Nero24200
2006-11-10 10:21:58 UTC
#52818
This surgestion would likey be complicated to impliment, but I wondering what everyones thoughts on it are
Would it be possible to impliment matrial components as mandatory for spells that require them? So your character would have to activly search for sulphar and bat guano in order to cast fireball? As well increasing Role-Play and potenionally opening up more quest ideas (such as searching for matrial components) it would also tone down certain spells so that more powerful spells are cast only in dire situations.
MadCaddies
2006-11-10 10:40:38 UTC
#52820
EFU has summoning ingredients for different themes already. I'm not sure that disabling each individual spell being cast by all our casting characters because they haven't done certain quests or acquired rare or crazy ingredients would be beneficial, nor worth the scripting effort.
alogen
2006-11-10 11:14:55 UTC
#52826
In that line, perhaps making components to change a spell?
For example, add beetle's belly, into the spell to enchant the flaming hands to do another 1 fire damage/increase range
(or something like this)
Could be nice if mages had to have components.
With a possibility to make new kind of spells.
The idea is buying a wizards' box, which the script takes the components from it, on cast spell. (and a small tool which tells the script the char have the box/uses it)
Although, it might add lag, so, well, DMs, what do you think?
Nero24200
2006-11-10 11:40:13 UTC
#52830
. I'm not sure that disabling each individual spell being cast by all our casting characters
It wouldn't be each individual spell, only those that have matrial components as descirbed in the players handbook (which rules out the majority of spells). Most matrial components are easy to find or can be bought at stores normally, its only componenets for very, very powerful spells, like raise dead that require rare matrial componenets (and to my knowledge this is already in effect in terms of RP at the hold, since they have a delivery quest for diamons which is the matrial componenet needed for raise spells)
MadCaddies
2006-11-10 12:54:37 UTC
#52838
Well, you did use Fireball as an example! :P
In any case, compiling a list of spells that would need these components, then introducing a system where they can't be cast unless the caster has said components in his possession seems like a fairly arduous task that really doesn't seem to add much.
I'm also fairly sure Raise Dead already requires a special component, but don't quote me on that.
Nuclear Catastrophe
2006-11-10 13:42:10 UTC
#52845
Yeah, Raise Dead requires a component. I do think components that augment the 'less used' or the 'summoning' spells are nifty, otherwise, it'd be a royal pain for a mage to have to fill his inventory with guano in order to fireball something.
Snoteye
2006-11-10 14:20:31 UTC
#52850
Why is nothing good enough as it is anymore? :/
Either of you played DDO? Because I can tell you, having to constantly restock on spell components is not very entertaining. It works in PnP because PnP (usually) isn't complete hack'n'slash; but ultimately, both DDO and NWN are.
I'm a very big fan of the summoning reagents because it adds a whole lot of flavour, but I'm also very much against micromanaging, and apart from having to eat and drink, it doesn't get much more micromanaging than having to use spell components.
On a completely different note, it's also a sure-fire way to ruin some spellcasters since not all can justify taking Brew Potion and Craft Wand ICly.
I'm also not convinced that we need to introduce components to make regular spells more powerful. I'd wager that mages are, aside from clerics and bards, and perhaps paladins, the most powerful class on EfU, which is clearly backed up by the amount of high level casters there's been.
I'll add that for a few very specific spells (Raise Dead, for instance), components should be a requirement, but otherwise I'm completely against this.
alogen
2006-11-10 14:44:38 UTC
#52854
And what about adding components, not to increase the spell or empower it, but to change it?
(like a stone of cold, or something, to change burning hands to freezing hands?)
9lives
2006-11-10 14:55:24 UTC
#52855
That would be too overpowering, giving Wizards power akin to Sorcerors', with more spell selection.
Mystic_warden
2006-11-10 19:03:11 UTC
#52898
Changing the energy type of an elemental spell (which damages by fire, cold, acid, sonic or electricity) is actually a metamagic feat in PnP.
Achiving something same with components, the same way as the summoning themes work (which is great!) would add a lot of flavour for arcane spellcasters, as there is no way to get new spells into the game without a hak. The scripting requirment should be the same.
Please note it would not make the spells more powerful, just change the energy type for damage, which could come very handy in certain situations, but it doesn't make them overpowered IMHO.
Thrawn
2006-11-10 19:08:32 UTC
#52901
The problem of changing types of damage is that there are no animations to support any of that. You'd have fire doing cold or acid damage, but all the visuals would still be fire.
alogen
2006-11-10 19:49:17 UTC
#52916
Cant the animation be changed?
Also, other types of magic
(perhaps even funny ones, like trying to cast invisible, and make
yourself blind, instead? :P) like different light colors...
Harlstar
2006-11-10 22:13:26 UTC
#52972
Adding components to spells would certianly lessen the numbers of our power-hungery and mostly evil wizards.
Also, going though quests to cast ONE spell sounds like a damn huge headach.
Nero24200
2006-11-11 00:23:25 UTC
#53004
It wouldn't really be a quest for one spell component, after all, in the example I gave, the quest to find diamonds for the hold, the quest ends when you feel you have enough, you can return with any number of gems and claim a reward (though if this was done for the puporses I surgested in the post, it would mean that having a large spell component bag labbeled "swag" would suddenly look a little more full rather than having gold for a reward)
chaosprism
2006-11-11 04:44:36 UTC
#53038
Thrawn
The problem of changing types of damage is that there are no animations to support any of that. You'd have fire doing cold or acid damage, but all the visuals would still be fire.
Could you use animations from other spells and vfx to do it?
For example if people did a fireball of cold damage could you use 4x cold breaths shooting off in different directions simultaneously?
Mestil's acid breath could be the acid ball.
Having a lightning bolt spell that did fire damage may be the hardest (line of fire) maybe you could spawn short animation fire vfx in row to show the fire's passage.