[Merged] Cooldown Thread

[Osvir]

I feel that the reaction to people saying "I will reduce my pledge" is making it waaay bigger than it actually is.

 

Example:

Me: "I will reduce my pledge because this doesn't fit my view"

PersonA: "OMGOSH CRYBABY!"

PersonB: "Why? Whyyyy!?"

PersonC: "Is that a threat? It is, it's a threat! People check it out it's a threat!!!!"

Me: "Wait... wtf... what?"

[grotbag]

And then, as described by Osvir, the party fights all the non-beholder enemies, and the wizard does nothing during all these encounters because he's waiting for the beholder encounter. And then the beholder is dead and the party wants to go down lower in the dungeon, or further in the world, but the wizard is without any spells, or what spells he has left are pretty specific, and then the party has to rest and go back to a generic spell makeup, or something like that. In short, you got to pick something strategic, but it was only momentary and pretty much ruined the use of the wizard for anything else, and the party was forced to delay because of that particular class.

 

It's a bit of a misleading example, since the wizard in D&D will have low-level spells which would be wasted on the high-level monster and which they don't therefore need to conserve during the cheaper fights - and if nothing else, you can give them a sling or a stick to poke the goblins/rats in the back of the head with. They never have to be literally standing fallow, and they haven't been ruined, they're simply not bringing out the big guns every time combat occurs.

 

But no, I don't think I see the problem with what you're basically presenting. The cleric won't be casting healing spells every single time a party member's damaged in combat, because the spells are a precious resource. The mage is not casting Epic Apocalypse causing, like, 1 gazillion points of damage against every roomful of goblins, because his spells are limited; the fighter who tore through those same goblins may well end up 'standing in the corner' in the big battle against the dragon while everyone else deals the damage, because he has rubbish Will and he failed a check. The rogue will be less help fighting against that iron golem than disabling traps and picking locks. Is it really a cause for complaint that every party member is not equally useful in every given situation?

Edited October 2, 2012 by grotbag

[MReed]

Some spells are inevitably better than others -- to take one obvious D&D example, "Charm monster" is better than "Charm person". As a result, the only reason to use "Charm person" when you have "Charm monster" available is because "Charm monster" is on cooldown. If the cooldown timers are short (allowing one spell to be cast multiple times per encounter), then the odds are very high that you will never end up in a situation where you need to use "Charm person". In a Vancian system, though, you might (and fact, probably would) not want to dedicate the higher level spell slot to a rarely needed spell like "Charm monster", but would be willing to commit the lower level spell slot to "Charm person".

 

And yes, this only applies if the cooldown timers are short, and that was the context of this quote in the first place.

 

 

Are you assuming that all spells are always available with cooldowns as the only limiting factor? Have they said they are getting rid of spell levels and limited spell slots? That's an entirely separate issue.

 

 

I'm assuming that spell levels exist, although they may not be called that. In other words, there are certain abilities that you get early in the game ("Charm person") and other abilities that you get later ("Charm Monster") without losing the abilities that you received earlier.

 

I'm assuming that spell slots, on the other hand, do not exist -- if you have an ability, the only restrictions on usage are cooldown / mana related. I deal with adding "spell slots" separately.

 

The game should be balanced based on the assumption that you won't rest often. Player who rest more frequently will have an easier time than the baseline, obviously, and that's exactly what those players were looking for. In any case, my point is that people will do this if that's what they feel they need to do to defeat the next encounter -- or maybe they will just give up on the game altogether, figuring that a game that is designed so that they have to leave their computer running overnight (8 hour cooldown) just to survive the next encounter (because they "suck") isn't a game that they want to play.

 

Isn't that what the difficulty settings are for? I really don't like game mechanics that require you to handicap yourself to get the desired effect. The smart way to play the old games was to rest spam. It was simply more effective.

 

First of all, some people simply refuse to play games on less than the default level. I don't understand those people myself, but apparently it is an ego thing. More importantly, though, a single encounter might be too difficult for the player, while most or all of the rest of the game is provides a challenge without waiting around / rest spamming. This may be because of using an unusual party, missing a key side quest / item, or any number of other factors.

 

Again, this is really irrelevant to the point at hand -- any system with long cooldown timers is inevitably going to result in some players waiting out the cooldowns. Those players are not going to be happy. I really don't see any good reason to make these people unhappy at this point.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

I just don't really understand why do certain people feel that they are better qualified to decide what will be best from a game design perspective than the people who have been doing this for years and are frickin' paid to do it?

[ogrezilla]

 

 

I'm assuming that spell levels exist, although they may not be called that. In other words, there are certain abilities that you get early in the game ("Charm person") and other abilities that you get later ("Charm Monster") without losing the abilities that you received earlier.

 

I'm assuming that spell slots, on the other hand, do not exist -- if you have an ability, the only restrictions on usage are cooldown / mana related. I deal with adding "spell slots" separately.

 

 

I guess I'm looking at this from the other side. Until they say they are removed, I am assuming we still have something along the lines of the spell slots we saw in the old IE games.

 

 

First of all, some people simply refuse to play games on less than the default level. I don't understand those people myself, but apparently it is an ego thing. More importantly, though, a single encounter might be too difficult for the player, while most or all of the rest of the game is provides a challenge without waiting around / rest spamming. This may be because of using an unusual party, missing a key side quest / item, or any number of other factors.

 

Again, this is really irrelevant to the point at hand -- any system with long cooldown timers is inevitably going to result in some players waiting out the cooldowns. Those players are not going to be happy. I really don't see any good reason to make these people unhappy at this point.

This is definitely the part I'm more concerned with. I think the longer cooldown system is more likely what they are looking at.

[Shevek]

They announced level scaling too? Man...

[Osvir]

And then, as described by Osvir, the party fights all the non-beholder enemies, and the wizard does nothing during all these encounters because he's waiting for the beholder encounter. And then the beholder is dead and the party wants to go down lower in the dungeon, or further in the world, but the wizard is without any spells, or what spells he has left are pretty specific, and then the party has to rest and go back to a generic spell makeup, or something like that. In short, you got to pick something strategic, but it was only momentary and pretty much ruined the use of the wizard for anything else, and the party was forced to delay because of that particular class.

 

It's a bit of a misleading example, since the wizard in D&D will have low-level spells which would be wasted on the high-level monster and which they don't therefore need to conserve during the cheaper fights - and if nothing else, you can give them a sling or a stick to poke the goblins/rats in the back of the head with. They never have to be literally standing fallow, and they haven't been ruined, they're simply not bringing out the big guns every time combat occurs.

 

But no, I don't think I see the problem with what you're basically presenting. The cleric won't be casting healing spells every single time a party member's damaged in combat, because the spells are a precious resource. The mage is not casting Epic Apocalypse causing, like, 1 gazillion points of damage against every roomful of goblins, because his spells are limited; the fighter who tore through those same goblins may well end up 'standing in the corner' in the big battle against the dragon while everyone else deals the damage, because he has rubbish Will and he failed a check. The rogue will be less help fighting against that iron golem than disabling traps and picking locks. Is it really a cause for complaint that every party member is not equally useful in every given situation?

 

* Not saying big guns every encounter

* Definitely not a gazillion points of damage

 

I simply, personally, want to find a bigger role for the Mage. Otherwise he could simply be a Summon not unlike the Final Fantasy summon "Oh it's time for the very RARE occasion where I need my Mage. Summon the almighty Magemobile!" *1 turn boom* "I'll see you guys later mkay? I don't wish to miss the afternoon tea" "Thanks broMage, see you later" *poof*

 

I want a Gandalf Mage, one who takes action and is a part of the fight. Not some tree hugger on the other far-side of the map screen.

 

Don't get me wrong, I love the Mage in Baldur's Gate and all of the IE games. Specially Planescape: Torment <3

 

What I want to see, not only in the Mage, is that every character benefits every situation. Making the most out of every class role. I don't want the Mage to be a passive buff that sits around smelling flowers whilst the rest of the team is having an epic battle where they could benefit from some sorcery. Nothing overpowered crazy nuclear hazardous, something balanced.

 

I use spam resting when I play Baldur's Gate. Save>Rest>Save. It leaves a bitter taste in my mouth but it is the only way I can enjoy Baldur's Gate, because I want those spells, and I want as much use out of my Mage as possible. But it makes no sense (non at all) to go through a rather small field in what... 5-6 Days? Or when you go into the Mines (the one you can flood in Baldur's Gate), in-game time it took me several days resting INSIDE the dungeon.

 

Roleplaying-wise it disgusts me, but again, it was the only way for me to enjoy the Mage mechanic.

[Crusty]

There should just be natural regeneration of spells/abilities that vary on the specific spell/ability, the current state of the character and any other important aspects like a character's natural abilities or perks.

 

It essentially works as a form of cooldown since it's measured in real time instead of game time and addresses the issue of rest spamming.

 

So, say, every 5 minutes, you regain 1 use of spell X.

 

I am of course assuming that spell slots and limited usage of spells still applies. If we have unlimited usage of spells, it will be hard to design cooldowns as anything other than WoW or Dragon Age-esque. That would be bitterly disappointing.

 

As for people complaining about the spells per day routine we see in VC, tie the spell slots to a resource like mana or something to do with the soul(s). Don't give it a numerical hardcap per level or anything, only limit it to what is capable of the character. So if the character wants to cast 100 magic missiles but is unable to find space for anything else, let 'em. Give each spell and ability a different value, with weaker spells being the least resource intensive and the stronger ones most intensive.

 

That way, you can plan a suite of spells and abilities that rely entirely on the character.

 

That's probably what I'd like to see, assuming we have cooldowns and a non-Vancian way of spell selection.

[J.E. Sawyer]

reading all of the quotes on the front page, it really sounds like the cooldowns are more likely replacing the rest system while you will still have to make choices about what spells you have available to cast.

Thank you for reading what I wrote.

[Merin]

This thread will just get closed or merged. Post your comment in an existing thread that is reacting to the word "cool down" being uttered in a non-negative way.

 

 

EDIT - and then the thread does get merged and my post looks almost as silly as all the "oh, no, WOW cool down spamming!" now look.

Edited October 2, 2012 by Merin

[ogrezilla]

reading all of the quotes on the front page, it really sounds like the cooldowns are more likely replacing the rest system while you will still have to make choices about what spells you have available to cast.

Thank you for reading what I wrote.

I do what I can. I don't want to sound like a jerk, but I might suggest someone addresses this issue before the townsfolk light their torches

Edited October 2, 2012 by ogrezilla

[ImNotCreative]

 

I'm assuming that spell slots, on the other hand, do not exist -- if you have an ability, the only restrictions on usage are cooldown / mana related. I deal with adding "spell slots" separately.

 

 

But why? They said several times that they want to have some kind preparation and/or spell slots.

[MReed]

I'm assuming that spell levels exist, although they may not be called that. In other words, there are certain abilities that you get early in the game ("Charm person") and other abilities that you get later ("Charm Monster") without losing the abilities that you received earlier.

 

I'm assuming that spell slots, on the other hand, do not exist -- if you have an ability, the only restrictions on usage are cooldown / mana related. I deal with adding "spell slots" separately.

 

 

I guess I'm looking at this from the other side. Until they say they are removed, I am assuming we still have something along the lines of the spell slots we saw in the old IE games.

 

 

I agree that this is the most likely scenario, based on the dev comments in the OP.

 

First of all, some people simply refuse to play games on less than the default level. I don't understand those people myself, but apparently it is an ego thing. More importantly, though, a single encounter might be too difficult for the player, while most or all of the rest of the game is provides a challenge without waiting around / rest spamming. This may be because of using an unusual party, missing a key side quest / item, or any number of other factors.

 

Again, this is really irrelevant to the point at hand -- any system with long cooldown timers is inevitably going to result in some players waiting out the cooldowns. Those players are not going to be happy. I really don't see any good reason to make these people unhappy at this point.

This is definitely the part I'm more concerned with. I think the longer cooldown system is more likely what they are looking at.

 

Yeap. Fundamentally, if a functionality similar to a "rest" button (that resets cooldowns in the field) is included then the system is a Vancian system, no matter what you call it. I consider this very unlikely based on the posts to date. If you don't, then I don't see a way to avoid the "wait for multiple real-time hours to reset cooldowns" issue, and I feel that's a serious gameplay defect.

[Jaesun]

OK fine, since it won't be the hoorible WOW/DA spam/cooldown crap, and remains the tactical decisions, like the IE games, I can live with that.

Edited October 2, 2012 by Jaesun

[J.E. Sawyer]

I do what I can. I don't want to sound like a jerk, but I might suggest someone addresses this issue before the townsfolk light their torches

I already have.

[Wirdjos]

I do what I can. I don't want to sound like a jerk, but I might suggest someone addresses this issue before the townsfolk light their torches

I already have.

 

I am loving Mr. Sawyer more each time he posts on this subject. The man just refuses to be pushed around and it is simply amazing. Bravo again, sir.

[GhostofAnakin]

So cooldowns are replacing rest? So for example, instead of having to rest for 8 hours, the spells replenish over that same time and are ready in 8 hours?

 

If that's how it works, then I actually prefer that method. It saves having to find a place to rest and allows you to continue to do more adventuring while your spells replenish themselves over that time.

[Gfted1]

Or it means you will have to stand there for 8 game hours waiting for your abilities to replenish. At least "resting" would fast forward that process.

[TrashMan]

How the hell is that better? Now you have to wait actual 8 hours to get the spell back instead of finiding a safe spot and resitng.

 

Also, it makes resting and sleepign compeltely superflous.

 

Horrible. Horrible.

 

Seems hte devs want to do away with resting, which was IMHO one of the best things that added to the atmosphere of old IE games.

[ogrezilla]

I do what I can. I don't want to sound like a jerk, but I might suggest someone addresses this issue before the townsfolk light their torches

I already have.

 

I am loving Mr. Sawyer more each time he posts on this subject. The man just refuses to be pushed around and it is simply amazing. Bravo again, sir.

 

Indeed.

 

So cooldowns are replacing rest? So for example, instead of having to rest for 8 hours, the spells replenish over that same time and are ready in 8 hours?

 

If that's how it works, then I actually prefer that method. It saves having to find a place to rest and allows you to continue to do more adventuring while your spells replenish themselves over that time.

Ya that's how I take that. No idea how long to expect these cooldowns to be aside from being all but certain they won't be measured in seconds very often. I have a feeling it won't be 8 hours though.

Edited October 2, 2012 by ogrezilla

[Infinitron]

I do what I can. I don't want to sound like a jerk, but I might suggest someone addresses this issue before the townsfolk light their torches

I already have.

 

I am loving Mr. Sawyer more each time he posts on this subject. The man just refuses to be pushed around and it is simply amazing. Bravo again, sir.

 

Oh, stop the brown nosing. You're paying this man money for a product. He owes you, not vice versa.

 

We need more details.

[Ieo]

I do what I can. I don't want to sound like a jerk, but I might suggest someone addresses this issue before the townsfolk light their torches

I already have.

 

I am loving Mr. Sawyer more each time he posts on this subject. The man just refuses to be pushed around and it is simply amazing. Bravo again, sir.

 

Indeed. That was quite the bitchslap.

[Living One]

Or it means you will have to stand there for 8 game hours waiting for your abilities to replenish. At least "resting" would fast forward that process.

Cooldowns to replace resting sounds acceptable but there is still this potential problem.Then again I can live with it(sort of).

Edited October 2, 2012 by Living One

[ogrezilla]

Or it means you will have to stand there for 8 game hours waiting for your abilities to replenish. At least "resting" would fast forward that process.

How the hell is that better? Now you have to wait actual 8 hours to get the spell back instead of finiding a safe spot and resitng.

 

Also, it makes resting and sleepign compeltely superflous.

 

Horrible. Horrible.

 

Seems hte devs want to do away with resting, which was IMHO one of the best things that added to the atmosphere of old IE games.

ok, so you both immediately realize that having an 8 hour cooldown is a bad idea. Yet you both seem to think the developers don't realize that?

[GhostofAnakin]

Or it means you will have to stand there for 8 game hours waiting for your abilities to replenish. At least "resting" would fast forward that process.

 

That's actually true. So perhaps the devs aren't going to make it the same "wait 8 hours" timeframe for the cooldown. But at the same time, it won't be almost instantaneous like a lot of current games.

 

Again, though, I'd like to hear more about how they're going to implement it before I form a final opinion on it.