View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Davairus Implementor
Joined: 16 Jan 2004 Posts: 10351 Location: 0x0000
|
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 2:02 am Post subject: Dispel magic change |
|
|
Due to persistent uber-ness of shamans and not wanting to look at this for another year I have brought forward a change intended for aff module A. That is, dispel magic's save varies dependent upon the class that is casting the spell.
If you are fighting a shaman/necromancer then they cast dispel magic as a MAL
If you are fighting a healer/invoker they cast it as AFFLICTIVE
Illusionist casts as MENTAL
Game balance is important to us and its time that shaman's were given something more serious to worry about than nerfs to their damage per round - they are spellcasters and spells should be key for them to succeed. It is clear that shamans are enjoying the benefits of being able to attack their victims on two save-fronts - mals with their curses and anti-spells with their dispel magic spell (further problematic with shamans in melee-damage suits and falling back on healing). While dispel magic is necessary in the shamans arsenal, especially for battles with other clerics, it is easier on other classes (especially on the classes with particularly poor regen) for it to follow the same spell-type as their main sphere of spells. Many people have pointed out, quite rightly, that it is not possible to cover the spell needs of shamans in basic gear, and still do enough damage to overpower the shamans curing defences. This is partly a problem of being in basic gear, but also a problem of needing to cover so much saves.
Some may notice invokers have lost potency now, and I think that pure mages should be able to pose a threat on multiple spheres of magic, since they lack the melee/cure that a single-sphere shaman can still afford. Invokers have put all their eggs in one basket (aff). This is eventually addressed in aff module A. Til then you will have to make do, because its more important that we take care of shamans. Classes with outstanding balance issues make it difficult to see other problems by contrast. In a few weeks or months of getting settled in with the dispel change, we will be able to see even more clearly what tools the mage classes need exactly. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Erlwith
Joined: 22 Mar 2006 Posts: 1626
|
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 3:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
This doesn't balance things, so much as further tip the scales in one direction. Where some classes may now find it easier to fight shaman, classes like rangers who always had an upper hand now only need some mal saves to totally wipe the floor with shaman. ? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mahkan
Joined: 22 Oct 2007 Posts: 264 Location: The Interwebs
|
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 3:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
is it fair to say you are gimping invokers for the moment? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Blarg
Joined: 20 Jul 2005 Posts: 109 Location: Pennsylvania, USA
|
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 4:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
Where does this leave mobs who cast dispel magic? Still a mental spell? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Davairus Implementor
Joined: 16 Jan 2004 Posts: 10351 Location: 0x0000
|
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 5:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Rangers always had a upper hand?
Invokers have been gimp and I'm not helping matters, but I will tell you, the future for invokers is not gonna be dispel/stream. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Xerties
Joined: 24 Feb 2006 Posts: 484
|
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 5:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
So that explains why I couldn't dispel for shit today. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Erlwith
Joined: 22 Mar 2006 Posts: 1626
|
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 5:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: |
Rangers always had a upper hand? |
Against shamans they do wouldn't you say? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Slade Emissary
Joined: 17 Mar 2004 Posts: 666
|
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 6:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Very heavy impact change.
Shaman: Warranted. Shamans will still be good and if you sleep on mental they still have the underrated insomnia (far worse than necromancer sleep if you kill time and stick with them at the breaking point). Or they could just go into save proof cause pain spells. Or just skip it all and cure and out-regen you. To the guy above, ranger wasn't easy - it just turned it from very uphill battle to somewhat uphill battle.
Necromancer: If someone wants to complain try this class. They are reduced to what.. powerword kill in mental (which by the way, I suspect people should actually try every now and then). They took a little bit of a hit, and I wouldn't be surprised to see them have one of their decent (but nothing like dispel) spells become mental soon.
Invoker: Await changes
Healer: Belt of invokation get! Kind of double edged - makes breaks easier for healers, but your saves now also help against their damage spells as a perk in addition to the usual dispel. Probably a very very minor hit to healers overall, if that.
I like it overall (pending invoker change, of course). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Davairus Implementor
Joined: 16 Jan 2004 Posts: 10351 Location: 0x0000
|
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 8:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
The invokers are probably not that much more gimp today than they were yesterday. Back in the first age we had one save, instead of 3, and it was very easy to just load up. Fast forward to the present and you now have break items to level high saves, plus modern thinking has led to people figuring out that invokers do just fine in hit/dam. Especially since they have been granted shield block now. I think they compare favourably with the past, enough that I'm not worried so much about them.
Shamans on the other hand have been heating up the forum with complaints since time began. That isn't up for debate really. As a class, its a pretty straight-forward sum though. They have mals, cures, and harms. The mals are disablers and reducers, which soften up a target to prevent the shaman's own defences from being overpowered, 1 is enough and 2 turns the tables. But since mals do reliably fail, the shaman would spend time on the ropes, putting mana into healing. (Its been shown time and again that this is the easiest way to beat shamans - just get your damroll too high for them to cope with.) A shaman has a couple of tricks up his sleeve to use against high mal that help him win the attrition/curing battle (mainly hysteria and insom), also kick, to help him do some damage while conserving mana, and then he has the harm spells for when there is plenty mana to waste (and those spells certainly are efficient at wasting it). Harm is a nuke to use if his opponent makes a mistake, kinda like how bash is vs a missing prot shield. That's basically a description of how the shaman class works in a nice balanced fight. Now, in addition to that well-thought out gameplay, we also have cake dispel/own with red dragon+mace and harm nuke ..and that's not quite what we had in mind for our clerics. That's more what we had in mind for the people that 100% forgoe saves and just load damroll-only. The change thus helps that particular area.
I think shamans are actually a fine class to play, and invokers also pretty good if you gear them according to the formula. All invokers miss really is a lack of choices, its like, should I dispel/hellstream? Or should I dispel/chain lightning? Or should I spam hellstream or chain lightning? etc.
As for rangers they're fine .. put some thought into it. Prot shield + weapon ward + flight reduces most fighters to pretty similar targets for the spellcasters. Rangers have lower health than "most fighters" and pets are quite disposable. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Erlwith
Joined: 22 Mar 2006 Posts: 1626
|
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 6:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
First, I wasn't trying to allude in any fashion that rangers were overpowered. Just that this now makes a partially one-sided battle more one-sided.
Quote: |
they are spellcasters and spells should be key for them to succeed. |
So why allow a couple of items to render most of their spell arsenal more or less useless? It just sounds ass backwards to me. They are primarily spellcasters so let's make it that much harder for them to land spells?
I'm sorry, but to me this just sounds like someone didn't like having to save against mal and mental when fighting shamans. The point I am trying to make here is this change does not seem like a change that will balance things. It seems to me it will only make fighting shamans easier for everyone. However I'll reserve real further judgment until I see this change in situ. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Esivole Immortal
Joined: 21 May 2004 Posts: 958 Location: Somewhere beyond the present.
|
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 9:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
and there is a reason for the tone down on shamans, ... since they have been the majority of the top pkr's for as long as I can remember. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kedaleam Immortal
Joined: 25 Mar 2006 Posts: 989 Location: Michigan
|
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 10:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lovin' it... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Groq Immortal
Joined: 13 Jan 2006 Posts: 500 Location: Downstate NY
|
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 10:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dispel magic is for n00bs. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kedaleam Immortal
Joined: 25 Mar 2006 Posts: 989 Location: Michigan
|
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 10:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Groq wrote: |
Dispel magic is for n00bs. |
Agreed... I mean who doesn't want their opponent to not have sanctuary...
This sentence makes no sense to me cuz of the double negatives... Oh well. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mahkan
Joined: 22 Oct 2007 Posts: 264 Location: The Interwebs
|
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 1:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
I cant imagine he, being a fire giant, likes dispel magic. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
The Zealot
Joined: 07 Sep 2005 Posts: 124 Location: London
|
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 1:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Just a random thought - is this going to negate the bonuses vs. dispel for raged giant zerkers?
They get some sort of increased mental saves, which is protection for when they rage. If dispel is no longer mental (for some classes), then they've just been kicked in the bollocks - it rolls back that beneficial change. Doubly so since I'm not sure what wield lags have done to the feasibility of throw/hold purple/ quaff purple.
I could be totally off, though. Just going on vague memory of playing a giant berserker. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
The Zealot
Joined: 07 Sep 2005 Posts: 124 Location: London
|
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 1:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oops. Can't edit.
Never mind the post above. I realised about a minute after posting why that was a retarded question.
Carry on. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Baer
Joined: 22 Jan 2004 Posts: 618 Location: Michigan
|
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 6:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Xerties wrote: |
So that explains why I couldn't dispel for shit today. |
That...and cuz you suck, Xerties. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Vertas
Joined: 17 Jan 2004 Posts: 1168 Location: Ewa Beach, HI
|
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hrm, this may be more work than its worth, but what if you classified buffs into different categories. Theres pretty much an opposite for every spell, and seeing as the theme so far has been opposites cancel each other out, with combat modules and etc, then this would make more sense. For instance sanctuary reduces damage taken, therefor reducing the effectiveness of afflictive spells, thus the aff save would determine whether or not sanc was dispelled. And so on and so forth. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mandor
Joined: 03 Mar 2006 Posts: 794
|
Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2008 8:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
Vertas wrote: |
hrm, this may be more work than its worth, but what if you classified buffs into different categories. Theres pretty much an opposite for every spell, and seeing as the theme so far has been opposites cancel each other out, with combat modules and etc, then this would make more sense. For instance sanctuary reduces damage taken, therefor reducing the effectiveness of afflictive spells, thus the aff save would determine whether or not sanc was dispelled. And so on and so forth. |
interesting idea I vote for. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|