Back in EQ1 you could loot special "Master" versions of spells that would have a bit more kick or a slight efficiency upgrade over the normal spell. These were generally rare and a fun bonus to try and hunt down at max levels.
I hope we see even more depth with rare spells and abilities being used as loot drops to help bring character diversity and cause people to move around the world more to seek these out.
In addition to this type of alternate spells another thing I really liked in Vanguard was how Shaman picked a power animal when they rolled their class and that determined some of the spells that were received.
Giving players 2 alternatives for an ability now and then that they would have to choose one or the other could create some character diversity and prevent every class from being as cookie cutter by max level.
Personally I like these kind of big permanent choices for my character but I can see how some people may not like a system like this.
How do you feel about having alternate spells and abilities in game ?
Thanks in advance,
Kiz~
I definitely want the spell/skill tome levels. It added to gameplay.
My only concern about permanent choices as to one spell version over another is that inevitably, players will decided that one is more min/max than the other and a player didn't make that choice, they can't raid on certain raids, etc. I like the idea overall, but that is a factor that needs to be sorted because that kind of thing started happening very early on and now-a-days, people vote-kick group members for "gimped" characters in group content.
But, hey, maybe with it being such way of life that you'd have no healers or tanks or whatever to choose from if you did this that it kills the practice.
I thought EQ1 spell system was the best one. Get newer versions of the older spells but keep them in your book in case you needed a less mana drain for casting on lower level mobs/player characters.
One set of spells memed at a time (maybe 10 slots instead of 8) and thats it. Some newer games give you too many slots so you can have a boatload of spells to choose from. They also take away lower level spells when one is upgraded due to newer spell recieved at a new level.
Although i like the idea of casting buff only spells from your book without changeing out your mrmed spells. But only out of combat.
I like having various spells being more rare by being dungeon drops or from hidden away roaming hermit/pariah casters and some being researched from various bits of collected paper, but having a core set of common spells available at the various class guilds in cities for each spell level tier (or I guess just each level if they go that route).
I am not personally a fan of having various versions of the same spell with differing strength. I mean I guess I can see how maybe some wizard has figured out, for example, that if you wink at the end of casting Stormbolt it has a bit more pizzazz for a sliver more mana and cast time. I'd just prefer having entirely different new spells be the rare scrolls in the world for us to be excited about finding instead of Stormbolt +1.
You'll be happy to hear that we already know looting spells/abilities is a pretty big thing in Pantheon. The Living Codex will allow for a lot of customization in spells and abilities...
From the FAQ:
2.0 What is new or unique about spells and abilities in Pantheon: Rise of the Fallen?
An important aspect of character development in Pantheon is obtaining powerful spells and abilities. In MMOs it is common to find rare items out in the world, whether by adventuring or by crafting, but abilities and spells are more often learned from trainers or even just given to player when his or her character levels up. In Pantheon, however, many of the more rare and exotic spells and abilities are found not at the local trainer but from a wise sage hiding in the depths of a dungeon or at the top of a remote tower. Through a game system we call “The Living Codex,” players will be able to manage both standard class abilities and these powerful and rare abilities.
The Living Codex serves as a ‘spellbook’ to manage “Essential” and “Transcendent” spells and abilities.
The first section of The Living Codex is labeled “Essential” and will contain the host of standard abilities characters can naturally learn throughout their lifetime.
The second section of The Living Codex is labeled “Transcendent” and is built for the scribing and intensifying of powerful Prime Scroll abilities.
2.1.1 What are “Prime Scroll” abilities?
In Pantheon many of the most powerful and exotic abilities can only be found out in the wilds of Terminus from heavily guarded treasure vaults, the depths of dungeons, and from unimaginable locations. These most powerful abilities are written on legendary parchments known as Prime Scrolls.
Spells and abilities that are learned from Prime Scrolls and stored in The Living Codex as “Transcendent” abilities.
The Prime Scroll will only fill the top portion of each page; underneath, there will be three empty sections that the player can mark with special items which will further enhance the primary ability. These three sections are detailed below:
• Seal of Amplification
o Amplifies the bonus modifiers from Mana Climates that affect the Primary Scroll’s mana color. More powerful seals will increase the bonuses.
• Brand of Resilience
o Lessens the negative modifiers from Mana Climates that affect the Primary Scroll’s mana color. More powerful brands will decrease the penalties.
• Signet of Synergy
o Applying a Signet of Synergy to an ability will unlock different class-specific synergy effects that can be used in combination with synergy effects from other classes, sometimes to awesome effect. However, the Primary Scroll ability must be capable of synergy effects and not all are.
What if the force of a spell and mana consumption could dependent on the cast time?
So fast button clicking causes quick casts that cost little mana,but the chance that the spell will fizzle is increased when casting hasty ,because of the decrease in spellfocus.
Take a small hasty uncontroled fireball as example ,or huge destructive fireball where a mage gets enough time to let it grow to two-hander size .And aim it with great precision.
Ofcourse since it is seen as greater danger,the greater the fireball gets,the more aggro would be drawn towards you
I think the climate system can prevent min/max "best" choices for spells
As there could be climates where one alternate spell version might work better ,worse in the other
But to prevent players from constantly switching their spell version there should be something that rewards players for sticking with the version they like ,an attunement bonus of sorts that you get after sticking with a version (they'd lose that bonus as soon as they equip another version and have to start from scratch again)
So you could switch constantly and use all the spell versions at mediocre level or specialize to be great in certain situations and climates.
That would give those min/maxers something to think about I bet,as they would have to accept that it is either being a specialist for certain situations
Or mediocre in all situations
Angrykiz said:Back in EQ1 you could loot special "Master" versions of spells that would have a bit more kick or a slight efficiency upgrade over the normal spell.
You probably menat to say EQ2. That game offers a wide range of tiers for spells.
Crafting in EQ2 used to be a lot more difficult while crafting Journeyman or Expert spells. We used to have to craft a quill, paper and ink but this requirement was eventually removed from the crafting process. Once you reach L.20, you can research spells in order to boost them up a tier until you reach Grandmaster.
Angrykiz said:Back in EQ1 you could loot special "Master" versions of spells that would have a bit more kick or a slight efficiency upgrade over the normal spell. These were generally rare and a fun bonus to try and hunt down at max levels.
I hope we see even more depth with rare spells and abilities being used as loot drops to help bring character diversity and cause people to move around the world more to seek these out.
In addition to this type of alternate spells another thing I really liked in Vanguard was how Shaman picked a power animal when they rolled their class and that determined some of the spells that were received.
Giving players 2 alternatives for an ability now and then that they would have to choose one or the other could create some character diversity and prevent every class from being as cookie cutter by max level.
Personally I like these kind of big permanent choices for my character but I can see how some people may not like a system like this.
How do you feel about having alternate spells and abilities in game ?
Thanks in advance,
Kiz~
I want different spell names, not master 1 2 3..4.. thats the cheap way to do it. I want spells every 5 levels. Makes earning them more rewarding.
The spell quality system from EQ2 was awesome. It's a great way to make the world loot table more diverse. Instead of every named having a static loot pool, they also have a chance to drop a master spell scroll. Just about every spell in the game could be upgraded to master ... so yeah, it really helped with making all names have an inherent value loot wise (because of the chance to drop masters) but it also created a very fulfilling progression experience.
Why limit this to just spells? Make very item have variables. That 20% haste item you wanted? Would you really be happy if when you finally saw it drop it only had 10% haste when the next person gets 35% haste?
You realize there are consequences for having spells/items that have variations: Which version do you balance the game against? The most common, i.e. the worst, version or the rarest and best version? The choice will affect everyone. Everyone with the version better than the balanced one will have a much easier time in the game while everyone with the version worse than the balanced will have a more difficult time. And would you be happy knowing your spells were sub-par and that you would struggle more than the next person?
There are threads out there where people are quite vocal about segregation and separate of the playerbase. I was in EQ2 and even there guilds would ask which version of spells you had. When EQ1 introduced runes you turned in for spells guilds there only wanted players with the best variation. It does nothing but add another aspect which would divide the playerbase. Spell version, keyed zones, playtimes, etc.
Personally I like things which divide up the playerbase because that means less competition for me in the content I'll be facing.
Vandraad said:Why limit this to just spells? Make very item have variables. That 20% haste item you wanted? Would you really be happy if when you finally saw it drop it only had 10% haste when the next person gets 35% haste?
You realize there are consequences for having spells/items that have variations: Which version do you balance the game against? The most common, i.e. the worst, version or the rarest and best version? The choice will affect everyone. Everyone with the version better than the balanced one will have a much easier time in the game while everyone with the version worse than the balanced will have a more difficult time. And would you be happy knowing your spells were sub-par and that you would struggle more than the next person?
There are threads out there where people are quite vocal about segregation and separate of the playerbase. I was in EQ2 and even there guilds would ask which version of spells you had. When EQ1 introduced runes you turned in for spells guilds there only wanted players with the best variation. It does nothing but add another aspect which would divide the playerbase. Spell version, keyed zones, playtimes, etc.
Personally I like things which divide up the playerbase because that means less competition for me in the content I'll be facing.
I'm pretty sure there will be different versions of items, there always is. They just have differant names. What is the deference in set_A
Belt of Ultimate Haste (+35 haste)
Belt of Ultimate Haste (+15 haste)
Or set_B
Belt of Ultimate Haste (+35 haste)
Goobers Haste Belt (+15 haste)
The name is the only difference, so I don't see where set_A is any harder to balance than set_B.
Same would apply to spells unless scribing the lower level of the spell would stop a person from scribing the higher version when/if they came accrost it.
Edit: just to clarify, I'm not suggesting or advocating RNG stats on items or spells, I'm simply stating they should be no harder to balance than multiple items in the game offering differant values of the same stat. What they name it is irrelevant to balance.
For the love of god no random variables on items! When an item drops it should be the best version possible (aka items only have 1 iteration of themselves), if items have the options to drops with multiple random stats variables, the weaker ones will be considered garbage and will leave a sour taste when they drop because they could have always been better.
Having various "master ranks" of most spells and abilities is good, because it's not a random variable, it's just another proggression path to having a comple and powerful character.
Seriously, please do not implement random stat variables, it's one of the worst things it can be done to MMORPG's itemization, this is not diablo, you cannot reclear the same content 200 times a day to get that perfect stat roll......
jpedrote said:For the love of god no random variables on items! When an item drops it should be the best version possible (aka items only have 1 iteration of themselves), if items have the options to drops with multiple random stats variables, the weaker ones will be considered garbage and will leave a sour taste when they drop because they could have always been better.
Having various "master ranks" of most spells and abilities is good, because it's not a random variable, it's just another proggression path to having a comple and powerful character.
Seriously, please do not implement random stat variables, it's one of the worst things it can be done to MMORPG's itemization, this is not diablo, you cannot reclear the same content 200 times a day to get that perfect stat roll......
I agree with this completely. I really don't like RPG games that have RNG stats, whether spells or gear, because it makes things murky in my mind. I feel it's a cheap way to make the loot table look larger then it really is. Dev's use it all the time to say "Millions of different items in the game" when actually it's maybe 100 items with random stats, level restrictions, and abilities.
This also only encourages you to change out your gear every few battles because you found 4 more copies of the same item you had but one procs 10.2 fire dmg rather then 10.1.
I fully support VR but to be honest I don't much like the idea of the "Prime Scroll" abilities either. "No sorry, we want someone in our group who has [specific Signet of Synergy] because we're fighting [specific mob]. It feels like it's another place you can sink a bunch of time into and set your toon apart from others. Maybe that's a good thing and I'm looking at it wrong way. I'm not fully sure how to take it.
Either way, I'm flexible, however they do it I will give it a good try. EQ1 and Vanguard were great games and I'm confident Pantheon will be too.
Zorkon said:Vandraad said:Why limit this to just spells? Make very item have variables. That 20% haste item you wanted? Would you really be happy if when you finally saw it drop it only had 10% haste when the next person gets 35% haste?
You realize there are consequences for having spells/items that have variations: Which version do you balance the game against? The most common, i.e. the worst, version or the rarest and best version? The choice will affect everyone. Everyone with the version better than the balanced one will have a much easier time in the game while everyone with the version worse than the balanced will have a more difficult time. And would you be happy knowing your spells were sub-par and that you would struggle more than the next person?
There are threads out there where people are quite vocal about segregation and separate of the playerbase. I was in EQ2 and even there guilds would ask which version of spells you had. When EQ1 introduced runes you turned in for spells guilds there only wanted players with the best variation. It does nothing but add another aspect which would divide the playerbase. Spell version, keyed zones, playtimes, etc.
Personally I like things which divide up the playerbase because that means less competition for me in the content I'll be facing.
I'm pretty sure there will be different versions of items, there always is. They just have differant names. What is the deference in set_A
Belt of Ultimate Haste (+35 haste)
Belt of Ultimate Haste (+15 haste)
Or set_B
Belt of Ultimate Haste (+35 haste)
Goobers Haste Belt (+15 haste)
The name is the only difference, so I don't see where set_A is any harder to balance than set_B.
Same would apply to spells unless scribing the lower level of the spell would stop a person from scribing the higher version when/if they came accrost it.
Edit: just to clarify, I'm not suggesting or advocating RNG stats on items or spells, I'm simply stating they should be no harder to balance than multiple items in the game offering differant values of the same stat. What they name it is irrelevant to balance.
You're rebuttal to my point is not applicable because you are referencing different items that could (and probably will) drop off different mobs in different zones and at different levels. This topic is about alternate versions of the same exact item. In EQ1 every Flowing Black Silk Sash that dropped had the exact same Haste percentage. There wasn't FBSSv1 at 5% haste or FBSSv2 at 11.5%. No, every FBSS was the same. Player made items in EQ2 could have, if memory serves, different stats based upon their quality but for mob dropped? All identical. I can't think of a single game I've played where dropped items off the same mob had variations in stats. It's an idiotic mechanic that does more harm than good.
Vandraad said:Zorkon said:Vandraad said:Why limit this to just spells? Make very item have variables. That 20% haste item you wanted? Would you really be happy if when you finally saw it drop it only had 10% haste when the next person gets 35% haste?
You realize there are consequences for having spells/items that have variations: Which version do you balance the game against? The most common, i.e. the worst, version or the rarest and best version? The choice will affect everyone. Everyone with the version better than the balanced one will have a much easier time in the game while everyone with the version worse than the balanced will have a more difficult time. And would you be happy knowing your spells were sub-par and that you would struggle more than the next person?
There are threads out there where people are quite vocal about segregation and separate of the playerbase. I was in EQ2 and even there guilds would ask which version of spells you had. When EQ1 introduced runes you turned in for spells guilds there only wanted players with the best variation. It does nothing but add another aspect which would divide the playerbase. Spell version, keyed zones, playtimes, etc.
Personally I like things which divide up the playerbase because that means less competition for me in the content I'll be facing.
I'm pretty sure there will be different versions of items, there always is. They just have differant names. What is the deference in set_A
Belt of Ultimate Haste (+35 haste)
Belt of Ultimate Haste (+15 haste)
Or set_B
Belt of Ultimate Haste (+35 haste)
Goobers Haste Belt (+15 haste)
The name is the only difference, so I don't see where set_A is any harder to balance than set_B.
Same would apply to spells unless scribing the lower level of the spell would stop a person from scribing the higher version when/if they came accrost it.
Edit: just to clarify, I'm not suggesting or advocating RNG stats on items or spells, I'm simply stating they should be no harder to balance than multiple items in the game offering differant values of the same stat. What they name it is irrelevant to balance.
You're rebuttal to my point is not applicable because you are referencing different items that could (and probably will) drop off different mobs in different zones and at different levels. This topic is about alternate versions of the same exact item. In EQ1 every Flowing Black Silk Sash that dropped had the exact same Haste percentage. There wasn't FBSSv1 at 5% haste or FBSSv2 at 11.5%. No, every FBSS was the same. Player made items in EQ2 could have, if memory serves, different stats based upon their quality but for mob dropped? All identical. I can't think of a single game I've played where dropped items off the same mob had variations in stats. It's an idiotic mechanic that does more harm than good.
I think he was talking more over that instead of random % value, you have set values with different names dropping from the same boss? idk
I hate the idea of camping something for hours to finally get that drop, and it's the crap version. Crushing your hopes when you first see the name. I think it's a lazy and stupid way for people to keep players farming.
That being said I hate the idea of ranked spells too, like Fireball v1 then Fireball v2. I hope they have spells with the same effect type, but bigger graphic, more damage, more mana used and a different name while I can retain my lv 1 fireball if I choose too.
Having a general set of spells that everyone has, then rare spells that need to be farmed is a great idea. Tho I hate the idea of then having to glyph or install something into the spell... I think that's just another stupid idea that will just force a player to do more work once we figure out what the best min/max is 95% of people will simply use that, taking away the customization anyway. Whats wrong with simply having a spell be the spell. if you want to alter it to have different abilities, just make it a different spell.
That's what EQ1 did and I have not found a better spell system yet, modern game devs always try to make some stupidly complex idea to make it more interesting. Simple and straight forward doesn't mean its bad.
Atleast that's my opinion
a cool spell system is when you can can get alternative versions of spells and abilities:
lets say you have basic spell: firebolt which throws a single firebolt at a target.
but the alternatives are not "stronger firebolt" where you get the same spell but with more damage , but the spell alters some way:
you can find "firebolt flame" version which has the same basic damage but ignites the target adding some burning over time damage.
you can find "fan of firebolts" version where you throw three slightly weaker firebolts that can hit three different targets.
you can find "void firebolt" version where you cast firebolt which only have half the range but it sucks heat instead of explodes and thus slows the target.
MyNegation said:a cool spell system is when you can can get alternative versions of spells and abilities:
lets say you have basic spell: firebolt which throws a single firebolt at a target.
but the alternatives are not "stronger firebolt" where you get the same spell but with more damage , but the spell alters some way:
you can find "firebolt flame" version which has the same basic damage but ignites the target adding some burning over time damage.
you can find "fan of firebolts" version where you throw three slightly weaker firebolts that can hit three different targets.
you can find "void firebolt" version where you cast firebolt which only have half the range but it sucks heat instead of explodes and thus slows the target.
I have a feeling things like this will be in the living codex for altering spells.
Nymphey said:Vandraad said:Zorkon said:Vandraad said:You realize there are consequences for having spells/items that have variations: Which version do you balance the game against? The most common, i.e. the worst, version or the rarest and best version? The choice will affect everyone. Everyone with the version better than the balanced one will have a much easier time in the game while everyone with the version worse than the balanced will have a more difficult time. And would you be happy knowing your spells were sub-par and that you would struggle more than the next person?
I'm pretty sure there will be different versions of items, there always is. They just have differant names. What is the deference in set_A
Belt of Ultimate Haste (+35 haste)
Belt of Ultimate Haste (+15 haste)
Or set_B
Belt of Ultimate Haste (+35 haste)
Goobers Haste Belt (+15 haste)
The name is the only difference, so I don't see where set_A is any harder to balance than set_B.
Same would apply to spells unless scribing the lower level of the spell would stop a person from scribing the higher version when/if they came accrost it.
Edit: just to clarify, I'm not suggesting or advocating RNG stats on items or spells, I'm simply stating they should be no harder to balance than multiple items in the game offering differant values of the same stat. What they name it is irrelevant to balance.
You're rebuttal to my point is not applicable because you are referencing different items that could (and probably will) drop off different mobs in different zones and at different levels.
I think he was talking more over that instead of random % value, you have set values with different names dropping from the same boss? idk
I was talking only to Vandraads comments on it being a problem to BALANCE the game with items having differant stats. The game will be riddled with different items of different stats of all types. Same boss different boss, same zone differant zone, same level different level, buy it from a cash shop (heaven forbid) whatever...
The name of the item being the same is nothing more than a name and will not have a thing to do with balancing the game.
oneADseven said:The spell quality system from EQ2 was awesome. It's a great way to make the world loot table more diverse. Instead of every named having a static loot pool, they also have a chance to drop a master spell scroll. Just about every spell in the game could be upgraded to master ... so yeah, it really helped with making all names have an inherent value loot wise (because of the chance to drop masters) but it also created a very fulfilling progression experience.
I agree, but also have a hard time with this.
As mentioned, it does make loot and loot progression a little more interesting. When that giant chest dropped after killing a mob, you knew there was a chance of there being an ancient skill in there, and that was exciting - and it's another way to stand out from your peers. Being the assassin in EQ2 with the Ancient Backstab was a heady experience, and set me apart from the riff raff. (On that note, were they really called "ancient"? That doesn't sound right)
Not sure how I feel about it being another way of dividing the playerbase, though. If I'm set apart from my fellow tanks, I'd rather it be through gear (wearable), and personal skill, than through different versions of abilities.
There was also the problem in EQ of those master and ancient versions really only ever being useful at end game. Nobody had any reason to purchase the stronger versions of skills at early levels when they knew it would just get replaced soon. That makes the whole thing a little silly to me. Hopefully, Pantheon's level progression will be much slower and more time will be spent in the inbetween levels so as to make it worth the time.
I have a knee jerk reaction to anything that's only worth the time in end game, but present the whole game. Leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
Maybe if these different versions were ONLY player crafted, that would be something else. I could perhaps get behind that. Then it's a little less about luck of the loot draw, and more about taking the time to farm and buy from traders. It's a more deliberate scaling of your character instead of just being the lucky shmuck in that one group that one time. If you're going to divide the playerbase, I'd prefer it be done that way.
Tralyan said:There was also the problem in EQ of those master and ancient versions really only ever being useful at end game. Nobody had any reason to purchase the stronger versions of skills at early levels when they knew it would just get replaced soon. That makes the whole thing a little silly to me. Hopefully, Pantheon's level progression will be much slower and more time will be spent in the inbetween levels so as to make it worth the time.
I have a knee jerk reaction to anything that's only worth the time in end game, but present the whole game. Leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
A way around this is to make the highest level (have there be like three tiers) slightly better than the first tier of the next replacement. That, plus slow level progression should give life to the upgraded tiers.
Yes, exactly what Dragonfist said. Also, there were plenty of spells in EQ2 that never got upgraded. The "ancient" spells you are talking about were all from the very first expansion ... every class got an ancient spell at level 52, 55, and 58 ... and from what I can remember, those spells were never upgraded in the future. So for anybody who wanted the master quality version of these spells, the only way to get it would be farming level appropriate content. EQ2 was a pretty solid game early on, and if there were only a few things I could take from that game, it would be the spell quality system, the shinies, and the class diversity. I loved seeing 24 classes in that game ... raiding was awesome! Now we already know of 14 classes for Pantheon, but it's possible that with specialization, it ends up being similar to how EQ2 was anyway. In EQ2 you had brawlers who could specialize at level 20 (Monk/Bruiser) -- in Pantheon we'll see Body & Soul for monk.
With 14 base classes, specialization could lead to 28 classes total. When it comes to raiding I really hope to see 48+ (72 would be great!) player raids. There is no better way to ensure that all classes are viable for end-game raiding that bumping up the maximum raid size. When it's limited, it's pretty much a guarantee that certain classes will have a hard time making it into raid groups. I've seen it so many times over the years with every game that had limited raid size ... do we take a samurai, or add a 4'th blackmage instead? Do we invite the monk or paladin, or grab a 3'rd wizard/brigand? I would love to see unlimited raid size similar to how EQOA did it but if that isn't possible, 24 man is definitely not enough! Spell flavor/diversity means nothing if you can't justify bringing extra folks along for the ride.
If there is to be some form of variation then I think I could get behind the idea of leveling up your spells over time through use instead of having multiple versions of the same spell scattered through the world to collect.
I prefer the idea that you get a spell and start out at a novice but with much use over time you can end up being a master of the spell. Something so with regular use you'd end up on average at an intermediate level before you move on the next tier, but if you want to go off and put in a lot of extra curricular work you can become a master. Maybe in addition: for every spell of a type raised to master you gain a tiny benefit for all spells of that type, maybe a fraction of a % damage increase, % reduced cast time, or a very slight mana cost reduction. If someone goes out of their way to master all fire spells available to their class when max level then they might have, for example, +10% damage to all fire spells and -10% mana cost or even just the -10% mana cost. If it takes a long time to reach master with each spell then it would be a nice long term goal for a class and could bring about some interesting early specialization choices.
Iksar said:If there is to be some form of variation then I think I could get behind the idea of leveling up your spells over time through use instead of having multiple versions of the same spell scattered through the world to collect.
I prefer the idea that you get a spell and start out at a novice but with much use over time you can end up being a master of the spell. Something so with regular use you'd end up on average at an intermediate level before you move on the next tier, but if you want to go off and put in a lot of extra curricular work you can become a master. Maybe in addition: for every spell of a type raised to master you gain a tiny benefit for all spells of that type, maybe a fraction of a % damage increase, % reduced cast time, or a very slight mana cost reduction. If someone goes out of their way to master all fire spells available to their class when max level then they might have, for example, +10% damage to all fire spells and -10% mana cost or even just the -10% mana cost. If it takes a long time to reach master with each spell then it would be a nice long term goal for a class and could bring about some interesting early specialization choices.
See, now THIS I can get behind, as long as it's a huge pain in the ass to achieve. This is a great way to divide the playerbase by commitment/skill and not by JUST gear and luck of the roll. And that's not to say I don't think gear progression and loot aren't important - I do - but there isn't enough reward in MMO these days for commitment to class and playtime.
Perhaps make it so that you can only improve these spells (gain experience) by using them on mobs that still give experience, so not everyone is just blasting Giant Rats at lvl 50 to make their fireball stronger. Have it take an inordinate amount of time for each improvement. For buffs, require reagents to be used to limit the amount of casts you can use (or at least to make it harder for people to simply spam cast for improvement purposes). Things like that.
Not to say I didn't like the way EQ2 handled spell progression, but I will almost always opt for improvement based on skills and commitment over improvement based on loot and gear.
Good discussion.
I can get behind something like that as well. Perhaps, the "scrolls" that are dropped from mobs are a sort block of XP for that spell. You read it and you knock several hours off of your grinding to improve the spell. Diffferent difficulties of mobs drop more "insightful" scrolls with their difficulty. Also, reagents are a pita. I would only be good with that if it were a thing that went away after reaching, say, intermediate.