Viewing Issue Simple Details Jump to Notes ] Wiki ] View Advanced ] Issue History ] Print ]
ID Category Severity Reproducibility Date Submitted Last Update
0000715 [DCSS] FR: Interface Improvements minor N/A 2010-02-06 12:49 2011-08-13 06:44
Reporter Core Xii View Status public  
Assigned To Kate
Priority normal Resolution no change required  
Status closed   Product Branch 0.7 ancient branch
Summary 0000715: Sustained spells
Description As it stands, you cast Repel Missiles, it costs a certain amount of mana to cast, then you have the status effect for a while. You get a warning that it's about to expire, after which it does. If you wish to sustain the spell, you have to cast it again. An effect you'd prefer to maintain at all times requires tedious micromanagement.

Proposed change: Instead of a one-time MP cost for casting these spells, what if they decreased your max MP to sustain? If casting, say, Repel Missiles gave you a permanent status effect but decreased your MP by 2, until you deactivate it or you expend too much MP to upkeep it.

Granted, then if you wanted to only gain such an effect temporarily, you'd need to manually deactivate it. Still, a design to consider.
Additional Information
Tags No tags attached.
Attached Files

- Relationships

-  Notes
OG17 (reporter)
2010-02-06 13:45
edited on: 2010-02-06 13:46

That's a massive MP pool hit for the sake of limitless duration. Looking at my current DrIE, ozocubu armor's level 3, deflect missiles 6, swiftness 2, and levitation 2 (which would be 4 for flight if I wasn't draconian). That's stuff I try to keep up constantly. If I was using lichform, that'd be 8 in itself. And add 6 for haste, on and off, if that would use this mechanic despite its contamination, along with 4 for teleport control. What's left to cast with?

Then again, you mention both "max mp" and "upkeep," so I'm really not sure if this is what you're saying anyway.

Porkchop (reporter)
2010-02-06 14:04
edited on: 2010-02-06 14:34

Sounds like it could be a neat ability to be added to demigod or a new species. Perhaps new god ability.

Would be a cool patch to have something like automated recasting of spells if safe/stop if interrupted .

nrook (updater)
2010-02-06 22:41

Not much is left to cast with, because you're keeping six buffs up at a time. It's not as if you would have much MP left anyway without some form of channeling, as you just cast a ton of spells.

This would do a lot to put a dent in the "pre-battle free buffs" phenomenon of crusaders casting a billion spells and then quickly regaining MP through artificial methods.

Glow-giving spells (currently only Haste, I think) would have to be exempted from this process, as they are not designed to be used all of the time.

There are a few other problems (buffs running out is a part of balance, this system sidesteps spell failure/miscast problems) but I think they are worth solving in exchange for the potential benefits here.
OG17 (reporter)
2010-02-07 05:46

Are we considering MP regeneration to be exploitive now, then? "Pre-battle free buffs" are what buffs are, save berserk and whatever. You're not going to cast reflect or deflect after something perforates you, you're not going to cast swiftness and flight after something chases you down, you're not going to cast haste after you engage a known threat, and you're certainly not going to look for a fight while lacking half of the resource that keeps you alive. Also, this isn't a crusader issue, as it's offensive casters that need to burn MP to function.

Regardless, thinking about it, I don't see why haste would be exempt from this proposal - if you want haste, flip it on and get all the haste you want. If you want to stop the contamination, flip it off. Having a set duration makes little sense in this context.
felirx (developer)
2010-06-07 18:16

Dragon Age used the sustained abilities mechanic. In there, they only reduced max MP, so you could say cast spell xyz that costs 6 mp and then flip on a sustained ability which reserved 6 mp, without losing effective mp in the process.
TGW (reporter)
2010-06-07 21:44

This should also hunger you slowly. I like this, though.
KiloByte (manager)
2010-06-07 23:20

The effective cost of using enchantments is a tiny fraction of the casting cost -- exactly, level/(duration*regen). And that's not even considering Makhleb/Vehumet or any other ways to regain mana faster.

Thus, if the max MP reduction would be the full spell level instead of a more realistic fraction, you'd increase the cost of buffs drastically.
b0rsuk (updater)
2010-06-08 21:17

If a character can cast a buff at sufficiently high success rate, then saying it might fail is splitting hairs. At the very least sustained buffs could be enabled once your success chance is high. Besides:

- it is completely acceptable to have a magic school that is governed by different rules. Variety is good.
- an equivalent of miscast could be "flickering". Each turn the spell is in effect it would have a chance to provide no benefit for a single turn. The chance would be proportional to success chance.
- I think it's a problem that many schools' names could be used interchangably. They don't have a common theme. This is especially the case for elemental magicks. Other schools (Necromancy, Summoning, Conjurations, Transmutations, Enchantment) are much better defined. The names suggest what a spell of that school should *do*. Meanwhile you could exchange spells between Ice and Earth magic and no one would notice. Could Shatter or LRD be an Ice spell ? Totally ! Shatter things from inside by causing ice inside them to expand. Condensation Shield could be a temporary Earth spell instead (crystal shield blah blah).
TGW (reporter)
2010-06-08 21:31

What b0rsuk said, and that buffs are by no means underpowered.
olo (reporter)
2010-06-10 15:22

This could be a good use of the Extension spell, by casting it your max MP are lowered by the level of the buffs you have active and they'll stay on until canceled.

This would also be a great item effect for an Amulet of Extension.
2010-06-10 23:05

The concern is with all the micromanaging it takes to keep your spells on. I think this should just be an interface change, i.e. rather than a new ability, just create a macro / control that will recast the spell when it runs out.

This is in line with the game's philosophy of not keeping players bogged down in mundane repetitive tasks, but doesn't require changes to actual gameplay.

Having said that, here's a new idea:

- Player stands over an artifact (of a certain minimum value) and prays (on an altar?) (or casts spell of "Imbue item")
- Player wields another NON-artifact item (ring, weapon, whatever)
- Player casts spell (such as Ozcubu's armor)
- The player forgets the spell (but does not regain the spell levels)
- The artifact disappears (along with the spellbook?)
- The item in the caster's hand becomes an artifact imbued with that spell and any properties it had previously, and can not have any other spells added to it (since it is now an artefact).
- There's a chance of miscasting and losing both the artifact and the item and getting blasted with magical energy.
- the level of spell that can be added to an item would be capped at 3 or 4?

This would be neat because you could create "minor artifacts", eg, take a ring of poison resistance and add AC+5 to it. Such artifacts could never have more than two properties because non-artifacts only have one property and only one could be added.
2010-06-10 23:07

I remember when I used to play D&D that we would cast a permanent "light" spell on a gold piece so we'd always have a flashlight on hand, that's what gave me the idea of enchanting items to get the permanent effect.
b0rsuk (updater)
2010-06-11 05:46

I think djnrempel's idea (enchanting items) is also good, and thematic which is nice. I still think an enchanted item you created should have a some kind of drawback (like -MP), for balance reasons.
Kyrris (reporter)
2010-06-11 17:00

Well, he did say that you lose spell levels permanently when creating the items. That's a lot more of a penalty than MP drain.
dpeg (administrator)
2010-06-12 12:24

I like the idea of some spells (e.g. Enchantments) working differently than others. There are many ways to set this up (e.g. (a) automatic recasting until the spell is stopped, (b) permanent effect for a maxMP cost as in the OP, (c) buffs cannot be re-cast until after a certain downtime etc.) Ultimately, this is wiki stuff, I will move it when I get the time (and no-one beats me to it). Before a change like this, we will probably have the Enchantments split (this could come for 0.8 already), but it will be good to see the ideas from here _before_ making up the split. (Spell school with a different mechanic.)
Kate (developer)
2011-04-11 10:21

Now on the wiki at: [^]

- Issue History
Date Modified Username Field Change
2010-02-06 12:49 Core Xii New Issue
2010-02-06 13:45 OG17 Note Added: 0002178
2010-02-06 13:46 OG17 Note Edited: 0002178
2010-02-06 14:04 Porkchop Note Added: 0002180
2010-02-06 14:34 Porkchop Note Edited: 0002180
2010-02-06 22:41 nrook Note Added: 0002212
2010-02-07 05:46 OG17 Note Added: 0002234
2010-06-07 18:16 felirx Note Added: 0005442
2010-06-07 21:44 TGW Note Added: 0005445
2010-06-07 23:20 KiloByte Note Added: 0005446
2010-06-08 21:17 b0rsuk Note Added: 0005468
2010-06-08 21:31 TGW Note Added: 0005470
2010-06-10 15:22 olo Note Added: 0005512
2010-06-10 23:05 user308 Note Added: 0005520
2010-06-10 23:07 user308 Note Added: 0005521
2010-06-11 05:46 b0rsuk Note Added: 0005528
2010-06-11 17:00 Kyrris Note Added: 0005535
2010-06-12 12:24 dpeg Note Added: 0005573
2011-04-11 10:21 Kate Note Added: 0012397
2011-04-11 10:21 Kate Status new => resolved
2011-04-11 10:21 Kate Fixed in Branch => 0.9 development branch
2011-04-11 10:21 Kate Resolution open => no change required
2011-04-11 10:21 Kate Assigned To => Kate
2011-08-13 06:44 Core Xii Status resolved => closed

Mantis 1.1.8[^]
Copyright © 2000 - 2009 Mantis Group
Powered by Mantis Bugtracker