PDA

View Full Version : Spell Ward changes



GoRinNoSho
08-25-2012, 07:34 PM
I suggest these changes to the spell wards. (The spell traps in the now less Forgotten Realms)

First off, since FoM only affects magical impediments to movement, then FoM should prevent the slow as well as the paralysis from the spellward effect.

Secondly, since Spellwards are slightly spells, then have them be disarmable not only by rogue/arty/wiz disable device, but also by Dispel Magic, Greater Dispel Magic, and Break Enchantment. They are magic and that would actually give more reason to have those spells other than a debuff to mobs.

redspecter23
08-25-2012, 08:03 PM
I'm with you 100% on the FoM thing. Phone call to the logic and common sense dept. at Turbine "How is a SPELL ward not a magical effect?"

OK, I can kind of understand not working with earthgrab and earthquake. Those are magical sources, but the effects are caused by mundane things. Real physical things. Can we get this bug (and I'll be calling it a bug as long as Turbine calls the traps SPELL wards) acknowledged and then fixed please?

Also allowing spell wards to be disarmed with dispel magic seems like a great idea.

Voldomar
08-26-2012, 07:32 AM
Also allowing spell wards to be disarmed with dispel magic seems like a great idea.

And with Mordenkainen's Disjunction. Please give these spells a reason to exist

V_mad_jester_V
08-26-2012, 08:27 AM
actually i see no issue with them. While i agree a spell should be able to disable them, i really dont care if fom worked against them or not. If you give people the means to bypass spell wards slowing effects then you give them means to make trappers useless against them. thats like saying "give all classes reflex against blade trap!" so no fom should not work with spell wards cuz they do very little damage, and would defeat the purpose of having spell wards in the first place.

and lets be real, i as a rogue wouldnt care for disabling them if they were less pesky cuz we had fom. At that point it wouldn't matter and ALOT of groups on my server would just zerg past them rather then actually wait for me to disable them. In my eyes all your post says to me is "give us more zergability!" and dont say its not cuz saying "give us a spell to by pass wards slowing effect" is the same thing.

*edit*


actually i see no issue with them. While i agree a spell (break enchant and greater dispel) should be able to disable them, i really dont care if fom worked against them or not. If you give people the means to bypass spell wards slowing effects then you give them means to make trappers useless against them. thats like saying "give all classes reflex against blade trap!" so no fom should not work with spell wards cuz they do very little damage, and would defeat the purpose of having spell wards in the first place.

GoRinNoSho
08-26-2012, 09:16 AM
You are making the assumption that a quest can either have spellward traps or conventional traps and not both.

In theory there should be both. The logic behind the slow effect change is that it is listed as a magical slow effect (per tool tip) and as a result it should be handled by fom. The damage/poison effect can still proc per normal.

The background for my request on this comes from the fact that the updates have caused a clear distinction that FoM should work on magical effects only yet there is an exception to the rule.

Additionally, as those traps are magical, the player should have an option of dealing with them magically with dispel magic, break enchantment, and mordenkainen's disjunction (thx for reminding me).

V_mad_jester_V
08-26-2012, 09:31 AM
You are making the assumption that a quest can either have spellward traps or conventional traps and not both.

In theory there should be both. The logic behind the slow effect change is that it is listed as a magical slow effect (per tool tip) and as a result it should be handled by fom. The damage/poison effect can still proc per normal.

The background for my request on this comes from the fact that the updates have caused a clear distinction that FoM should work on magical effects only yet there is an exception to the rule.

I still disagree with this part. Its called a >>>TRAP<<<< for a reason. These spell wards are almost harmless. I've seen the squishiest of them all survive these traps, and if you cant survive them, then take a look at your build. Not trying to seem like an elitist a hole but, i've seen super gimped builds make it past these traps.
Giving FoM to bypass the only thing that makes this a trap is dumb. The only way i could ever agree to allowing FoM to bypass the slow effect is by making those spell wards do 300+ damage. They can be disabled without even setting them off, from what 5-8 ish feet? Otherwise these traps would have absolutely no purpose other then to decoration.
/not signed to FoM part cuz its TOO much of an easy button request.



Additionally, as those traps are magical, the player should have an option of dealing with them magically with dispel magic, break enchantment, and mordenkainen's disjunction (thx for reminding me).
at no point and time did i disagree with this portion, i do agree that they should be allowed to be disabled via dispel, break enchant, and mordenkainen.

/signed to this part

GoRinNoSho
08-26-2012, 09:47 PM
Run the quests on Epic Elite unless they've toned down the damage. They used to do in the 150-300 damage range, so yes in that case they are effective regardless of slow or not and typically proc a couple of times if you are slowed and running through them. As it stands on eNormal some of the nastier spell wards hit for 80ish.

It is not a question of build as I can disable them with my rogues or bypass them with my other characters as I know the quests well enough to handle them regardless of build. It is more a question of principle. I guess this is an area where we can agree to disagree though.

One thought I had originally was if rogues should be able to disable spell wards, as they are spell wards and not traps in the conventional sense. Rogues etc. cannot currently disable glyphs of warding (clr spell) or various symbols (fear, fire, death, persuasion) and the spell wards should technically be of a similar vein as they are magical spell wards of arcane origin instead of conventional physical traps. I would imagine if disable device didn't work on them and dispel magic of some sort (or UMD check to disable) was required then there would be a great gnashing of teeth.

There seems to be a general lack of logic/consistency in this new endeavor and that is what I am focusing on.

xxScoobyDooxx
08-26-2012, 09:57 PM
I love them just the way they are ..... they make the quests much harder and this is a GOOD thing!

/not signed

Syllph
08-26-2012, 10:19 PM
Giving FoM to bypass the only thing that makes this a trap is dumb. The only way i could ever agree to allowing FoM to bypass the slow effect is by making those spell wards do 300+ damage.

What game are you playing? They hit me for over 300 regularly in epic Elite. The challenge Ring of Fire the Evil spell Wards that come out slow me then ping me for 350+ Evil damage that I cannot resist. Quite annoying. The Bridge fire spell Ward on the Drider optional in Trial by Fury does 350+ as well and slows you so you always get hit twice.

arkonas
08-27-2012, 10:46 AM
/not signed on fom and slow effect. spell wards are our new form of traps. their meant to be very painful and annoying. if ya don't like it dont do elite. or get a trapper.

signed on dispel magic greater dispel magic on "spell wards" if a spell made it. you should be able to dispel it.

Archangel666
08-27-2012, 10:53 AM
/not signed on fom and slow effect. spell wards are our new form of traps. their meant to be very painful and annoying. if ya don't like it dont do elite. or get a trapper.

signed on dispel magic greater dispel magic on "spell wards" if a spell made it. you should be able to dispel it.

Question: If Freedom of Movement doesn't protect from natural effects and it doesn't protect from magical effects (Spellwards are clearly magical), then what exactly is the point of the spell?

V_mad_jester_V
08-27-2012, 11:21 AM
Question: If Freedom of Movement doesn't protect from natural effects and it doesn't protect from magical effects (Spellwards are clearly magical), then what exactly is the point of the spell?

protecting you from allied sleet storms (i hate slipping and sliding, i hate when the spell is cast by enemy or ally, unles si have fom) and pesky a holes who wanna try to grease you up.

BoundByChains
09-23-2012, 03:41 PM
Spell Absorption works awesome.
Pale Lavender Ioun Stone absorbs the Slow effect, not the damage. And it counts as a level 1 spell, as it only takes 1 of the charges away per hit.

Worldcrafter
09-23-2012, 04:07 PM
For those who agree to being able to dispel the wards, but not to using Freedom of Movement, what you're saying is that it's okay to magically bypass it, but not magically bypass it another way? Freedom of Movement's purpose is to stop magical effects from slowing you down or hindering you. Even magical restraints, like the web spell, are not supposed to affect someone with FoM. And what would a spell ward be, aside from a magical restraint?

Would successfully dispelling the trap consider disabling it for the contribution toward XP bonuses? I would imagine so, since you are managing to disable the trap.