleported (at 15th level, you could teleport an entire party, that is you and 5 others). If not, a Word of Recall, Greater should be added that has this effect.


Good Hope: I think they meant "skill checks" not ability checks as skills def do get the +2 boost.

No. Again, from the SRD:


Good Hope
Enchantment (Compulsion) [Mind-Affecting]
Level: Brd 3
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Targets: One living creature/level, no two of which may be more than 30 ft. apart
Duration: 1 min./level
Saving Throw: Will negates (harmless)
Spell Resistance: Yes (harmless)

This spell instills powerful hope in the subjects. Each affected creature gains a +2 morale bonus on saving throws, attack rolls, ability checks, skill checks, and weapon damage rolls.

Good hope counters and dispels crushing despair.

It's there.


The Symbol spells, however do have high-cost material components. Similar components should be required to cast the spell. It would cut down on the use of the spell if you had to spend 1000pp on one casting of Symbol of Persuasion.

winsom
06-17-2008, 01:58 AM
If you take an action, you cannot attempt to break free. The DDO system just assumes that you want to do try to break free and therefore you cannot take actions until you make a save. Which is reasonable, since there's no way for the interface to really ask you which you want to do..

I think the reverse is more reasonable. A creature shouldn't be panicked about being stuck unless the web is on fire or something. For game purposes, I think this exception is unimportant (it would take extra coding). Monsters should treat the Web as a debuff (ignore it) and fight/act normally, with entanglement penalties.

I do not think it is reasonable for a character or a monster to automtically give up his prefered actions, and stop defending himself, in order to attempt to break free. That is very unintelligent behaviour. When a creature is no longer threatened with death it would take the time to break free.

The web spell would be more appropriately powerful if the monster AI would stop trying to break free, and start acting normally, as soon as it takes damage. Without that AI-coded behavior the monster should just attack/cast normally except it is rooted in place for the duration of the Web spell. If turbine wanted to add in a break free chance every 6 seconds or so, in addition to letting a monster act normally, that would be fine with me. Monsters act very infrequently compared to our characters, so its only fair to give them the chance to break free.

Ustice
06-17-2008, 06:34 AM
I think the reverse is more reasonable. A creature shouldn't be panicked about being stuck unless the web is on fire or something. For game purposes, I think this exception is unimportant (it would take extra coding). Monsters should treat the Web as a debuff (ignore it) and fight/act normally, with entanglement penalties.

Not quite casting normally. It requires a concentration check.

MysticTheurge
06-17-2008, 07:55 AM
I do not think it is reasonable for a character or a monster to automtically give up his prefered actions, and stop defending himself, in order to attempt to break free.

Except it's hard to know what a character's (or monster's) preferred action actually is in that scenario. Short of an actual tactical, turn-based system, it's nearly impossible to treat Web the same way you'd actually treat it in D&D. The DDO interpretation seems like a reasonable, live-action approximation.

adam1oftheround
10-06-2008, 10:02 AM
Can we tone down or turn off the visual on these spells?

1) They are painful to look at (Just try looking at a web spell inside a hypno sphere OUCH)
2) My video card can't keep up and I crash or slow way down when too much croud control pops up