The magical intervention sounds pretty cool. I would assume it would transfer the entire spell to the cleric, rather than the initial target.
The arcane barrier sounds good in theory, but I don't know how well an area effect like that will play out in the middle of combat. If it can be done, cool, but I think the intervention will be a better route.
As far as magical resistance eliminating the down time against stun and ice bolt, I may be biased here (stun is my favorite spell), but I feel like that would be too much. I would prefer to see the durations halved, then reducing the penalty against divine magic to make that less of a detriment if need be.
If we make mage armor applicable to others, I would like to see it only absorb spells. It seems more in line to me for a mage to be able to protect against magic while a cleric protects against physical attacks. Something about how the mage's knowledge and skill with mana allows them to keep the net of mage armor tighter to protect against physical attacks or something. In short, I would prefer to keep mage armor only available to the caster and adding in spell block for others
Post by Archmage Vazra on May 13, 2016 13:09:21 GMT -5
I'm in agreement with Sadie on two things here. On top of being incredibly powerful, spell Barrier sounds really wonky,whose going to be the arbiter of whats considered in and out of the barrier? We've seen with profane barrier that vague distances become quickly subjective. Whose estimation is correct? Especially in a PVP environment I can see this turning into an argument really quick.
The second point I agree with Sadie here is that total immunity to stun and ice bolt seems a little harsh, and a cheap shot since there's no visible indication in advance.
Another issue I see with spellblock is that it renders all of these other options obsolete. I can see counterspell and magical intervention being fun and interesting additions to the game. Additions that invite a deeper level of strategy, interaction and skill, but both are mechanics that would stand far better on their own, as spellblock would render them ultimately obsolete.
Post by Archmage Vazra on May 13, 2016 13:17:49 GMT -5
See the thing with the proposed Counterspell and Magical Intervention is that on top of beautifully fitting in the flavor of Arcane and Divine magic, is while they provide a countermeasure against magic, they don't do so in an arbitrary way. They aren't taking anything away from Arcane casters. Instead of just providing an easy way to flat ignore magic, they're encouraging and inviting combatents to do something about it. (In a way that would be fun and add a dynamic for both sides)
Personally, I'm still in favor of the spell block if it was modified to occupy the same space as a protection, only allowing you to wear one or the other. At four mana, it's probably not going to be reapplied in combat without completely nullifying a friendly mage and requiring done substantial organization. I would definitely like to see how it plays out in a line battle in the coming weeks, as those always feel a little closer to how our game works. Maybe a "knights vs. Knights" scenario with a couple of skill slots and no respawns on either side?
Last night at practice we did a play test of the counterspell bolt. I think it went very well. It was a purple spell Bolt that cost 3 mana and it would counter a held spell by an enemy mage if it struck them. It would also cut off a spell return if it struck a mage while they were doing that or it would dissolve a protective aura if a mage was struck with it and they did not have a primed spell.
We did two line battles and had 7-8 people on each side and two of those were Mages. So in those two fights we had four Mages, two on each team. I think the counterspell gave Mages another tool to use against other Mages which was unique but I don't think it heavily impacted close-in fighting. At the extremely close ranges of Shield wall fighting the counterspell did little to nothing to help. It is too hard to land a bolt behind a line of fighters. However when the Mages broke off and it was more Skirmish Style then it became much more useful because a mage could theoretically halt or hinder another Mage by priming a counterspell. I used this ability 2 times when coordinating with a mage and having them prime a counterspell and then walk towards a mage so that they could absorb the incoming spell or strike the other Mage and cancel theirs. I think the counterspell bolt made it even more lethal against Mages in a skirmish setting when sometimes a primed spell can deter opponents from rushing in. Walking in with a bolt that will negate their next spell or cancel their primed one seemed to be a bit more lethal than I expected. I honestly see the counterspell bolt being used by teams to hunt down Mages and not away to help counter offensive magic for allies.
I am more in favor of seeing counterspell allow conduction through an Ally or seeing magical intervention added to the Divine spells.
I think counterspell bolt has potential but I'm excited to play test other options.
Last Edit: May 19, 2016 17:06:55 GMT -5 by Jopper13
Drake to answer you, I don't think this up coming practice is going to be the last play test we do for things. It looks like there is a wide range of ideas floating around and my hope is to have an element of play test throughout practices moving foward. In this way people won't be afraid to offer up ideas and expand on the game. The issue I have is that we should set ground rules and keep an open mind about things that come up. This is a general statement for players and staff alike. With those 2 things I feel like many things are possible.
An idea was brought to my attention... what if the Counter Spell bolt either fizzles a spell or does "mana damage" and drains either all mana or like 5-10 mana? If we have stuff that blows up sheilds, melts armor, and drops enemies due to wounds... why not something that drains or drops mana?
Another angle to this that was also presented; what if this is a "divine blast" of energy, something that clerics can do instead of mages? They use divine energy to drain/backlash/release the mana stored in a caster... making this a divine spell bolt instead of an arcane one.
Please try to look at this from a perspective different than the "But that mana takes forever to get! Mages would have to do a ton of meditation to get it back if a single spell dropped them to zero" because healing wounds and repairing damaged equipment and armor takes a lot of time (and usually money) too.
Last Edit: May 21, 2016 16:22:46 GMT -5 by Jopper13
Personally I don't really like the thought of it draining mana, since it essentially does that by fizzling a spell and I feel like it would be wonky at best in combat. We can try it at practice, but my vote at this point would be to keep it at a fizzle and stagger.
I'm not opposed to giving the spell to clerics. Lore wise, I feel it fits in more with mages who understand better how magic is woven into spells, so they should in theory be better able to unravel it, but clerics do a lot of warding already, and that's almost what this is. I personally am still a fan of making this a separate skill that anyone with a magical lore skill and the 3 mana to cast it could take. That to me would signify a dedication on the part of the wielder to deciphering magic spells, reverse engineering them to be disabled by another spell, and practicing to bring that magic to bear, rather than just something that every mage with the enough skill could accomplish. It seems like a specialty or focus, rather than a general spell
The reason I feel it would be cumbersome is because armor and shield hits are tracked mentally, while mana uses physical representations. Forcing a player to stop and count out however much mana they would lose could easily become very time consuming and a very severe situation for the mage beyond simply losing the spell and/or an amount of mana. The easy way to mitigate that is to have the spell drain all of a caster's remaining mana, but that brings up a whole new issue: acid bolt destroys your armor, shatter destroys your shield, both of which make it harder to survive. We currently have no spell (or even mechanic) that breaks your weapon (unless you're an archer), which completely draining the caster's mana would effectively do to a mage. Doing so would go beyond the power of a spell block which negates a single spell, since a ready mage could blow through that with a low cost spell. That's why I would prefer to see it strip the target of magical auras before I would want it to drain mana itself. I don't know if I'm explaining this well enough, so please let me know if I need to clarify things more.