Post:Tentative Magic 3.0 Spell List - 9/21/2010 - 12:00:55

Re: Tentative Magic 3.0 Spell List · on 9/21/2010 12:00:55 PM	7597
Since a bunch of people commented on this. Strictly speaking, no guild can buff everything. WMs may get a mental buff, they may not, but it won't be with the Magic 3.0 release. Our interest is in 'get Magic 3.0 out' to start over 'make a bunch of new spells'. >How bad will the penalty for not targeting be? Targeting will work exactly like aiming, with the exception that an AoE spell will require about 50% more time. >Will it be the norm among all guilds that some offensive/defensive buffs will not be available at the same time? Yes, basically. Most non-primes don't have the humongous array of buffs that can be had by WMs in the first place, though. >If you cast a spell that cannot be used in conjunction with a spell you already have up, do you fail or does the new spell replace the old one? My preference would be to replace. Probably fail, given we're making an AP dispel that can no-contest remove any spell you've cast. >Chain Lightning: A "grouped/not grouped" or "Not PC/everything" selector would be more useful than the "engaged/everything" one. Is it possible to have "not a pc/engaged/everything" selector? I'm not sure what standard toggles we'll have for AoEs yet. >Ball Lightning: When you say you have another spell like this, are you referencing the familiar attack spell? I wouldn't mind seeing ball lightning retained in a less clunky form. Yes, I am referencing the familiar attack spell. >Dragon's Breath: Can we bump it to Esoteric and make it 3 shots? Otherwise the advantage of being able to shoot from the hip without penalty is offset by the disadvantage of having to cast and attack in two steps.< It's really not. Delayed cast is a huge advantage. Besides, adding multiple strikes would entail also making each weaker. >Tremor: Sounds like current Tremor, which is not very useful on its own. Will the new spell be different somehow? If not, can it be made different? If you don't end up liking it, don't take it! Not every spell is going to be something every person finds useful and this is acceptable. >Earth Sense: Could this become a straight perception buff? No. >Tailwind: Will this be self-cast rather than area cast? Yes. >Paeldryth's Wrath: I'm not sure what you're describing has much of a niche. It does. See above on how some people not using it doesn't mean others won't. People have semi-regularly asked for something like this, and if other people don't want it, they won't need to take it. >Shockwave: Will this affect everything in the room, or everything at an engagement range? Everything. >My concern here is, even the most experienced warmages will have no clear idea on what their spells actually do. I'm telling you what they do and that the boosts will be capped. It should be pretty clear. Not giving exact numbers is a decision that comes from higher than me but I'm pretty sure the playerbase is going to figure it out fast since it's all standardized. There won't be a huge PAFO element and there'll be about 2 weeks of global preview of everything. >2) Will warmages get to start from a clean slate on their spellbook? A full spell wipe is part of Magic 3.0. >Dont know why this is true, after all you control the Lore. Also, there is some lore indicating that aether TM is real in one of the AP quests. The best way to put WM 'lore' is schizophrenic and out of touch with reality. Armifer and I would really love to give you guys much better and solid information on what the elements actually are as part of Magic 3.0. >ES: So it has no use for mundane combat (the current version does albeit very weakly)? Also, would it protect from the elemental Magic v. whatever spells? It depends if mundane combat includes people who fling fireballs at you. But yes, we wanted to leave this one introductory so we pared down what it did and made it good at it. >AC: Is the no locate/ no perceive fam aspect going away? Yes. >AL: Finally arc light gets some love. Will there be a weaker area affect aspect ala current vert? No, nor will there be an area vertigo. If this bothers everyone, remember that you need to pay for such functionality now and we're trying to keep WM spells from all being 3-4 slot monsters. >LB: Is it keeping nerve damage? No. >CL: Is nerve damage in? Maybe. I don't object to it with the again caveat 'you have to pay extra for the functionality'. >GZ: Is it keeping the unbalancing? Probably not. >MOF: Interesting version, but if elemental transformation is coming for each element 2 mutually exclusive and hopefully nifty buffs is probably okay, I'm not entirely certain there wouldn't be a justified riot if there were 5. >IP: Will the current disadvantages stay? No. >RM: Will the current synergy with electricity stay, and while Im thinking about it, will the weather/WM spell synergy stay? I don't even know what the current electric synergy is but I'm going to tentatively say no. Weather will still modify the preparation costs / difficulties of WM spells. >SUF: so climbing bonus is out? Boo, but oh well. Why parry buff?. Because solid footwork and steady balance is very important for parrying. The Climbing bonus being out is more 'I don't think everyone wants to pay for this'. >Granite Spike: Here, and with the other intro single strike spells from other elements, were getting into the whole this spell is redundant problem. Granite spike, sun lance, chill geyser, (to a lesser extend Bolt) all basically the same sans damage type. It was determined that the ability to have a solid damage dealer of every damage type was probably not going to be redundant for the people who focus on damage dealers. They will be made so you don't need to take them all if you don't want them all. >Z: still removes RM? I don't precisely object to this one but I see no reason it needs to remove one of your other buffs. >Air Lash: meh, a lash of air just not as cool as a lash of energy, but OK. I think you will be very surprised. Armifer's comment was along the lines of 'Okay, but if we need to put it in Air it needs to stop looking so wimpy and show that Air is serious business.' >Im guessing it wont still be the best TM spell in the game given it is a basic spell. Will this concept even exist anymore? That concept does not exist anymore. >Paeldryth's Wrath: Me likey, but with auto retreat, not so good. Will the launching naptha aspect still be part of the spell? Magic 3.0 is under the assumption Combat will be out at the same time. Naphtha calcs are so weird, I can't give you an answer on this right away. >Shockwave: Will it still blow items out of the room/into oblivion? Trash collection is considered a cheap enough effect it could stay in the spell. >Will it still have the "knock down"? Will any TM spell still have the "knock down" aspect? Knock down is meant to be more part of the core combat system but there's no strict reason that a spell can't be about knocking things over. >Some might not like me for saying this, but I dont like that TM will be taught by combat familiars (or other pet type creations for that matter). Who remembers the uproar with the bards screaming and vocal learning? >Wanna learn TM, strap on a shield and get into combat. I'm not sure why you'd object to something that uses your TM skill teaching your TM skill but you will probably need to be where your familiar is to use this so you're going to be in combat. -Z
This message was originally posted in The Warrior Mages (35) \ Responses to GM/Official Announcements (2), by DR-ZEYURN on the play.net forums.