Jump to content

Welcome to Obsidian Forum Community
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Spells used up when interrupted in spite of no spell actually cast


  • Please log in to reply
49 replies to this topic

#1
DiabloStorm

DiabloStorm

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 122 posts

As a wizard or probably any spell user, but as I'm playing wizard and I get 2 casts with a certain spell under normal circumstances...why the hell are they being used up when I'm interrupted? This doesnt make any sense since the spell wasn't actually cast. This alone makes rekvu's helm the only viable helm for use unless you're for sure not going to be interrupted. With spells so limited in their use now, why the hell does this need to be in place on top of it all? Half of my spells get interrupted and then subsequently USED UP while I've made absolutely no offensive measure, effectively standing there and THEN i'm rendered defenseless because I can't even cast anything since I have no casts left.


Edited by DiabloStorm, 12 March 2019 - 06:55 PM.


#2
Purudaya

Purudaya

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 462 posts
Interrupts cancel all active abilities (even martial ones), not just spells.

Keep your wizard in the back line and take passives/equip items that grant concentration, the one ability that prevents interrupts. If an enemy is disrupting your wizard, direct party members to disrupt/disable that enemy. If necessary, invest in protection spells that reduce your chance of being hit.

#3
xzar_monty

xzar_monty

    (6) Magician

  • Members
  • 680 posts

To interrupt means to stop in the process of doing something. So, spellcasting has already begun, and it is ruined by interruption. Makes perfect sense that you lose the spell.

 

Maybe calm down the anger a bit? Or do something else instead? There are perfectly viable means for solving the problems you're having, as Purudaya points out above.


Edited by xzar_monty, 12 March 2019 - 10:27 PM.


#4
DiabloStorm

DiabloStorm

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 122 posts

To interrupt means to stop in the process of doing something. So, spellcasting has already begun, and it is ruined by interruption. Makes perfect sense that you lose the spell.

 

Maybe calm down the anger a bit? Or do something else instead? There are perfectly viable means for solving the problems you're having, as Purudaya points out above.

Not sure how exactly it makes "perfect sense" the interrupt is an interrupt, makes absolutely no sense that the spell has also been "spent"...because it wasn't, it was interrupted from being cast. It never even went through.

Lets say you're at the store buying something, you're at the register about to spend your money, before the money even leaves your hand I come up and interrupt you by punching you in the face, does your money magically still get spent or used up at the time the blow lands because I Interrupted you? That's the lack of logic here.


Edited by DiabloStorm, 12 March 2019 - 10:41 PM.


#5
xzar_monty

xzar_monty

    (6) Magician

  • Members
  • 680 posts

There is no lack of logic whatsoever, and your example is not analogous at all. It is not interrupted FROM being cast, it is interrupted DURING the casting process. Please do check what the word actually means: "to stop the continuous progress of (an activity or process)" or "to break the continuity of (a line or surface)". There is no argument here, you're simply wrong. You may not like it, but the rule in the game is perfectly logical and sound.

 

You're doing a high jump. Your feet have already left the ground. Someone pushes you. That's your jump ruined, the bar comes down. But it's a jump nevertheless.


Edited by xzar_monty, 12 March 2019 - 10:46 PM.

  • ronaldo, Purudaya and Frak like this

#6
DiabloStorm

DiabloStorm

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 122 posts

There is no lack of logic whatsoever, and your example is not analogous at all. It is not interrupted FROM being cast, it is interrupted DURING the casting process. Please do check what the word actually means: "to stop the continuous progress of (an activity or process)" or "to break the continuity of (a line or surface)". There is no argument here, you're simply wrong. You may not like it, but the rule in the game is perfectly logical and sound.

 

You're doing a high jump. Your feet have already left the ground. Someone pushes you. That's your jump ruined, the bar comes down. But it's a jump nevertheless.

Okay, so by your argument I should be losing spell casts any time I willfully cancel casting, such as the numerous times I've cancelled casting to reposition an AOE before it finished. Except that doesn't happen in game either. Next?


Also, your example is of a deflection, not interruption. the jump went through, the spells dont.
 

de·flect
/dəˈflekt/
verb
 
  1. cause (something) to change direction by interposing something; turn aside from a straight course.
    "the bullet was deflected harmlessly into the ceiling"

To interrupt is to stop. So if my spell was stopped during the middle of casting and a complete cast is required for the spell to activate and be spent, how exactly is it spent again? I think your idea of what is logical and sound is severely flawed.

in·ter·rupt
/ˌin(t)əˈrəpt/
verb
 
  1. 1.
    stop the continuous progress of (an activity or process).
    "the buzzer interrupted his thoughts"

Edited by DiabloStorm, 12 March 2019 - 11:01 PM.


#7
xzar_monty

xzar_monty

    (6) Magician

  • Members
  • 680 posts

Why do you insist on being wilfully obtuse? There is a significant difference between volitionally canceling an action and being disturbed while trying to perform an action. It is painstakingly obvious.

 

It would have been possible to write the rules differently, but there is absolutely no lack of logic in the way they are implemented now. Again, you may not like them, that's fine, but there's no error in them.

 

In reply to your linguistic quibble: the spell is not spent as such, it is ruined, which ends up meaning the same thing.


Edited by xzar_monty, 12 March 2019 - 11:04 PM.

  • ronaldo and Purudaya like this

#8
DiabloStorm

DiabloStorm

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 122 posts

Why do you insist on being wilfully obtuse? There is a significant difference between volitionally canceling an action and being disturbed while trying to perform an action. It is painstakingly obvious.

 

It would have been possible to write the rules differently, but there is absolutely no lack of logic in the way they are implemented now. Again, you may not like them, that's fine, but there's no error in them.

 

In reply to your linguistic quibble: the spell is not spent as such, it is ruined, which ends up meaning the same thing.

Keep telling yourself that. You know you've failed to defend your 'point' when you resort to calling me things.



#9
Purudaya

Purudaya

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 462 posts
Every crpg I've ever played (and I've played a lot) differentiates between a player cancelling an action and having an action interrupted.

Losing a spell due to being interrupted while casting is absolutely not unique to PoE2. It's a common gameplay mechanic for this genre.

Edited by Purudaya, 12 March 2019 - 11:10 PM.

  • xzar_monty likes this

#10
DiabloStorm

DiabloStorm

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 122 posts

Every crpg I've ever played (and I've played a lot) differentiates between a player cancelling an action and having an action interrupted.

Losing a spell due to being interrupted while casting is absolutely not unique to PoE2. It's a common gameplay mechanic for this genre.

Except that interrupts did not work this way in POE1 if memory serves.

And serves it does:

"If the interrupted action is one that can be performed only a limited number of times (e.g., a spell), the action is not permanently lost, but it must be manually restarted after the Interrupt period has elapsed."

So, yep, I think it's BS



 https://pillarsofete...2FConcentration


Edited by DiabloStorm, 12 March 2019 - 11:20 PM.


#11
xzar_monty

xzar_monty

    (6) Magician

  • Members
  • 680 posts

Every crpg I've ever played (and I've played a lot) differentiates between a player cancelling an action and having an action interrupted.

Losing a spell due to being interrupted while casting is absolutely not unique to PoE2. It's a common gameplay mechanic for this genre.

 

Yep. It goes back all the way to DD and concentration checks. In fact, that's probably where it comes from, given that Concentration is the skill used to resist interrupts in Deadfire.

 

It's fine if someone doesn't like the rule. But it's absolutely logical and there's nothing wrong with it.



#12
Boeroer

Boeroer

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 14817 posts
  • Location:Bucharest, Romania
  • Lords of the Eastern Reach Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

In open beta you even lost your spell use (all ability resoiurces basically) when you canceled it by yourself. Due to overwhelming feedback from beta testers this was changed so only interrupts would do this.

Interrupts are supposed to be a powerful tool against the use of powerful (but lenghty) abilites. Hence several classes have abilites that evolve around interrupts. Not consuming the ability resource on interrupt would make interrupts a lot weaker, and that is not desired since the game and furthermore the class abilites are balanced around the current state of interrupts (taking away the ability resource).

The whole interrupts vs. concentration mechanic was invented to give more tactical depth. And once you understand how it works and also understand how you can utilize it it really does achieve this.

It's the rule of the game. And in my opinion it's fine. What is annoying to you is also annoying for the enemy. It's not that it's imbalanced.
Citing dictionaries and definitions if the word "interrupts" will not change how the game works. The developers chose to design it that way and that's what you are left with. PoE1 was different because there interrupts were a passive, rel. unreliable and automatic mechanic and didn't need the use of special abilites that themselves cost resources(!) like in Deadfire - at least in most cases (in every case where you can time it yourself). How bad it would be if you spend a resource on a preciseliy timed interrupt (that may even miss or only graze!) but the enemy won't lose his resource?

Only because you play solo and get interrupted a lot does not mean that the rule is generally bad or makes no sense. It only makes things tougher for you as a solo player. Especially if you chose to ignore interrupts altogether and don't use them yourself.

There is another way to prevent interrupts besides Rekvu's Fractured Casque. It's called Concentration. You can stack Concentration layers. You can get an inspiration that provides Concentration (like Courageous), you can use an ability that grants additional Concentration (like Spirit Shield) you can put on items that grant additional Concentration (like Upright Captain's Belt), you can pick an ability that grants an additional layer at the start of combat (Combat Focus) etcpp...

Concentration was designed to counter interrupts. So if you have a problem with getting interrupted you can either use interrupts on enemies yourself (besides some special passives that interrupt on crit only abilities can interrupt you - and you can interrupt abilites - see Slicken) and/or you invest in Concentration. Or you scrap it and put on the Casque (and as a Wizard pick Grimoire of Vaporous Wizardry while you're at it).

Anyway - your emotional and highly subjective way of reasoning will not help you in any way other than blowing off some steam, which hopefully was accomplished now.


Edited by Boeroer, 14 March 2019 - 12:24 AM.

  • thelee, ronaldo, xzar_monty and 1 other like this

#13
xzar_monty

xzar_monty

    (6) Magician

  • Members
  • 680 posts

It's amazing what a different conversation this would have been if the original post had gone along the lines of "Hey, I'm having problems with this, has this changed since the last game, what should I do?" instead of essentially full-blown anger and resentment.


  • thelee, Purudaya, MaxQuest and 1 other like this

#14
Boeroer

Boeroer

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 14817 posts
  • Location:Bucharest, Romania
  • Lords of the Eastern Reach Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

Indeed. But I guess the frustration is ingrained too deeply.

edit: direct translations from German often don't work very well... ;)


Edited by Boeroer, 12 March 2019 - 11:32 PM.


#15
DiabloStorm

DiabloStorm

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 122 posts

In open beta you even lost your spell when you canceled it by yourself. Due to overwhelming feedback from beta testers this was changed so only interrupts would do this.

Interrupts are supposed to be a powerful toll against the use of powerful abilites. Hence several classes have abilites that evolve around interrupts. Not consuming the ability resource on interrupt would make interrupts a lot weaker, and that is not desired since the game and furthermore the class abilites are balanced around the current state of interrupts (taking away the ability resource).

It's the rule of the game. And in my opinion it's fine. What is annoying to you is also annoying for the enemy. It's not that it's imbalanced.
Citing dictionaries and definitions if the word "interrupts" will not change how the game works. The developers chose to design it that way and that's what you are left with. PoE1 was different because there interrupts were a passive, automati mechanic and doidn't need the use of special abilites that themselves cost resources (!). How bad it would be if you spend a resource on an interrupt (taht may even miss) but the enemy won't lose his?

Only because you play solo and get interruoted a lot does not mean that the rule is generally bad or makes no sense. It only makes things tougher for you as a solo player. Especially if you chose to ignore interrupts altogether and don't use them yourself.

There is another way to prevent interrupts besides Rekvu's Fractured Casque. It's called Concentration. You can stack Concentration layers. You can get an inspiration that provides Concentration (like Courageous), you can use an ability that grants additional Concentration (like Spirit Shield) you can put on items that grant additional Concentration (like Upright Captain's Belt), you can pick an ability that grants an additional layer at the start of combat (Combat Focus) etcpp...

Concentration was designed to counter interrupts. So if you have a problem with getting interrupted you can either use interrupts on enemies yourself (only abilities can interupt you - and you can interrupt abilites - see Slicken) and/or you invest in Concentration. Or you scrap it and put on the Casque (and as a Wizard pick Grimoire of Vaporous Wizardry while you're at it).

Anyway - your emotional and highly sunjective way of reasoning will not help you in any way other than blowing off some steam, which hopefully was accomplished now.

Well, in response, it's just something I noticed with earth blights and their pull of eora which they endlessly cast. It's good that interrupts affect them the same way but, unless i'm mistaken, some enemies seem to have an unlimited amount. Citing developer's choice; same could be said about the bugs they've left behind, as they are the creators ultimately responsible. Doesn't mean they've chosen well in all aspects. "The developers chose to design it that way and that's what you are left with."  Indeed.

This was not how interrupts performed in the last game. Stacking concentration is too costly for my liking so the casque is a must. I appreciate the constructive response, but for some encounters I feel the design choice here leaves me with little option. I'm looking for a way to apply acute rash or frostbite without knocking myself out (I saw your thread on this) and have yet to find a reliable source.


Edited by DiabloStorm, 12 March 2019 - 11:34 PM.


#16
Purudaya

Purudaya

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 462 posts

Every crpg I've ever played (and I've played a lot) differentiates between a player cancelling an action and having an action interrupted.
Losing a spell due to being interrupted while casting is absolutely not unique to PoE2. It's a common gameplay mechanic for this genre.

Except that interrupts did not work this way in POE1 if memory serves.
And serves it does:"If the interrupted action is one that can be performed only a limited number of times (e.g., a spell), the action is not permanently lost, but it must be manually restarted after the Interrupt period has elapsed."
So, yep, I think it's BS

https://pillarsofete...2FConcentration
Again, losing a spell if shot/stabbed while casting is common to this genre of games. It's not new to PoE2; the same goes for BG1, BG2, IWD1, IWD2, PS:T, DA:O, Tyranny, and just about any other RTwP game I can think of.

I'm sorry you don't like it. It's as much of a staple in crpgs as a grenade throw being interrupted by gunfire is in an fps. Learn the rules and plan accordingly; you're the only user I've seen in these forums that has a problem with this.

Edited by Purudaya, 12 March 2019 - 11:39 PM.


#17
DiabloStorm

DiabloStorm

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 122 posts

It's amazing what a different conversation this would have been if the original post had gone along the lines of "Hey, I'm having problems with this, has this changed since the last game, what should I do?" instead of essentially full-blown anger and resentment.

Where's the fun in that? I wouldn't have been able to refute your logic.



#18
Boeroer

Boeroer

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 14817 posts
  • Location:Bucharest, Romania
  • Lords of the Eastern Reach Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

Except that [XY] did not work this way in POE1.


This is DiabloStorm's problem in a nutshell.
  • DiabloStorm likes this

#19
DiabloStorm

DiabloStorm

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 122 posts

 

 

Every crpg I've ever played (and I've played a lot) differentiates between a player cancelling an action and having an action interrupted.
Losing a spell due to being interrupted while casting is absolutely not unique to PoE2. It's a common gameplay mechanic for this genre.

Except that interrupts did not work this way in POE1 if memory serves.
And serves it does:"If the interrupted action is one that can be performed only a limited number of times (e.g., a spell), the action is not permanently lost, but it must be manually restarted after the Interrupt period has elapsed."
So, yep, I think it's BS

 https://pillarsofete...2FConcentration

Again, losing a spell if shot/stabbed while casting is common to this genre of games. It's not new to PoE2, and *if memory serves* it was the implementation in PoE1 as well, regardless of what the gamepedia wiki says. Same with BG1, BG2, IWD1, IWD2, PS:T, DA:O, Tyranny, and just about any other RTwP game I can think of.

I'm sorry you don't like it. It's as much of a staple in crpgs as a grenade throw being interrupted by gunfire is in an fps. Learn the rules and plan accordingly; you're the only user I've seen in these forums that has a problem with this.

 

No, indeed it was not applied this way in POE1, taking 5 minutes to hop in game would show you that.



#20
DiabloStorm

DiabloStorm

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 122 posts

 

Except that [XY] did not work this way in POE1.


This is DiabloStorm's problem in a nutshell.

 

Pretty much. Said it before I'll say it again, POE1 had a good thing going for it, why fix what isn't broken?

Oh and yes, before it's said, I have considered going back and playing it again. on top of the 500+ hours I already put into that game, so you'd think I'd remember how interrupts work when I was soloing as a mage back then, too.


Edited by DiabloStorm, 12 March 2019 - 11:40 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users