Page 1 of 1

Rework Ring of Flames

PostPosted: Tuesday, 7th February 2017, 19:38
by Jeremiah
Ring of Flames seems like a potentially interesting spell that doesn't get that much use because it's too high level and uses too many spell slots for type of characters who might want to use it.

Also, Charms look to be on the way out, and I think part of Ring of Flames is worth saving as a lower level spell.

Suggestion: remove the rF++,rC-- and fire magic enhancer part of the spell.

The new version would simply place a ring of flame clouds around the caster that move when he/she does, damaging adjacent enemies.

Make it available at a level when the damage done by flame clouds is likely to be still significant to the type of monsters the player will be fighting. Perhaps lvl 5 - 6, either pure Fire or Fire/Air.

Also, make the spell supported by Vehumet.

Re: Rework Ring of Flames

PostPosted: Tuesday, 7th February 2017, 20:06
by duvessa
The problem is there's already a spell for killing things with fire clouds and it's level 3

Re: Rework Ring of Flames

PostPosted: Tuesday, 7th February 2017, 20:47
by Doesnt
The character type who wants to use it is an all-in fire mage that lacks either Fire Storm or the kill-die apts/wizardry to get Fire Storm running, and it is quite noticeably useful for them as an MP-efficient way of burning popcorn before Fire Storm.

Re: Rework Ring of Flames

PostPosted: Wednesday, 8th February 2017, 10:33
by Gozigzag
Ring of Flames is a very interesting spell that you almost never get because vehumet does not support it.

Re: Rework Ring of Flames

PostPosted: Wednesday, 8th February 2017, 19:29
by lethediver
A charms spell that makes your PC more vulnerable to stuff is already dumb. A charms spell that makes you more vulnerable AND requires you to be in melee range of enemies for it to do anything is even dumber.

Re: Rework Ring of Flames

PostPosted: Wednesday, 8th February 2017, 20:25
by njvack
Slotless spell power boost is pretty definitely doing something.

Also you don't need to be in melee range to get flame clouds to burn monsters.

Re: Rework Ring of Flames

PostPosted: Wednesday, 8th February 2017, 20:27
by Rast
Also the flame clouds block ranged cold attacks.

Re: Rework Ring of Flames

PostPosted: Wednesday, 8th February 2017, 21:38
by kuniqs
rF++ is good in Zot for obvious reasons, and almost every mage trains charms to make use of the endless stupid buff spells, so Ring of Flames is a rather easy spell for fire elementalist to make use of

IMO change it to Conjurations/Fire, 'cause it's supposed to be used to buff spellpower and deal damage more than protect you, so Conjurations make a little more sense here than enchantments here.

Re: Rework Ring of Flames

PostPosted: Thursday, 9th February 2017, 05:11
by huiren
I think there's almost no reason for anyone to train charms up past 10 anymore, and that's only on characters with a good apt that have battlesphere early. I haven't gone past 5-6 in any of my recent games. Maybe there's more draw to invest in Charms to get deflect missiles, but the charms dependency on ring of flames makes it hard to cast now that charms brings so little to the table.

Re: Rework Ring of Flames

PostPosted: Thursday, 9th February 2017, 05:34
by Shard1697
kuniqs wrote:rF++ is good in Zot for obvious reasons, and almost every mage trains charms to make use of the endless stupid buff spells
There aren't really many of those anymore though. Haste is gone so what are they gonna be training charms that high for? Deflect missiles?

Re: Rework Ring of Flames

PostPosted: Thursday, 9th February 2017, 05:59
by Doesnt
i'm not the only one who values dmsl highly and goes for it whenever feasible am i

Re: Rework Ring of Flames

PostPosted: Thursday, 9th February 2017, 06:53
by huiren
I suspect it will be considered more valuable now, but in the past I always thought repel missiles at decent power was enough and only went for dmsl on an air mage with haste or a something like a DE/HE^Ash for whom it's dirt cheap anyway.

Re: Rework Ring of Flames

PostPosted: Thursday, 9th February 2017, 19:29
by lethediver
Dmsl is a trap. Rmsl works just fine in all but the most stubbornly suicidal of engagements

If you're launching a frontal assault against yaktaurs you need to rethink your playstyle, not your spellset

Re: Rework Ring of Flames

PostPosted: Thursday, 9th February 2017, 20:17
by pedritolo
lethediver wrote:Dmsl is a trap. Rmsl works just fine in all but the most stubbornly suicidal of engagements

If you're launching a frontal assault against yaktaurs you need to rethink your playstyle, not your spellset


TBQH I'm more worried about iron shots from iron giants or crystal spears from ancient liches. They make it worth it to spend some exp on deflect missiles to avoid sudden deaths from +50% HP, particularly on fragile species. Not that I do it all the time, but it's good to know that I can.

Re: Rework Ring of Flames

PostPosted: Saturday, 11th February 2017, 06:03
by kuniqs
Dmisl appears to be tailored to Deep Elves and Spriggans imo.

Re: Rework Ring of Flames

PostPosted: Tuesday, 14th February 2017, 19:35
by duvessa
Deflect missiles success rate doesn't matter so you don't actually need to use any extra xp to get it.

Re: Rework Ring of Flames

PostPosted: Sunday, 5th March 2017, 07:08
by TonberryJam
Correct me if i'm wrong, but I thought Ring of Flames protected you from incoming ice magic so the rc-- was non-issue as far as even being hit with cold damage, except maybe cold branded melee.

Also, it's a great spell as is and provides a lot of utility that hasn't even been mentioned in this thread to warrant it's high level. I don't think the spell can or should be lowered in level, simply for what it brings to the table.

Re: Rework Ring of Flames

PostPosted: Sunday, 5th March 2017, 09:04
by nago
Bolt of cold and other beam missiles are eventually stopped by flames clouds, if present in their trajectory.

However, missiles with a psychal component such as throw icicle or arrows are not

Re: Rework Ring of Flames

PostPosted: Sunday, 5th March 2017, 18:19
by minstrel
Part of the issue with RoF, in my experience, is the fact that, by the time you get it, rF is seldom something of which you need more, and if it were, I wouldn't want to rely on having a specific spell up to cover it. Whereas, another dot of rC- could be a big issue (shard shrikes come to mind).