PLEASE devs throw away the age old system of spell ranks. It's old and antiquated and old. Did I mention old?
I love games like Diablo 3 where you get a spell like firebolt and NEVER get firebolt 1, firebolt 2, firebolt 3, etc. Why have us gain all these spells just so that we can hit level 50 and sift through our 37 pages of spells where each spell takes up an entire page itself because it has 10 versions yet we don't use the first 9 because they are simply weaker versions.
I like the codex idea and think this type of system would fit perfectly with it. Instead of getting heal 1, heal 2, heal 3, heal 4, we get...heal. It's an instant cast heal that heals for a little amount of health and costs relatively low mana. Then, instead of leveling up and having to buy/train heal 2 and 8 levels later heal 3, just have the spell's power increase on its own as we level up. Then with the codex, however it's going to work, we can alter that heal spell to make it behave in various ways. Maybe change it from instant heal to a slow cast big heal.
But however the system works let's do away with Divine Blessing 1-9. Let's just have Divine Blessing and move on. Either it increases in power on its own as we increase in level or we can alter with the codex. This will allow us to keep a neat and clean spell book. It will save us from obtaining spells that we outlevel and no longer use. And it will also create a system where we have use for ALL of our spells, even our lower level ones.
This idea birthed from another discussion but there was a lot more being discussed in there which made the topic(s) very broad and I like to discuss things in a very specific manner. I believe it's easier on the devs when we discuss one thing at a time so that they can easily refer to the topic and get everyone's feedback on that specific topic and not have to sift though multiple other ideas. So what say you? Do you prefer a much cleaner spell system without all the ranks and clutter or do you like to buy that new version every so many levels?
Hey, I used to use some of those lower rank spells in EQ
Ping Pong with mobs
I (a Wizard) a Druid and a Mage used to group daily when we were waiting to find us a Healer and a Tank we would "ping pong" mobs out in open areas and we needed those lower level spells.
1) Druid and Wizard Loaded Snares
2) All of us load Direct Damage spell equal to the lowest of the three of us (seems we always loaded a DD that matched the Druids Largest)
3) All of us load our smallest Direct Damage to "fine tune" our agro
4) We would spread out in a triangle around the MOB, Druid and I cast our snares the same time incase one was resisted.
5) as the mob was heading to Player 1, Player 2 would cast his Big Nuke, putting him at the top of the hate list, Turning the mob to him.
6) player 3 would then cast his Big Nuke, turning the Mob to him.
7) Player 1, Big nuke.. turning the mob again.
The small fast nuke was loaded incase the big nuke wasn't quite enough to turn the Mob... and he needed a little more "persuading". To hit again with the Big Nuke would have thrown the balance off, and the next in line would not been able to turn the mob.
PL'ing noobs with Sand Giants is RO
As a Wizard Power Leveling options were pretty slim, no Buffs, no Heals, just damage. But what I could do was take a Sand Giant in Ro and beat it to within an inch of it's life where it would turn to run this took the small nukes to get it close, but not dead... Then zone out and let the noobs have at it. If all I had was the Big Nuke I wouldn't have been able to do that, it would have just killed it.
As for sifting through pages. EQ added a system where you right click on the spell slot, and a MENU comes up listing all your spells, by category, and in order of level. Actually makes the spell book (for loading spells onto the bars) about obsolete. Would solve that sifting problem your talking about
So I would have to say I liked to buy a new version every so many levels. Or at least have the Power of the spell adjustable on the fly.
I also found use in some of the lower level spells.
I often would intentionally load up a lower spell for pulling and for added DPS without stealing aggro.
As well, I used them for farming tradeskill items when I didn't want to use all my mana and drop 100K damage on a mushroom that had 3HP.
They could just impliment a master list of spells that you have learned and a spell book with the ones you are actively using.
You could choose wheter you sifted through the long list, or solely used tour spellbook. I personally like seeing the spells I have learned, and there are situations you may need a low lvl one.
For those who get overwhelmed by clutter (myself included), use the sleek spell book. Win win
EQ had those ranks as well (although they were disguised, with each new spell rank having a new name). As already said above, it could be quite useful to keep lower level spells loaded for a while for efficiency or other reasons.
If you look at EQ again, how many spell lines did each caster class get? The spell books might look a bit thin if you only had one version (growing with levels) for each spell "line". You'd have to have a lot more fluff spells (or other, "real" spell lines). I'd like that, but I think it might be harder to implement and balance.
I actually forgot about that. As a bard in VG I used a low level version of their shout which was an instant cast direct damage spell which was great for pulls and keeping low on the aggro list. But there are SO many other ways to handle this type of stuff and I can't think of a reason why NOT to do away with spell ranks.
fazool said:
As well, I used them for farming tradeskill items when I didn't want to use all my mana and drop 100K damage on a mushroom that had 3HP.
This was actually discussed VERY briefly in a far away thread that Brad touched on. Dealt something with higher level players camping lower level resources and trying to avoid this type of circumstance. So if Pantheon was developed in a manner where higher level players didn't need to farm lower level resources then there would be no need to waste mana on low level mobs.
Sarim said:
If you look at EQ again, how many spell lines did each caster class get? The spell books might look a bit thin if you only had one version (growing with levels) for each spell "line". You'd have to have a lot more fluff spells (or other, "real" spell lines). I'd like that, but I think it might be harder to implement and balance.
Pushing the devs to create more 'real' spell lines is a good thing. Helps push creativity and would help diversify the game's skillset. And I don't think there's much to worry about trying to implement this because a handful of games use this type of system already. And when I look at the brief image of the Codex I can't help but hope that the devs may be leaning on no spell lines. With the Codex it appears we may be able to alter our spells and in my head being able to alter spells but having long spell lines seems awkward.
I never liked a spellbook full of antiquated spells of the exact same thing but higher/lower levels, especially if each had a unique name. Trying to remember which are higher or lower was a PITA.
BUT, like others, I often used lower versions in certain circumstances.
WHAT IF... casting began and ended with a button. Click to begin, and you can control the damage output (Range of course) by how long you let the spell cast. If your cast time is 3.5 seconds, and you only let it go for 1 second, you do rougly 30% or less of max damage. ??? Of course you could just click once, and let the spell max out and auto-cast. This could also affect mana usage.
What if PRF created a whole new spell mechanic?
Instead of having to say yes or no to spell levels - how about we learn new levels of spells as before, but only the highest level is in our spell list/book.
Then when we go to cast it, we decide how much power we want to expend on it.
For example, think of an archer: when shooting an arrow, they can pull the string back all the way or partway if they want a slow shot.
We could do something like that with spells. Let's say I have a firebolt spell and after many levels I have increased its power. 1HP, then 10HP then 100HP damage,
But, when I go to use it, I can put it in low gear by casting it differently and only use a little of its power (and less of my mana)
I dub these "casting modifiers" and maybe they can be activated with a macro or a key combination.
I also found use for lower level spells, particually for tagging mobs (low mana cost and fast casting), or buffing lower level players that were too low for the "good stuff".
I also REALLY looked forward to getting new spells. This served as major "fuel" to keep me going through the levels. The bland, tasteless gradually-increasing-in-power Fireball example you cited is exactly the opposite of what I'm looking for. This is Guild Wars 2 style progression, where power increases are gradual and spoon-fed. The spell augmentation example mentioned would be ok if it's implemented correctly, with all paths having value and purpose.
As an EQ vet, I dislike the sterile RK.I, II, III etc system currently in use, which does indeed clutter your spellbook. Never would I cast a lvl 100 RK.II over a RK.III of the same level and spell. I preferred the simpler way spells were prior to this change: Some spells being vendor-bought, some crafted, some dropped, some quested, along with certain "Ancient" versions you could obtain from raid bosses. For spells I couldnt buy from a vendor, I'd engage in a bit of trading to line up in advance as many spells as I could in anticipation for my next level. Just having (hopefully most of them) in my bag ready to go was a great feeling. Looking forward to milestone spells, like KEI for enchanters, focus for shaman, or aegolism for clerics, was always a huge driver for me. Couple that with the fact that these are class-defining spells that you couldnt just waltz into town and buy from a vendor or trainer made otaining them even more sweet and rewarding.
Spells are but one thing in a long list of mechanics that made EQ such a rewarding (and addicting) game to play. I can't speak for everyone, but spell anticipation and planning not only kept me going through the levels, it kept me subscribed.
I agree with almost all of you in that I like the idea of having stronger and weaker spells. Also, I think spells should be different. Not only in name, but in their affects, both visual and mechanical. However, it is important that we are always gettting new spells, and not just keeping old spells that automatically gain power. Going after new spells was half the fun... no, more than half the fun of the game for me. Also, they add a great cash sink into that game. Acquiring new spells is one of the most imporant cash sinks affecting a caster as they goes through the leveling process. Tanks need armor, rogues need weapons, and casters need spells.
Dekaden said:I also found use for lower level spells, particually for tagging mobs (low mana cost and fast casting), or buffing lower level players that were too low for the "good stuff".
Simple solution to this and even satisfies your desire to gain new spells every level or two, a spell that is specifically made for tagging/pulling mobs with low threat. Instead of using fireball 1 to tag a mob at level 60, you have a spell specifically made for tagging.
I also REALLY looked forward to getting new spells. This served as major "fuel" to keep me going through the levels. The bland, tasteless gradually-increasing-in-power Fireball example you cited is exactly the opposite of what I'm looking for. This is Guild Wars 2 style progression, where power increases are gradual and spoon-fed. The spell augmentation example mentioned would be ok if it's implemented correctly, with all paths having value and purpose.
It's actually Diablo 3 like I mentioned but that's neither here nor there. Just because you no longer gain multiple spells of the same line doesn't mean you wouldn't continue to gain new spells every so many levels. There would still be new spells to gain PLUS you'd have the augmentation system where you would gain new ways to interact with your previous spells. Nothing is 'spoon-fed' you would still have full control of gaining new spells, changing your old fireball spell into a new spell (thus getting a new spell) is no different than gaining a new spell by way of getting the next rank of your spell line.
Spells are but one thing in a long list of mechanics that made EQ such a rewarding (and addicting) game to play. I can't speak for everyone, but spell anticipation and planning not only kept me going through the levels, it kept me subscribed.
Still not sure where the concern for this comes from. You would still have much anticipation and planning in your future. Maybe even MORE planning since instead of getting the same spell over and over you'd have to strategize and plan out which direction you wanted to augment your spells. But of course there could always be some way to change your spells and augment them in multiple ways so that you don't get locked into a certain spell forever. But that's another discussion for another day. But yeah, it would still be like Christmas every so many levels waiting upon your new spells and going to get them and scribe them and try them out because I really love that feeling too. It just wouldn't be of repeat spells and spell lines.
I appreciate your angle in reducing spellbook clutter, on this we can agree. However, I don't think the solution is fewer spells, but rather better spell management.
I like the idea of having a codex of sorts to augment certain spells, although I would prefer this to apply to a select few spells and possibly be obtained via AA or gated behind levels. Having character development milestones to look forward to and strive for is an important feature for me.
As far as spells leveling with you, as your system would require, I am not on board. I do not prefer a gradual, bland, uninspired power curve as I level. For example, I enjoyed getting a new spell at lvl 10 that was incredibly powerful against lvl 10 and 11 mobs, but started to lose potency against lvl 12 and 13 mobs, leaving me looking forward to the next spell upgrade at lvl 14.
Your system isn't bad per se, and works well enough in Diablo 3. It's just not the experience I'm looking forward to in Pantheon.
I never minded having spell lines which we kept througout our progression through the game. Knowing that every now and then your Firebolt or Ice Strike or Slow would show up again more powerful than before was enjoyable. What made it acceptable was the names were always different. It is when the developers literally just add an ever increasing number after the name is where I get pissed off. That is just being stupidly lazy. And I hate stupidly lazy developers.
Xonth said: I really like getting a new spell upgrade that had a new name because from an rp/immersion standpoint I liked when my spell went from lets say "beam of fire" to "beam of lava". Just cosmetic thoughInitially, EQ did a really good job with spell naming. Spells were based upon game lore and hand unique names rather than just Healing I, Healing II, Healing III, etc.
I actually liked getting serious upgrades to spells at a certain level...it gave me something to look forward to and made certain levels new benchmarks for power. Getting spell X at 23 made me WAY stronger at 23 than 22, which was a nice break from the boring linear progression of minor power increases every level. I could see giving a spell line and then instead of just getting a new spell and keeping the old one, maybe you get an upgrade to replace the existing spell, so you don't have 10 versions of it? Personally, I also think there is use for the old ones though. What if you are helping a lower level friend and only want to cast the level 10 heal on him instead of the massive level 50 version, etc?
I hate spells ranks. In EQ, if you didn't get a spell or missed an expansion, etc and only got a rank 2 spells and not the raid rank 3, then you could be screwed for 2 expansions until the spell became totally irrelevant. It's also much tougher to help people since when you do a dps chart or a heal chart or an aggro chart, etc, you cannot do one that is for everyone of the same class because someone may have a rank 2 this, a rank 3 that, a rank 1 this and a rank 3 from a previous expansion or lower level can be more powerful than a rank 1 or 2 spell that is higher level...but the mobs often start to resist it more as well.
I think that the only difference in spells should be with the focus on gear and people who are raiding will be getting a better focus since they need more dps or more heals or... People in group get the same spell but with a lesser focus since they do not need as much to kill in group or solo.
That way, if someone was a ''casual'' and decides to start raiding, they have the spells and are not screwed for not having raided from the start. Or if someone is in the army or ill and misses X raids and doesn't get rank 3 spells, they also won't be screwed when they come back.
patrick83 said:It's also much tougher to help people since when you do a dps chart or a heal chart or an aggro chart, etc, you cannot do one that is for everyone of the same class because someone may have a rank 2 this, a rank 3 that, a rank 1 this and a rank 3 from a previous expansion or lower level can be more powerful than a rank 1 or 2 spell that is higher level...but the mobs often start to resist it more as well.
I'm having issues understanding how this in any way affects the efficacy of a parse. Please elaborate.
Well what you quoted was not about parses but about making a dps spreadsheet for example. If we don't have the same rank spells, they won't do the same damage.
The issue with dps for example is that a spell that you do not get in rank 3 if rank 3 is the max rank may haunt you for a long time. Let me give you a direct example. I missed one expansion in EQ because I was in the hospital for 6 months. When I got back, I caught up but my spells for that expansion were rank 2. As a necro, we got a dot called ''whatever'' pyre like reaver's pyre in example thatr was our best dot every expac. Even once the new expact started, the old pyre spell was better than most of your new dots except the new pyre spell. But not having that veaer's pyre rank 3 haunted me for 2-3 expansions as it should of been on my list of best spells still or casted in a certain order to maximise DPS but I couldn't do that since I didn't have that spell.
So unless they ensure that even rank 1 spells from a higher level expansion is higher than the previous rank 3, you could be ''haunted'' by a missing rank 3 for 203 expansions and lose dps. During most raids, all dps matters so this can be an issue.
