The Tavern

At least in "final" spellbook (i.e the one you form after you've found all necessary spells and trained necessary skills).

ignition pro's:
- single school
- one level lower (easier to cast, less MP, take up less spell levels in memory)
- can and will effect ALL targets in view (so even stronger than smite-targeting)
- does higher damage vs tightly packed groups (in general damage SCALES UP PER TARGET with numerous targets nearby, while firestorm deals same damage PER TARGET)
- always 100% save to use friendly-fire wise

firestorm pro's:
- can hit stuff 1-2 tiles behind corners if you know where to hit
- partially irresistible
- higher damage vs single targets
- spawns vortex's that can distract enemies

If number of spells you can memorize was unlimited you would probably carry both. But limited as it is, I really feel like in situation where firestorm is noticeably better non-fire based spells (shatter, glaciate, orb of destruction, etc) are better still. So it's better to keep only ignition.
Anyone else gets similar feeling?

(Mod edit: moved from GDD)

You left out another pro of firestorm, the high damage. Ignition does calc_dice(3, 10+pow/3) damage per explosion, or about 3d(3.3+pow/9). Fire Storm, on the other hand, does calc_dice(8, 5 + pow), or about 8d(0.63 + pow/8). At 100 power, that's over twice the damage from Fire Storm (56 vs 24). So if the monsters aren't packed tightly together, Fire Storm will kill them quicker.

neil wrote:You left out another pro of firestorm, the high damage. Ignition does calc_dice(3, 10+pow/3) damage per explosion, or about 3d(3.3+pow/9). Fire Storm, on the other hand, does calc_dice(8, 5 + pow), or about 8d(0.63 + pow/8). At 100 power, that's over twice the damage from Fire Storm (56 vs 24). So if the monsters aren't packed tightly together, Fire Storm will kill them quicker.

I sort of included that into "higher damage vs single targets".
As soon as two or more targets are nearby ignition deals same or more.
And if multiply targets are far apart one FS will not hit them all, while one ignition will, so it also evens out.

So the thing wrt exp savings is that you already shouldn't get ignition in a 3 rune game unless you went Vehumet; it's a huge waste of exp over bolt of fire for another damage spell that is usually worse assuming good positioning. I think you're vastly underestimating the damage difference between firestorm and ignition as well; firestorm does more than twice the damage in neils analysis and that's before counting damage over time from the flame clouds. You aren't outdamaging firestorm with ignition unless you have 3+ adjacent nonresistant enemies. Ignition is better if your positioning is very bad, but it's better to avoid that situation. Imo a character that has any business casting either spell wants firestorm over ignition as soon as they can cast it.

The vortices and ability to hit things out of LOS are extremely good.

You can do most of vaults without ever seeing much more than 1 monster at a time with firestorm. Hitting monsters out of LoS is seriously broken, but then again so is any character who has enough XP to get firestorm safely castable in the first place while not ignoring their defenses.

This is probably not GDD material, since I don't actually see a proposal to be discussed (unless you want to remove Fire Storm, which is probably not true).

As others have said Fire Storm is really good, if you manage to get it. Much better than Ignition.

The vortices from firestorm also have a lot of defensive value, blocking LOS and drawing fire. It's no small point that without conjurations, the fire skill won't be all that useful until at least obtaining ignition. What are you going to do with the investment in fire until then otherwise... inner flame? The irresistible portion of damage is an enormous difference. When you're up against something which is immune to fire, it can be the difference between being able to kill something, or not. Being versatile to handle whatever the game can throw at you instead of great sometimes and awful others is a key point for completing the game. You can avoid some stuff, but not always.

Ignition is hilariously OP in ziggurats. Outside of that is really meh.

I think its kinda a shit spell and wouldn't mind it being removed. I feel it is trying to fill a niche of fire based AOE damage that firestorm is already filling.

I also highly dislike that you are magically shielded from the explosions yourself. I mean come on, a full LOS spell making every monster explode and it doesn't even matter if they are next to you?

neil wrote:You left out another pro of firestorm, the high damage. Ignition does calc_dice(3, 10+pow/3) damage per explosion, or about 3d(3.3+pow/9). Fire Storm, on the other hand, does calc_dice(8, 5 + pow), or about 8d(0.63 + pow/8). At 100 power, that's over twice the damage from Fire Storm (56 vs 24). So if the monsters aren't packed tightly together, Fire Storm will kill them quicker.

That just shows that as soon as 2 monsters are together ignition is already on par with firestorm.

CPTANT wrote:
neil wrote:You left out another pro of firestorm, the high damage. Ignition does calc_dice(3, 10+pow/3) damage per explosion, or about 3d(3.3+pow/9). Fire Storm, on the other hand, does calc_dice(8, 5 + pow), or about 8d(0.63 + pow/8). At 100 power, that's over twice the damage from Fire Storm (56 vs 24). So if the monsters aren't packed tightly together, Fire Storm will kill them quicker.

That just shows that as soon as 2 monsters are together ignition is already on par with firestorm.

If you have less than 45 spell power and the monsters have 0 AC and no fire resistance and you ignore the vortices and the clouds and the fact that Fire Storm hits them from out of LOS, yes.
Otherwise, Fire Storm does better damage from further away.

neil wrote:You left out another pro of firestorm, the high damage. Ignition does calc_dice(3, 10+pow/3) damage per explosion, or about 3d(3.3+pow/9). Fire Storm, on the other hand, does calc_dice(8, 5 + pow), or about 8d(0.63 + pow/8). At 100 power, that's over twice the damage from Fire Storm (56 vs 24). So if the monsters aren't packed tightly together, Fire Storm will kill them quicker.

Or do both, sac love to quaz and Firestorm then ignition all the new vortexes.

Is there ANY reason for ignition to not hit the caster when adjacent to monsters affected?

CPTANT wrote:Is there ANY reason for ignition to not hit the caster when adjacent to monsters affected?

So it isnt terrible and super annoying to use?

I never learn Inner Flame for this very reason. Most of the time you (almost) blow yourself up casting it. If Ignition had that, it would be another spell I'd just never learn. As it is right now, it is rather nice, particularly if you don't have access to Firestorm.

Siegurt wrote:
CPTANT wrote:Is there ANY reason for ignition to not hit the caster when adjacent to monsters affected?

So it isnt terrible and super annoying to use?

Hitting everything in LOS with a single click wasn't convenient enough?

Every other AOE spell effects the caster if they are in the area of effect.

CPTANT wrote:
Siegurt wrote:
CPTANT wrote:Is there ANY reason for ignition to not hit the caster when adjacent to monsters affected?

So it isnt terrible and super annoying to use?

Hitting everything in LOS with a single click wasn't convenient enough?

Every other AOE spell effects the caster if they are in the area of effect.

The situation where you'd want to use Ignition but not Bolt of Fire, many dispersed enemies, very rarely overlaps with the situation where you have no monsters adjacent to you.

CPTANT wrote:Every other AOE spell effects the caster if they are in the area of effect.

I suppose Cause Fear, Ring of Flames, Olgreb's Toxic Radiance, Iskenderun's Mystic Blast, Ignite Poison, Metabolic Englaciation, Shatter, Alistair's Intoxication, Tornado, Disjunction, Awaken Forest, Irradiate, Battlecry, Gell's Gravitas, and Vortex didn't get the memo?

The Tavern

Firestorm is kind of outcompeted by ignition?

Firestorm is kind of outcompeted by ignition?

Re: Firestorm is kind of outcompeted by ignition?

Re: Firestorm is kind of outcompeted by ignition?

Re: Firestorm is kind of outcompeted by ignition?

Re: Firestorm is kind of outcompeted by ignition?

Re: Firestorm is kind of outcompeted by ignition?

Re: Firestorm is kind of outcompeted by ignition?

Re: Firestorm is kind of outcompeted by ignition?

Re: Firestorm is kind of outcompeted by ignition?

Re: Firestorm is kind of outcompeted by ignition?

Re: Firestorm is kind of outcompeted by ignition?

Re: Firestorm is kind of outcompeted by ignition?

Re: Firestorm is kind of outcompeted by ignition?

Re: Firestorm is kind of outcompeted by ignition?

Re: Firestorm is kind of outcompeted by ignition?

Re: Firestorm is kind of outcompeted by ignition?

Re: Firestorm is kind of outcompeted by ignition?

Re: Firestorm is kind of outcompeted by ignition?