Melf's Acid Arrow & Spell Forge

[Jarmo]

The trouble with spellcrafting, and the reason I think Bethesda removed it in Skyrim, was that it was too exploitable (now it's alchemy and smithing to exploit instead ).

 

There's a couple of things that annoy me to no end in this.

 

The first is the gaming company that sees players having fun and learning to do new things (drain health 1s vs damage health) and the company immediately decides the players must be stopped from having fun. Play it the way we intended and not the way you'd like!

Much the same with acrobatics, Skyrim was filled with these platforms you can't jump to but have to go around, if you could jump like in oblivion or morrowind, you could bypass much of the caves (and miss out another 40 meters of corridor and 4 draugurs). But that'd have been fun!

 

The second is the players, who remind me of little children with dolls. They go around twisting the head of the doll until it breaks, then they'll go crying their doll is broken. Yeah, you can probably break a freeform game in some way. But who the hell told you to smith 4000 iron daggers in the first place? Your exploiting the game and then complain when the balance breaks! Don't break the balance unless you want it broken!

 

----

Not meant as a personal attack, but as a general rant. No idea how Pipyui plays ES games.

I know I liked my "damage self 1pt" fire spell practice, followed by !heal self 1pt" restoration practice. But I didn't damn well complain afterwards it was too easy to level up.

Edited November 19, 2012 by Jarmo

[JFSOCC]

The trouble with spellcrafting, and the reason I think Bethesda removed it in Skyrim, was that it was too exploitable (now it's alchemy and smithing to exploit instead ).

 

There's a couple of things that annoy me to no end in this.

 

The first is the gaming company that sees players having fun and learning to do new things (drain health 1s vs damage health) and the company immediately decides the players must be stopped from having fun. Play it the way we intended and not the way you'd like!

Much the same with acrobatics, Skyrim was filled with these platforms you can't jump to but have to go around, if you could jump like in oblivion or morrowind, you could bypass much of the caves (and miss out another 40 meters of corridor and 4 draugurs). But that'd have been fun!

 

The second is the players, who remind me of little children with dolls. They go around twisting the head of the doll until it breaks, then they'll go crying their doll is broken. Yeah, you can probably break a freeform game in some way. But who the hell told you to smith 4000 iron daggers in the first place? Your exploiting the game and then complain when the balance breaks! Don't break the balance unless you want it broken!

 

----

Not meant as a personal attack, but as a general rant. No idea how Pipyui plays ES games.

I know I liked my "damage self 1pt" fire spell practice, followed by !heal self 1pt" restoration practice. But I didn't damn well complain afterwards it was too easy to level up.

I agree with the first, not the second.

[Pipyui]

Sorry, didn't mean to incense anyone with my previous post. The balancing thing wasn't a huge issue and a lot of fun can be had with it, but I do feel that spellcrafting as a "legitimate" game mechanic (at least in TES and many other RPGs I've played) was never much fun (except 100+% cameleon). You couldn't create many unique spells, it was mostly just "fireball and lightning! Complements perfectly my other generic damage spells!" Given the time and effort that the devs would require to put a spellcrafting system in place, I just don't think it would be worth it.

This isn't at all to say that the devs shouldn't try to improve spellcrafting if they have any insightful ideas, by all means they should, just that I don't need a half-baked spellforging system stapled onto my game just for the sake of having one.

 

Edit: I'm digging myself into a deeper hole, aren't I?

Edited November 19, 2012 by Pipyui

[Tauron]

It might be problem if, lets say, someone founds notes on how to conjure Melfs flaming ball of awsomness, but Melf has been dead for over millenia.

[AGX-17]

How would an "acid arrow" not be corroded by the acid on it? If it were made from glass how would it penetrate armor? Wouldn't most of the acid drip off before entering an enemy's body? And wouldn't the acid be too small a quantity to do serious damage? Acid works by chemical reaction, the atoms or molecules in the acid react with atoms or molecules in the victim's body, and once all the molecules have been torn up and recombined into the resultant substance the acid would cease to exist unless the resulting molecule or compound is also an acid.

Edited November 19, 2012 by AGX-17

[Umberlin]

Sorry, didn't mean to incense anyone with my previous post. The balancing thing wasn't a huge issue and a lot of fun can be had with it, but I do feel that spellcrafting as a "legitimate" game mechanic (at least in TES and many other RPGs I've played) was never much fun (except 100+% cameleon). You couldn't create many unique spells, it was mostly just "fireball and lightning! Complements perfectly my other generic damage spells!" Given the time and effort that the devs would require to put a spellcrafting system in place, I just don't think it would be worth it.

 

I'm not a fan of the game as a whole, but Two Worlds II actually had insight on how to make 'creating' spells by combining different aspects better, it wasn't perfect, but it was on the right track. Concepts beyond that game exist as well with ideas I'll just mash all together for fun (note - this is not the Two World's II system, or any particular system, just a mish mash of different things I've seen/heard about):

• Spell Type
  

Is it a damage spell? Is it a spell that blinds? Is it a spell that conjures an item? Perhaps the spell merely makes you smell funny. Perhaps it calms you. Maybe it causes the target to levitate into the air, and be unable to move. Perhaps it levitates the caster into the air. Perhaps it makes the target weigh twice as much or makes a limb, your choice, stop working. We're talking the actual effect here, and not how it's applied. Think in terms of: "Damage, lower resistance, increase resistance, lower defense, increase defense, levitate, fly, water breathing, increase 'stat', decrease 'stat', increase 'skill', decrease 'skill', apply 'status effect', 'remove status effect' and so on and so forth.

 

Different effects having different costs.

• Spell Element
  

Spell element would be a way of determining resistances in the case that such a thing is needed for the spell, in the case of a damage spell it would mean that if you chose fire the damage spell would be a fire type. However, you could choose, let's say a random much type for the game, arcane, and receive a different visual effect. As a result this functions within a resistance system, but even in spells that need no resistance type it helps dictate their visuals for purposes of making your own spells. While it has a practical application, in resistance part of it is purely visual for the pleasure of the caster.

 

Spell element is misleading, perhaps, because, while it might be an element like fire, you could, in theory, add in physical damage types and separate them into 'blunt' or 'piercing' or 'slashing' and so on. Perhaps its best to call it spell 'visual' and combine it with the bottom section, but anyways, you could have invisible applications of these physical effects, or phantom versions that are translucent or even wholly solid ones, like beiing chased after by a magically manifested arrow or being clobbered by a magically manifested hammer. Delivery (below) factors in here as well, again, is the hammer a projectile or is it a summoned thing?

 

Some element types are more expensive, for example a 'typless' element would cost the most, as it doesn't have a particular resistance attached to it, usually.

• Spell Color
  

Let's face it, if you're going to make your own spell, even if it's that fire element above, you're a wizard harry, and you want "Harry's Purple Flaming Ball of Healing Fun +2" ro have that little purple twist that makes the spell all yours. Yes I randomly made that up to be as nutty and out there sounding as possible on purpose.

 

Should we charge more for spells colored black?

• Spell Delivery
  

Delivery type covers things like, "is it ground targetted? How large is the area?" or, "is it a single projectile or multiple projectiles? Do the bolts go in a straight line or do they spread out? Do they spread out in a particular pattern or at random? Do they track your target? Is it like a mortar, having weight, and falling like a bomb?" or "Is the spell a beam? Is it a channeled beam or a single quick zap? Is it not a beam but a cone?" or "maybe it is a direct spell and is manifested directly at the location/enemy you're targetting instantly" or "is it a summoned entity?" or "blah" and "blah" and "so on" and "so forth" . . .

 

Different delivery methods having different costs. For example the more projectiles you manifest at once, the higher the cost, if they track rather than just flying at random you pay more. The area of the ground target would alter the cost as well. And so on.

• Spell Consequence
  

Essentially 'what happens when the spell goes off? Whether its applied to you an enemy or the ground - does it explode or does it bounce to another target or ricochet randomly? Perhaps it the spells pierces through targets instead? Does it create a field, a bubble? Perhaps it creates a rain where it goes off? Perhaps something bursts up from the ground? Perhaps there's a cloud of 'something' whatever your effect is, its visual determined by the element and color combinations above. If it's a summoned entity is it a temporary one that runs over and applies its effect then disappears (bomber minion) or does it stick around awhile and hang out? Maybe it makes you a glass of lemonade. And so on.

 

Different consequences would have different costs applied to them based on the value, or 'exploitability' potential of the consequence type.

• Spell Range
  

How far can you extend the spell. This doesn't just effect initial range, for example if you have a spell that bounces you'd have to determine the range of the bounce. Obviously different ranges have different costs. A touch range spell obviously is cheaper than a spell that hits that guy in the tree a mile away.

• Spell Power
  

The actual power of whatever effect you're applying. So this would determine the damage capability of a damage spell or 'how' blinded a blinded target (how bad their vision is, do they have partial vision or none at all) is or 'how' snared a snared target is or 'how' healed a healed target is. Water breathing might how a depth added to it, so water breathing only worked down to a certain depth unless you increased its power. Levitation might only go so high. Flight might only go so fast. How hard does the hammer that just fell on your head from the sky hit you?

 

Obviously the more you increase the power, the greater the cost.

• Spell Duration
  

Spell duration applies to certain spell types. For example how long a blind lasts, or when you're hit with a fire spell, does it unload its damage all at once (1 second) or over time (over five seconds) and how often do those ticks apply (every three seconds for nine seconds or every second for three seconds)?

 

Duration can work for or against the amount of cost. A spell that does 5000 up front instantly is different from the spell that does 5000 damage spread out over thirty seconds. Typically games that have spellcrafting, of any sort, at all, actually up the cost for more front loaded "damage" spells while duration "damage" spells still increase the cost but less so (this is not always true of course, because with a Blind increasing the duration would actually increase the cost, instead of reducing it). A spell that blinds you for a second is just the opposite, you're going to pay less if it only blinds then for a single second but pay more of a cost to the spell if it lasts for 10, 20, 30 or 'whatever' seconds.

• Spell Secondary Effect
  

What about multipe effects!? While I like customization, the better system's I've seen still have some limits. The better ones only allow for one or two additional effects alongside the initial effect, and limit what those can be. Usually they're status effects like Burning or Blinded or Poisoned or Snared or what have you. You'd also govern the power and duration of these secondary effects under the above noted sections. So you could add burning to your fireball or add a single second stun to your 10 second blind and so on and so forth. Secondary effects obviously increase the cost of the spell in question. They'd obviously be optional.

• Drawbacks
  

Optional but decrease the cost of the spell by adding in a flaw or 'drawback' to the spell, like the spell stealing coins from your pockets and littering the ground around the target with the coins or perhaps it steals your health or makes 'you' move slower after casting it. How much these reduce cost depend on how badly they afflict you. You wouldn't be able to pile on drawbacks one after the other, much like the system would prevent you from piling on many many secondary effects, but it'd be there.

• Spell Name
  

Let's face it, this is the most important part. You can't have "Umberlin's Hammer Space Clearing Sale" spell without the name, and it unloads all the stored hammers in hammer space, everyone's getting a hammer, and each hammer falls from the sky and then exploding into coins around the place it hits as your pockets mysteriously become lighter. Everyone is getting a hammer. Everyone. There's one for you, and you and . . .

 

What?

[JFSOCC]

So you're saying that it would be...

 

Hammer time?

Edited November 20, 2012 by JFSOCC

[Pipyui]

^

^

 

That's quite a take you got there. Details that particularly caught my interest were the delivery and personalization (like color) options. I'm used to being limited in making only touch, single projectile, and AOE spells, so having a plethora of means of delivery appeals to me. Unfortunately though, some of the more interesting methods like scattershot sound like ARPG elements - meaning they might not be possible in a pen-and-paper cRPG type system, where success and failure is determined by die rolls. Delivery by ethereal weapons sounds fun, but I fear would be very difficult to implement correctly. How does the game know how you want said object to behave? Besides predesigned "summoned floating weapon" and "flying spear projectile," I don't see many options here (though these themselves should be fine enough). Same argument applies to the "spell consequence" section. Consequence options would require a lot of specific details to be accounted for regarding other spell options, so I think many of the elaborate ones would require me to mod them in myself. Can't ask for too much from the Devs for this.

 

Granting color and visual effect personalization options to the player sound neat too. I might remake a generic fireball spell simply to make it purple. This should be easy enough, I think (defining an effect texture with variable hue is easy, right?).

 

Drawbacks are strangely not present too often in spellcrafting. I'd be okay with them, if they were well designed and specific to each spell effect. i.e. making a damage spell more powerfull at the cost of melee is silly if I don't wield a weapon; slowing player movement is fine, but if I create an AOE binding spell that is bigger and lasts longer at the cost of my own speed, does it really matter? Making it more powerfull, but binding myself as consequence is more appropriate for this particular effect.

 

In short: delivery / consequece - maybe, but it would be quite the project. Color / Visual effect - yeah, go for it! Drawbacks - sure, just be carefull with it.

Others usually come standard in spellcrafting, so ... yeah (I'm a word wizard).

 

Edit: So in the end, I'm still pretty ambivilant on spellforging. On one hand it could be made pretty neat, but on the other, accomplishing this would be a considerable dev project.

Edited November 20, 2012 by Pipyui

[Umberlin]

. . .

 

Well, in the end, if well done, it can be cool, however, let's be realistic - you're ambivilant for good reason, it's really easy to mess up and there are games that have messed it up. So, in my mind, you either do it, and do it very well, or you realize you can't do it as well as you'd like, so you don't. In addition, it just doesn't fit with some types of RPGs, where others it fits into better. My opinion is that the more open, sand boxy, RPGs benefit from it most, the less open ones just aren't going to benefit from it as much.

 

Granting color and visual effect personalization options to the player sound neat too. I might remake a generic fireball spell simply to make it purple. This should be easy enough, I think (defining an effect texture with variable hue is easy, right?).

 

Well, I think it's something that requires foresight, you need to make sure you start all your visual effects with the idea that they're going to be recolored. I remember seeing the CoH forums years ago, and a developer explaining why they regretted not planning ahead for power customization, as adding in power customization later (which they eventually did) took more resources than if they'd just planned for it in the first place.

 

Drawbacks are strangely not present too often in spellcrafting. I'd be okay with them, if they were well designed and specific to each spell effect. i.e. making a damage spell more powerfull at the cost of melee is silly if I don't wield a weapon; slowing player movement is fine, but if I create an AOE binding spell that is bigger and lasts longer at the cost of my own speed, does it really matter? Making it more powerfull, but binding myself as consequence is more appropriate for this particular effect.

 

Quite so, context sensitivity, so to speak, is important - the drawbacks, and in some cases other effects, available need to be sensitive to the effects you've selected to a practical extent.

 

How does the game know how you want said object to behave? Besides predesigned

 

It doesn't. The games I've seen this end treat them like the particle effects in general. Your hammers, for example, are going to act like a projectile if you choose them to be delivered as a projectile. They fall from the sky if you choose a rain. They explode from the ground if you choose the delivery method that comes from beneath the target/selected area. In terms of 'summons' however, you're quite right. The games I've seen that let you manage summons were very limited, with very pre-determined summon types and behaviours.

 

Consequence options would require a lot of specific details to be accounted for regarding other spell options, so I think many of the elaborate ones would require me to mod them in myself. Can't ask for too much from the Devs for this

 

Consequences are essentially, 'what happens when the spell goes off' so what happens when your projectile hits a target or a wall or the floor. What is the consequence? You've already selected the effect, in this case the effect is damage. So left blank the projectile hits a target and does damage. If you selected a consequence like 'splash damage' you'd choose the range of the splash. Now the projectile explodes dealing damage over the area. Consequences are very pre-defined, and there aren't a lot of details you can meddle with. For example the 'cloud' consequence creates a cloud where the projectile hits, and the duration selection determines how long the cloud stays in place. So your projectile creates a cloud that deals damage over the duration selected (like the splash damage you'd also define the size of the area the cloud covered).

 

This is actually very similar to systems that actually exist.

 

-

 

While I dislike Two Worlds II as a game, again, it's a great example of spell creation moving toward better methods - it uses a card system where you combine effect, delivery and other cards to make your spell do what you like, and its cost is determined by the cards used to create the spell. It even has the methods I talked about like deciding whether your projectile/projectiles track their targets or not.

 

Not all of what I mentioned is from Two Worlds II (drawbacks for instance are not from TWII), but almost all of them have actually existed in one game, or another, that I've played (though never all at once, that I'm aware of), to some extent. I decided to use mechanics I've seen in games, and not just mechanics off the top of my head, to keep things in the realm of what is actually possible - in other words, if I've seen a game actually do it, then I assume it's possible.

 

While it's neat to talk about, I actually don't think it's a practical thing to do in P:E. I just thought it was interesting to talk about.

Edited November 20, 2012 by Umberlin

[Pipyui]

Yep. Some of this may be too unrealistic and impractical for PE, but that doesn't mean it isn't worth discussing. (I think the devs already mentioned that they didn't have plans for spellcrafting, anyway)

 

Your hammers, for example, are going to act like a projectile if you choose them to be delivered as a projectile. They fall from the sky if you choose a rain. They explode from the ground if you choose the delivery method that comes from beneath the target/selected area.

Huh! I'll admit, the fact that a game can do that without making a right mess of it baffles me. What game is that? I want to see that in action now. (not trying to be tricky here - curious in earnest)

 

Consequences:

Ahh, misunderstood that part (I think the "bouncing" example threw me off). I had imagined that you wanted to be able to define a spell's behavior something like an effect script. Such that you could create a ball that would bounce towards a target, but with a path defined by physics. Or a contaminating spell (not like "disease type spreads to others," but like "I want my incinerate spell to light other enemies aflame if they touch my first target."). So that's what I meant to describe as unrealistic.

 

So far as spell clouds, explosions, or splashes, I had written those off as being part of the "visual" or "delivery" attributes. I see now that, for the former at least, this isn't so accurate. Explosions and splashes might differ only visualy and not mechanically, but a spell cloud or rain would differ mechanically. If there was a spellforging system, I would certianly like these options.

 

--------------------------------------------------------

 

On a different note (and more in line with the OP), I think spellforging could work in PE in a more basic sense as scrolls. Like potions, you could produce one-shot spells perhaps a little too specific for regular use (scrolls that wouldn't see use in regular combat, but could, say, levitate your party across a gap to otherwise inacessible areas). The spells would be predefined, but you would need craft them and they wouldn't be an infinite resource. This could be worthwhile for providing hidden content in the world and making exploration just a little more dynamic, making context-specific events, and giving magic some usefull utility outside of combat.

Edited November 20, 2012 by Pipyui

[Umberlin]

Yep. Some of this may be too unrealistic and impractical for PE, but that doesn't mean it isn't worth discussing. (I think the devs already mentioned that they didn't have plans for spellcrafting, anyway)

 

I can't find the quote, but I'd really not assume otherwise anyways. I think that's likely spot on.

 

Huh! I'll admit, the fact that a game can do that without making a right mess of it baffles me. What game is that? I want to see that in action now. (not trying to be tricky here - curious in earnest)

 

In spell crafting you mean? Never that I'm aware of, it's usually been to the idea of summoning a weapon you can wield when it has been there, or as a pet you summon (floating sword that swings at the enemy, usually achieved by using a typically character skeleton with no visual - but of course you don't bother with that, it's all pre-set that there are typical types of summons, much like Morrowind/Oblivion where spell crafting a summon is usually just modifying the existing summons). The examples I'd give as using weapons as spell projectiles are typically going to be eastern games, some 2D one or two 3D. I remember the Mana Khemia series had several spell effects that used a basic weapon as a projectile (like a rain of swords from the sky), as a 2D example and the Atelier series having examples of it in 3D. Oddly enough I'm pretty sure the only Western game with 'weapons as projectiles/spell effects' I can think of, off the top of my head, are from D&D, especially PnP, where you had a better variety of spell types.

 

The concept is largely the same though, is your sword you've summoned a projectile? Well, obviously the sword flies at the enemy in such a way that it sticks them with the pointy end.

 

-

 

Actually one of my favorite spell lines from D&D didn't use weapons as projectiles/spell effects, but a hand or fist as a spell effect, that being the Bigby spell line (there's a wiki article with the entire spell line if you're interested). One of my favorites. Bigby's Clenched fist, for example, is an evocation spell, and . . . I'm not a big evocation fan, I much prefer transmutation when it comes to D&D, but the Bigby line, in my mind, is evocation done in a way that's actually interesting. I guess I'm just hard on the evocation school in general though.

 

Consequences:

Ahh, misunderstood that part (I think the "bouncing" example threw me off). I had imagined that you wanted to be able to define a spell's behavior something like an effect script. Such that you could create a ball that would bounce towards a target, but with a path defined by physics. Or a contaminating spell (not like "disease type spreads to others," but like "I want my incinerate spell to light other enemies aflame if they touch my first target."). So that's what I meant to describe as unrealistic.

 

No, no scripts, more like the usual Morrowind/Oblivion line of thought where you're just filling in/selecting, pre-existing options and altering their values. I only use that as an example because I assume that's what you're familiar with, but I do think Two Worlds 2 has the better spell creation system with its cards.

 

I don't think I've ever seen the 'touch my target and you get set on fire' thing in a spell crafting system.

 

Anyways, I'll stop now, I imagine the OP would like his thread to move on.

Edited November 20, 2012 by Umberlin

[Lephys]

Wow. Some amazetastic ideas being tossed around in here, .

 

Umberlin, I really like your spell-crafting system.

 

I've always found the spell variety a bit lacking in RPGs. Sometimes it's really good, but not often. Still, though, it always feels like there should at LEAST be some degree of customization.

 

I always enjoy trying to figure out a spell-crafting system, . After all, you're basically shaping mana or some manner of magic-inducing energy drawn from SOMEthing into a particular form. So why isn't it more malleable?

 

So the only other alternative to a full-on spellcrafting system I've thought of is a... well... a mana forming system? I don't know what to call it... *ponders*

 

Think of it like singing. You have many different types of sounds at your disposal, and you can combine them in any order, at any volume (that you're capable of producing)... They can convey words, or they can simply be melodious. etc. etc...

 

Well, why not with spells? Why must you only be able to create a ball of fire that can be hurled? You can literally ignite the air itself, but only in the form of a ball that gets thrown like a projectile, then explodes? And why is it always the same size, and uses the same amount of mana? If you need to, you should be able to charge it up, Kamehameha style, and put all your mana into it, if you so choose. Just like shouting while singing uses up your lungs' oxygen supply faster.

 

So, I'm in favor of the possibility of basically wielding magic like a sword: Each time you swing, you decide how hard to swing, where to swing, whether to slash or to thrust or to pommel strike, etc. I know it would have to be simple enough to do in mid-combat (or... mid-whenever-you-need-to-cast-a-spell). Perhaps, if it's still as complex of a system, you could do both? Save spells as you go, but still adjust them to a lesser degree when you cast? (change how many targets they strike, or how potent they are, or whether or not they travel between targets, or simply explode, etc.)?