Buffs, short duration and long duration

[moridin84]

In NWN2 or rather in any DnD based game the buff durations were all over the place. You had ones at 24 hours, 1 hour / level, 10 minute / level, 1 minute / level, 1 minute and 9 seconds. Despite that, once I got past level 10 I treated all buffs from 24 hours up to 1 minute / level as "long term" and everything else as I couldn't be bothered, I'll just cast FIREBALL instead short term.  

 

So I think buffs should be split into short term buffs and long term buffs.

 

Long Term Buffs

 

The long term ones can be either be AoE (affecting all party members) or self-cast and should last until you rest (or whatever)

 

I remember in NWN2 where you had stat boosting spells like bull strength and owl's wisdom. These spells were level 2. By the time you got past the halfway point the level 2 damage spells were pretty crappy. So the best thing to do was fill your level 2 slots with buff spells. This meant that every time you rested you ended you having to cast a ton of single target buff spells onto the relevant party members. Annoying. 

 

By making long term spells either AoE or self-cast you are limiting the amount of times you can need to cast them after you rest to precisely one. 

 

Short Term Buffs

 

The short term ones won't have the self-cast restriction but should only last up to the duration of the fight. I'm not sure how long fights are going to last in this game but imagine on average fights last for 2 mins. In this case, the maximum duration of a short term buff should be roughly 1.5 minutes, though it can be as short as 5 seconds. 

Edited February 15, 2013 by moridin84

[TRX850]

I'd agree with a more simplistic system as you describe, but I'd still like to cast short term buffs on other party members.  At lower levels, wizards and priests work well when they stand back and buff front-line warriors, for example.

 

Ah, I think maybe you edited a typo there.

Edited February 15, 2013 by TRX850

[Lephys]

What if, instead of simply limiting them by duration and categorizing them thusly, you limited SOME by quantity and some by duration?

 

Example (because I know that might not make sense just yet):

 

You're a Wizard, and you cast "Blazing Blades," and your party now has fire weapons. But, instead of trying to say "Hmmm, how long should they have fire weapons? Maybe 30 seconds? Maybe 2 minutes? It really depends on what you're fighting, I suppose. Hmmmm... *ponder ponder*", you say "Okay, how about everyone in the party gets 5 charges of fiery weapons? The next 5 attacks they make get an inferno-y boost. If they only attack 5 times in the next year, then it lasts a year. If they attack 5 times in the next 3 seconds, then it lasts 3 seconds."?

 

Although, it would probably be prudent for such buffs (the short-term, we'll call them) to wear off at the end of combat. The long-term buffs (duration-based) could be things that are pertinent outside of combat as well. Or, just more potent combat buffs (kind of like per-encounter effects versus per-rest effects... almost...)

 

*Shrug*. Just a thought. 8P

 

Thoughts are fickle things.

[kroska]

You could also have on-hit % buffs that have a chance to activate on hit or after casting a number of spells. Basically having long lasting buffs, short term buffs then super short (5 sec max) on-condition buffs.  *shrug as well* more ideas. 

[JFSOCC]

How about this:

Buffs would require concentration to maintain, depending on the skill (level) of your mage he can maintain more buff spells.

As long as there is nothing to distract him, he can maintain these indefinitely. However, when in combat, if he needs to cast a spell, (or even put up another buff) OR if he is attacked or attacking, everytime he casts, attacks or defends, there's an X% chance of a buff failing.

This % grows the more buffs are maintained until it's practically impossible to hold on to them.

 

that way, you can walk around will all your buffs pre-cast, pretty much as long as you want it, but during combat you'll have to make choices.

And time no longer becomes a factor.

[Shadenuat]

Game is't turn-based so DA:O or Arcanum like buffs would do just fine. Personally I think Arcanum system (maximum amount of supported spells is calculated from your INT, and they drain your stamina every few seconds) would be more interesting because in P:E stamina serves a purpose of additional HP bar, so maintaining few buffs and getting your stamina cut by percentage or drained every second will put spellcaster at a risk, and taking risks is always good.

 

The streamlined version would probably be something like this - you just click on buff, and it works on it's own (like aura). However, buff is another spell from your spellbook, which means it replaces possible Fireball or Web spell till you rest and change arcane tomes. The short-duration buffs could probably be just tied to per-encounter system and usable only in combat.

Edited February 15, 2013 by Shadenuat

[moridin84]

Charge-based buffs do make sense. It's just a different type of 'short term'. 

 

And on-hit thing is just an "effect", it could be a short term or long term buff. 

 

 

How about this:
Buffs would require concentration to maintain, depending on the skill (level) of your mage he can maintain more buff spells.
As long as there is nothing to distract him, he can maintain these indefinitely. However, when in combat, if he needs to cast a spell, (or even put up another buff) OR if he is attacked or attacking, everytime he casts, attacks or defends, there's an X% chance of a buff failing.
This % grows the more buffs are maintained until it's practically impossible to hold on to them.

that way, you can walk around will all your buffs pre-cast, pretty much as long as you want it, but during combat you'll have to make choices.
And time no longer becomes a factor.

 

Well it's an interesting idea. 

 

I think it makes things more complicated and doesn't really add much 'fun' though. 

Edited February 16, 2013 by moridin84

[JFSOCC]

well it make it a strategical choice whether you try to maintain your defences well, or cast offensive spells, at the risk of losing some of those buffs. I think it might actually help the strategy of combat, and also make a fully buffed enemy boss stop being unbeatable, as buffed wizards kind of had a tendency to be.

[AGX-17]

Personally I think Arcanum system (maximum amount of supported spells is calculated from your INT, and they drain your stamina every few seconds) would be more interesting because in P:E stamina serves a purpose of additional HP bar, so maintaining few buffs and getting your stamina cut by percentage or drained every second will put spellcaster at a risk, and taking risks is always good.

...Why does nobody read the updates? P:E is going to use a Dark Souls-style system where you get a certain number of casts per-rest. See Update #36 for reference.

[Shadenuat]

...Why does nobody read the updates?

Why does nobody read words like "personally I think would be more"?

Also, it's not DS system, it's your basic 4ed system and

it does not explain how buff times will be handled or how will they avoid the long prebuffing which happened always in IE games, which is what most people here are interested in (probably).

[Lephys]

...Why does nobody read the updates? P:E is going to use a Dark Souls-style system where you get a certain number of casts per-rest. See Update #36 for reference.

I don't believe anyone was debating how spell "ammo" would be handled. Shadenaut was referring to a specific system (Arcanum's) in which there was a maximum number of maintainable, on-until-you-deactivate-them buffs that was based upon the INT stat.

 

Simple misunderstanding.

[BaronVonChateau]

My voice also goes for a limited number of slot for maintaining buff spells. As for the Stamina cost, I'd favor a temporary penalty to Max Stamina, depending on the quality of the buff spell. Since the goal is to stop bothering casting buff spells again and again, let the mage cast it once and decide when to scrap it in favor of something else, or generally improve its durability by limiting the amount of spells he's maintaining.

[Lephys]

No more thoughts on the effect-quantity limiter for buffs ("charge-based" buffs -- thanks Moridin, ^_^)? (i.e. This shield blocks 7 hits, or this fire-weapon effect lasts for 5 attacks.)

 

Anyone? ...Bueller?

 

Blarg, I don't think I said it before, but I do like the idea of the DA:O style maintained buffs that are either off or on, and require upkeep while they're on. They just need to be done better than in that game (and DA2, for that matter).

Edited February 22, 2013 by Lephys

[AGX-17]

 

 

...Why does nobody read the updates?

Why does nobody read words like "personally I think would be more"?

Also, it's not DS system, it's your basic 4ed system and

it does not explain how buff times will be handled or how will they avoid the long prebuffing which happened always in IE games, which is what most people here are interested in (probably).

 

 

It doesn't matter what your personal opinion is when the devs have already decided on a system wildly different from your opinion of what they should use.

 

And I did read "personally I think would be more" and that grammar is gibberish.

Edited February 22, 2013 by AGX-17

[JFSOCC]

Be nice. And remember that this is a discussion forum. it's fine to discuss alternatives, especially as it may give insight to the strengths and weaknesses of each system, whether it's used or not.

[Lephys]

^ AGX... I fail to see the point in posting in this thread simply to state that posting within that thread is pointless.

 

Also, I seem to recall Obsidian already choosing the no-miss system. Then, after considering a topic started about it, they changed their minds on the system they had already chosen.

[Shadenuat]

It doesn't matter what your personal opinion is when the devs have

already decided on a system wildly different from your opinion of what

they should use.

It would't matter if we'd be on EA forums or something, but we already finished an amazing quest of defeating teh boobplates, which proves that our whining can actually get into designer's ear even if it would be only 2% of it.

 

Be nice

Let him be whatever he wants to be, grammar nazi who also plays forum police can be moderately entertaining.

[Chilloutman]

I was thinking about spell/abilities duration now when we have more insight into classses and it really bothers me. in DnD all spellcasting classes have spell book and number of memorised spells per day. I think now that all classes have some kind of spells we will not see this in game anymore. It doesnt make too much sense for fighter to be able to do ''input random ability'' only once per day. So what will be new replacement system? Cooldowns? If so then we will have quite large amount of abilities at disposal any time. In this case i think that short term buffs need to be extremly strong and long term ones quite weak. In DnD 3.5 there was a lot of mage spells that last few rounds/seconds which end up totaly useless. Who would cast +1 weapon for 10 seconds? Its dangerous (attacks of oportunity, time consuming and without any proper reward) much better is to cast another magic missile.

 

At least I never used these short term buffs as there is not enough time to properly micro in real time with 6 characters unless its pause/play each second of encounter

[PrimeJunta]

I'd drop long-term buffs altogether. The bad ones you just ignore, and the good ones are just a chore to apply. Put those effects on items instead; they still take up slots which involves a meaningful strategic trade-off, but it removes the chore part of it. Short-term buffs OTOH make for one kind of extremely fun gameplay, as long as they're powerful enough to make a real difference.

 

In fact IMO one of the problems with D&D short-term buffs is that at higher levels they, too, last too long. You can memorize two or three Battletides and Hastes and you'll be all set for the whole day, more or less.

[Sensuki]

AGX-17 has a point but yeah, he has that typical Portland hipster attitude

 

I am pretty sure the P:E system will be very simple, everything will probably be either a short duration spell that lasts for a certain time in an encounter, the entire encounter (when combat ends) or it will just be a passive modal aura. Pretty sure Josh Sawyer would have thrown the 9 minutes, 24 hours stuff out the window upon spell / ability design.

[anubite]

I think "long term buffs" are boring and pointless. Just make them passive abilities or auras.

 

Short term buffs should be so powerful and impactful that you WANT to use them over fireball, but they obviously shouldn't be trivial to cast - make them cost lots of mana or come with an interesting downside.