Is there a specific design goal behind spells fizzling? Is this mechanic set in stone?
I know (at least I think I know), the rate of spell fizzles is tied to the relevant casting skill. Does the relevant casting skill have any other effect on spell casting such as mana cost or casting time?
Instead of spells fizzling based on casting skill what if a failed casting skill check resulted in a higher mana cost or longer casting time for that instance of the spell?
In current tabletop RPGs there has been a trend to move away from out right failures (fizzles) to success with consequences (higher mana cost/longer casting time), could this apply here?
Manouk said:accidental mechanic that resulted in creating dramatic tension? ( heh)
I’m not sure it was an accidental mechanic or not, but I agree that it adds an element of “Dramatic Tension” if you’re a caster. Playing an Enchanter I can’t tell you how many times I became aware of myself grinding my teeth every time I would cast a MEZ because of the fear I would Fizzle and reduce my mana even further… It really made me focus as an EQ caster to max out all of my skills and always have this low level buff on me “Intellectual Superiority” that basically increases effective casting level by 6, and though it never completely did away with Fizzles it sure made me feel better that my chance of a successful cast was highly likely.
Rint
I could see the same thing happening if, on a casting check fail the mana cost or casting time was increased. Especially if there was no text message. If you aren't paying attention to your mana bar or casting times you might not have enough mana for that last mez, or your mez might wear off because the castig time on your re-mez was slightly longer than you were expecting.
EQ took it WAY overboard imo. I mean really... fizzling Spirit of Wolf at lvl 60 on a Druid? I guess the other 51 levels of constantly casting it wasn't enough practice?
I think it's one of those "in order to make it more REAL" things. There has to be a chance of failure due to environmental conditions NOT reflected in the artificial environment. Like there'd be a unepected noise and it would throw off your concentration. Battles are nasty, violent, scrary things. When you're in front of a computer, that doesn't necessarily come off as well in a more or less turn based game like most MMOs are. In EQ the turns were 6 seconds each (per tick) - if you follow. Boss mob battles in Dark Souls 3 for instance are PAINFUL, but I wouldn't want that style of battle in a MMO.
Personally if they do something similar, I think they should put a level cap on fizzles - say 10 levels. Maybe a higher cap the more levels you get... like 20 to start with and 10 near max level.
Intended or otherwise, fizzled spells added very dramatic tension.
Difficult camps and even raids could fail from a single missed cast due to a fizzle. And all players understood the risks of fizzles.
You loved it when you made that last second cast to stun, interrupt, heal, slow, haste, mezz, teleport, invuln., etc. to save the fight. But it was agony to fizzle and see a wipe at a difficult to travel to camp spot.
The result was players have to know their classes VERY well, know what to cast and when, as well as allowing for the ever possible fizzle.
I say keep it, and keep out the instant-gratification, lazy power-gamers that think mashing 3-5 buttons with no concept of group play should reward them with best in class gear.
I'm all for keeping fizzles, and the system is certainly fine the way it is, I was just curious if there was a specific goal behind the design. The thing people seemd to have mentioned the most about fizzles is the dramatic tension it adds. If thats actually what the goal of fizzles is then mission accomplished. However how that dramatic tension is generated can be done in different ways.
If the goal is dramatic tension then having the casting time of a spell be (X seconds + 0 to some percentage of the base casting time based on casting skill check) would definetely add tensions. This would require extreme attention to the casting bar/animation/however casting time is judged. Or maybe that wouldn't add tension as the normal play style becomes "pay extreme attention to casting times as you never know how long your spell will take to cast", the tension becomes the norm.
These discussions are all purely theoretical. Things that people think might be interesting alternatives to current systems. I'm not advocating a change to spell fizzles, just looking to discuss :)
I remember when you were casting a spell and if you were hit the spell bar would slightly move back a bit making the spell take a little longer to cast. It would do that with every hit if not interrupted or fizzled. The way EQ had spellcasting was amazing. Like said above, it taught you to really know which spells to load in every encounter and how and where to place your character to be the most efficient in a group. You had to know how to conserve mana, no matter how much mana you had. You could go through a full bar of mana in just a few fizzles or interrupts. Loved it ! :)
FFXI handled fizzles in a good way. Based off your current skill in that magic category and based on the level and stats of the enemy a spell could be resisted. There were different tiers of resisting. If a mage did a nuke it could be resisted in different tiers resulting in less damage depending on the tier of resist. The same applied to enfeebs/mezzes where they would last less time if they were partially resisted, or they could be resisted completely if you were way out of your league. If you got hit while casting then the cast had a chance to be interrupted causing you to have to start the cast over.
Cures and buffs has no fizzle aspect to them, but you could always be hit by the enemy and interrupted if hate management was bad. You could boost skill through leveling up the skill through use, equipment, and merits (FFXI's version of Alternate Advancement Points). Depending on the difficulty of the monster you could gear up in a way where a nuke would do more damage if it was an easier monster, or pile on more skill+ gear if it was a much higher level monster where resists were likely. Fizzling on cures and buffs seems a bit silly to me.
I never played EQ but I believe Alternate Advancement Points is the proper comparison. Basically once you reached level cap any exp would give limit points which for every 10k you would earn a merit point that you could spend boosting stats/skills to a certain cap.
Arximiro said:FFXI handled fizzles in a good way. Based off your current skill in that magic category and based on the level and stats of the enemy a spell could be resisted. There were different tiers of resisting. If a mage did a nuke it could be resisted in different tiers resulting in less damage depending on the tier of resist. The same applied to enfeebs/mezzes where they would last less time if they were partially resisted, or they could be resisted completely if you were way out of your league. If you got hit while casting then the cast had a chance to be interrupted causing you to have to start the cast over.
Cures and buffs has no fizzle aspect to them, but you could always be hit by the enemy and interrupted if hate management was bad. You could boost skill through leveling up the skill through use, equipment, and merits (FFXI's version of Alternate Advancement Points). Depending on the difficulty of the monster you could gear up in a way where a nuke would do more damage if it was an easier monster, or pile on more skill+ gear if it was a much higher level monster where resists were likely. Fizzling on cures and buffs seems a bit silly to me.
I never played EQ but I believe Alternate Advancement Points is the proper comparison. Basically once you reached level cap any exp would give limit points which for every 10k you would earn a merit point that you could spend boosting stats/skills to a certain cap.
The things you describe from FFXI were similar to systems in EQ. Resists based on level and saves vs types of magic, resists (saves) determining duration of cc, and casting interrupts etc.
Fizzle is different from resists though. Fizzle is where the spell fails to execute. It happens regularly at lower levels, and took I think 10% of the spell's mana cost.
I'm all for fizzles. Just like a melee ability has a chance to miss or be blocked, parried, dodged, a spell has a chance to fizzle or be resisted.
Dullahan said:I'm all for fizzles. Just like a melee ability has a chance to miss or be blocked, parried, dodged, a spell has a chance to fizzle or be resisted.
I'm pretty sure you've got it right here, Dullahan.
On a side note, I think it'd be interesting if they'd introduce a manual casting key combo sequence for casting spells. A new, difficult spell might require multiple, random key presses timed properly in order for the spell to be successful within the casting period. Almost like a DDR / Guitar Hero timing mini game in the middle of your already complicated duities. Just make the pay off rewarding enough and it could be fun. For example, if you get through all the key presses quick enough, your 2 second cast is done in 1.5 or it's more likely to crit. The downside would be if you missed a key, the cast time is increases, mana cost goes up, or you fizzle. As spells get easier and your skill increases, the number of keys required drops and the timing is less sensitive. At level 60, your SoW might only take one key press and completes as soon as you hit it.This would probably work best as an optional setting.
Dullahan said:The things you describe from FFXI were similar to systems in EQ. Resists based on level and saves vs types of magic, resists (saves) determining duration of cc, and casting interrupts etc.
Fizzle is different from resists though. Fizzle is where the spell fails to execute. It happens regularly at lower levels, and took I think 10% of the spell's mana cost.
I'm all for fizzles. Just like a melee ability has a chance to miss or be blocked, parried, dodged, a spell has a chance to fizzle or be resisted.
I do know how the fizzles work as I've seen them in the streams, but I didn't realize there was also a resist system in place on top of that. Typically I would just consider a full resist to be a miss for mages. It's almost like mages have a chance to miss initially and a second chance to miss again if they get a full resist. The comparison to melee being parried/blocked helps it make more sense. The system probably works well with how the game is structured so It'll be fun to see it in action. Since I never played EQ I don't have that experience to refer to.
Fizzles just wouldn't work in FFXI where sleeps/stuns have to be perfectly timed or you are looking at a wipe so you were prepared with proper skill to prevent a resist. Fizzles on cures seems crazy, but maybe there aren't a lot of moves that instantly take like 90% of the tank's HP. It would suck pretty bad to die to the RNG when there was no way you could have saved the tank. FFXI was pretty notorious for enemies that could drop you from 100% to like 10% in one move.
Arximiro said:Dullahan said:The things you describe from FFXI were similar to systems in EQ. Resists based on level and saves vs types of magic, resists (saves) determining duration of cc, and casting interrupts etc.
Fizzle is different from resists though. Fizzle is where the spell fails to execute. It happens regularly at lower levels, and took I think 10% of the spell's mana cost.
I'm all for fizzles. Just like a melee ability has a chance to miss or be blocked, parried, dodged, a spell has a chance to fizzle or be resisted.
I do know how the fizzles work as I've seen them in the streams, but I didn't realize there was also a resist system in place on top of that. Typically I would just consider a full resist to be a miss for mages. It's almost like mages have a chance to miss initially and a second chance to miss again if they get a full resist. The comparison to melee being parried/blocked helps it make more sense. The system probably works well with how the game is structured so It'll be fun to see it in action. Since I never played EQ I don't have that experience to refer to.
Fizzles just wouldn't work in FFXI where sleeps/stuns have to be perfectly timed or you are looking at a wipe so you were prepared with proper skill to prevent a resist. Fizzles on cures seems crazy, but maybe there aren't a lot of moves that instantly take like 90% of the tank's HP. It would suck pretty bad to die to the RNG when there was no way you could have saved the tank. FFXI was pretty notorious for enemies that could drop you from 100% to like 10% in one move.
Well a fizzle would only take a fraction of a second time-wise. It was more a mana penalty than time, at least, later in the game.
Most good casters would double cast (or mash) in a pinch or have two lines of /cast X in their macros to account for the possibility of fizzles.
Amsai said: I would also like to see different but similar systems where it makes sense. Like for instance a fizzle wouldnt seem right to me for say Bard. Call it finger fumbled instead. Also maybe instead of failing to execute it would execute wrong song. Another thing I liked was FFXIs Corsair class which basically had a built in fizzle in the form of skills based around a gamble of high to low results. Basically Im in favor of the concept but would like more variation or flavor in how it happens.
Missed note - also in EverQuest.
Manouk said:accidental mechanic that resulted in creating dramatic tension? ( heh)
Probably...was difficult at times to conserve mana...that would send me to a safe spot (solo) and practicing improving that spell or range of spells, to lessen the odds of fizzling. Improve your game. :) Even rooting myself on the spot to increase the likelihood of root sticking when I needed it to. Same with evac, hah evaccing my group out of Mistmoore, and they got out..I stayed and died. :P
I am all for fizzles being in the game. The added dramatic tension, difficulty, and complications do add to the game IMO. That said, revolw had a great point:
revolw said:EQ took it WAY overboard imo. I mean really... fizzling Spirit of Wolf at lvl 60 on a Druid? I guess the other 51 levels of constantly casting it wasn't enough practice?
Maybe we can find a way to limit this sort of thing.
JDNight said:I am all for fizzles being in the game. The added dramatic tension, difficulty, and complications do add to the game IMO. That said, revolw had a great point:
revolw said:EQ took it WAY overboard imo. I mean really... fizzling Spirit of Wolf at lvl 60 on a Druid? I guess the other 51 levels of constantly casting it wasn't enough practice?
Maybe we can find a way to limit this sort of thing.
It was always that higher level spell though that would fizzle. It was the same spell, just a higher level. The higher level spell would always fizzle right off the bat because you hadn't capped it yet. Reason a lot of us had lower level spells loaded for utility, sitting around making money. No fizzle
revolw said:EQ took it WAY overboard imo. I mean really... fizzling Spirit of Wolf at lvl 60 on a Druid? I guess the other 51 levels of constantly casting it wasn't enough practice?
IIRC, EQ eventually added an AA line that allowed you to 'master' older spells, so lower level spells would no longer fizzle. It seems to me it capped out around 3 levels below the current max level, so a level 100 toon could cast spells up to level 97 without worry of fizzles. It was always a risk with the most powerful spells though. I thought it was a pretty good system.
Mastery of all spells 3 levels below and lower is a great example of how far in the direction of convenience EQ moved.
If there is mastery of spells, it should come well beyond the spell's level requirement and probably involve other factors. For instance, perhaps you need to specialize in a particular school of magic which decreases fizzles and removes them entirely with low level spells (maybe half your level and lower). Maybe you should need to find a master copy of the spell (with a higher level requirement). Maybe its based on spell usage over a period of time.
Anything but removing these mechanics. Its those little things that come together and create the meta which makes a game enjoyable. Removing such things is exactly what led to "dumbed down" games that, hard as we try, are just not fun to us.
edit: Just to elaborate and lest anyone think I'm making a mountain of a molehill, consider what fizzles meant in EQ.
The decision to engage a mob (or for a party to pull) was based on player health, mana, preparation (buffs, knowledge, etc) as well as other factors... factors like the liklihood of missing attacks, being resisted, patrols, respawn (esp on offset timers), or - the chance to fizzle. It was those things that created the sense of danger in combat situations. It was those things that made the difference between the knowledgeable player who made informed decisions, accounting for all the variables, and the unskilled. When you begin to standardize everything and make it too predictable, it takes away from the challenge and sense of accomplishment.