Jacob/DirectDamageIdeas

• I do not like direct damage.
• I especially do not like through direct damage and high-level direct damage.
• The reason for this is that, while I have not problem with situational instakills (if you use this ability then your target is dead unless they or their allies do X), even moderately high level damage is close to "If you use this then your target is dead". It's non-interactive, and it's a really sucky way to loose a PC.
• I think that DD ought to be balanced in such a way that it is not especially good in PvP? compared to abilities that people can do things to avoid being killed by.
• On the other hand, DD is one of the main strengths of red and to a lesser extent blue and black magic, so simply nerfing it is not an option.
• What I would like to see, therefore, is forms of DD that are better in PvM? than in PvP?, in the standard magic syllabi.
• I think the best way to achieve this is to make most good DD spells multitargeting - there should be some single-target zaps, obviously, but they should be relatively expensive for what they do, whereas - especially in red - zapping lots of things at once should be an efficient use of mana. Specifically, n damage to one target should cost more than n damage that you're forced to divide up, although less than n damage that you can divide up or concentrate as you choose.

Mechanics that could do this include:

• n damage to each of m targets
• n damage to as many targets in range as you choose
• Introducing the call "mass effect person" - everyone within three metres of the target takes the effect
• n, n-1, n-2 etc damage to n targets - there is already a red spell that does this, but I think it should possibly be cheaper.
• n damage to the/a target every m seconds, p times - this is far more interesting to play against than simply n x p damage delivered as a lump.
• Probably not improving mass and wide spells - these may again create issues in PvP/MvP?, especially in the bar.
• A spell that makes the target(s) immune to any damage from spells you cast for five minutes, making the current mass and wide spells more viable. Or possibly only to damage of one colour from you?

As some examples (by the standard of last year - this coming year, I think levels will need to be rather different), I would like to see:

• "single to as many targets as you like" at about level 4.
• "double to as many targets as you like" at about level 5 or 6 on edit: this is too low, should be 7
• "single through to as many targets as you like at level 4.
• "quad, triple, double, single" at about level 6 or 7
• "triple to three targets" at about level 5 or 6
• "triple" at level 3
• "quad" at level 5
• "quin" at about level 6
• "hex" at level 8
• "Wide single" at level 2
• "Wide double" at level 4
• "Wide triple" at level 7
• Through adding more to the cost of high-damage than low-damage (n.b. not "high level rather than low level") damage spells -- quad through at level 6, quin through at level 8, hex through unobtainable, double through to unlimited targets possibly at level 8.
• A red syllabus with lots of multi-target damage spells and fewer single-target or mass/wide ones; the same true to a lesser extent of blue.
• Subdual single-target DD bothers me less, because it's opposable by the target's allies - if we wanted (although we might not) then black could continue to focus on single-target rather than multi-target zaps.
• Time-delayed DD is cooler than instant, because there are things you can do about it:
• "10 halves to one target, each needing a full verbal, spell broken if you take any damage or cast anything else" at level 4 (or possibly 5 due to its utility on elves);
• "half to any target, once every 10 seconds for five minutes", spell broken if you take any damage or cast anything else" at about level 3
• as above, doing single at level 4, double at level 6, triple at level 8.
• versions of the above that can't be broken at levels 4,5,7 for half, single, double.

In summary:

• I want burninating a mob of gribblies with DD to be a more effective tactic.
• I want sniping a single target with DD to be a less effective tactic.
• I want DD to be more interactive.

What do other people think??

--Jacob

This sounds excellent. --Lmm

I like direct damage although I can see your point about instakills, I'm happy with the idea of limiting DD to quad, quin or hex depending on through etc. I also think it might be a good idea to make low direct damage more efficient than high level (except perhaps for red).

I also think that many of your suggestions are frighteningly underpriced, eg. Wide red double would be level 7 currently. so double to as many targets as you like should be around level 8.

The downside to multi target DD is that either it's useless at low levels or too cheap at higher ones.

Note that 4,2 PC's have 7 hit points before they're dead where a 4,2 monster only has 4 before they're effectively dead. This gives a bit of leeway between intstakilling characters and monsters.- Joey

I think that wide and mass effects are heavily overpriced at present - they're far less useful that it was initially thought they'd be. I hope to get most of them reduced during the "look at the spell lists" process over the summer - wide red double should probably be around level 5, I'd say. --Jacob

That would allow your standard final-encounter boss to just kill an even level party without breaking a sweat (cast it twice before the party reaches you, then pick off the remaining one or two people at leisure - even a level 3 party could expect a level 5 boss as an opponent), or a mage gone mad to drop upwards of 15 people in an interactive. I'd rather change what 'mass' does, to allow it to give a 5-second charge so you can do the vocal in a position of safety and then make the effect call. Wide is quite as good as it is costed to be.--Requiem

I quite doubt that; once the warriors get to him the 5th level mage is doomed, and he'll be lucky to get off both casts without interruption; likewise if an interactive didn't stop a mage gone mad after the first one they deserve what they get. --Lmm

Hmm. You may well be right, actually - I may be incorrectly generalising from "mass is massively overpriced" to "mass and wide are massively overpriced". I do think that Earthquake is several levels to high, but that may be a function of overvaluing strikedown rather than wide; that said, I think "torrent of changing", the only other wide syllabus spell I can find, is also too high. But combined with DD it might well become very good indeed. --Jacob

I like the idea of 'channeled' spells - a spell that allows you to call an effect again and again until you choose to end the effect or are interrupted. I also like the idea of limiting the top end of magical damage. I do not like the idea of giving wide-area damage cheaply (or at all) - I'd rather make Mass a viable combat option. An interesting proposal I heard was to cut everything off at level 4 and make colour lore much more expensive, so higher level mages had more versatility and staying power rather than more raw blastitude. Much as I dislike the idea of changing everything again, it does sound a solid idea. --Requiem

I dislike the channeled idea because it is an effect that will frequently be uber and frequently be useless. I think the idea of more multi-target DD is a good one; I tend to prefer n targets to mass/wide because the former strikes me as easier to balance. I don't like the cutting everything off at level 4 idea at all, because it makes the style of mage linearing I like unworkable at higher levels. --Lmm

I think "call this at will", especially "call this at will with no verbal" is something to handle with caution; I think "call this every n seconds" is a much safer area to play in. --Jacob