njvack wrote:While I'm generally in favor of MOAR NUMBERS, this is a case where an adjective might be better -- with the manual's text saying something along the lines of "stop worrying about this ok?" Or just hiding it altogether...?
Wasn't spell power displayed in adjectives until a while ago? Also, spell power
is relevant, even if getting
max power isn't.
Also, reflecting on non-quoted text (speed editing at work, woo - there's barely any proofreading in this by the way) I'd say that your declared fondness of numbers has tricked you into evaluating one thing for which there are no immediately available numbers (effectiveness of some spells, which is completely subjective and based on spell power on the appropriate cases - which
is objective but also very well buried under formulae and stepdowns and what is proving to be a highly questionable display system) based on
other things for which there
are numbers (spell failure chance, which is given in-game, and spell hunger, which pretends to be hidden under an extremely clunky display but has an extremely simple formula so anyone who is minimally spoiled can come up with the actual number in a second).
You should stop worrying about spell power when it is
good enough, but it's still in your best interests to push it past "I can cast this safely at zero food cost" - at that point it's still most likely "not really that good", and if a player really beelines for zero hunger/failure with extreme focus on Spellcasting skill plus wizardry bonuses, your spell power dependant spell of choice might end up being rather underwhelming the moment you get it.