Low-level spells becoming per-encounter at high levels

[Althernai]

Why does this mechanic even exist? Spellcasters really come into their own at later levels anyway, with natural increases in spells per rest which allow them to spellspam more and more.

First of all, the natural increases are not that large -- by level 9, you have a grand total of 14 spells (plus whatever you get from talent and items) across all spell levels. Since other classes also "come into their own" (e.g. by level 8, Eder was basically indestructible as far as non-boss encounters are concerned and Grieving Mother starts with 2-3 spells per encounter and can easily get more with ranged attacks) and I don't know when the spells will be useful, the optimal strategy is to hold them in reserve until they are needed. This works, but it's not very interesting. Being able to cast level 1 spells per encounter spices non-boss fights a bit.

[scrotiemcb]

That is a self-imposed mental block, plain and simple. You have more resources per rest, so you can afford to throw more out there. A level 9 spellcaster would otherwise have 18 spells per rest... do you really see yourself casting ALL of them in one fight?

 

Although now that I think about it, spellcasters need one thing, and only one, to replace the "spells per encounter" mechanic: if you are out of 1st-level spell casts, you can still access the menu and cast those spells, but it counts as a second-level use (or third, if out of second). Same deal with using third-level casts on second-level spells and so on. This should start at character level 3. This way you could spam low-level spells in non-boss fights knowing you won't cut off your own access later, providing you're willing to give up a higher-level slot.

 

In other words, if you want 18 Fan of Flames per rest, then so be it. But not 4 per encounter.

 

Also, make the Extra 1st-level Spell talent available at character level 2, Extra 2nd-level at clvl 4, etc.

Edited April 10, 2015 by scrotiemcb

[Mortal]

i don't think the mechanic per se is too bad. it's just a bit strange that a wizard suddenly learns to "regenerate" alls his weaker magical powers after combat without needing a rest. and all of that in the transistion from level 8 to 9. i agree with thos who suggested that the mechanic should have been introduced more granular. maybe get one per encounter level 1 spell when you unlock level 3 spells, another "free" level 1 spell and maybe one free level 2 spell when you make it to level 4 spells etc. Or something along that line. 

 

also. i liked the idea of making the bonus level 1/2/3 spell talents "per encounter" spells. that would acutally make them fairly valuable and not a bad choice at all IMO.

[Ohioastro]

In classic D&D you could eventually cast 9/level for a total of something like ~80 spells at higher levels.  If the limit is going to be artificially low (like 4), then per encounter is actually fine; the alternative should be many more "per day".

[NickAragua]

Wow, I haven't seen the "spells per encounter" mechanic yet (all my guys are level 8 currently) but man, that sounds unnecessarily overpowered. And this coming from a guy who hates when player stuff gets nerfed in single player games.

 

I've got Aloth pimped out with two rings of wizardry so he's got six usage of most spell levels per rest AND I can give him talents to increase that to seven. Seven fire cones (or fireballs) per encounter is pretty damn ridiculous.

 

What do you guys want to bet that this is some kind of debugging thing the devs left in so that QA could blast through the later parts of the game quicker?

[scrotiemcb]

I don't like the idea of a per-encounter spell talent because a per-encounter ability is generally much weaker than even a first-level spell.

 

The only problem with the Extra Spell talents is that they aren't available early enough. Should be able to get 5 first-level casts per day (without gear) at character level 3.

 

As a contrast, Arcane Veil should be a 1/encounter deal. Maybe mess with its Deflection or duration for balance.

Edited April 10, 2015 by scrotiemcb

[Zenicetus]

Why does this mechanic even exist? Spellcasters really come into their own at later levels anyway, with natural increases in spells per rest which allow them to spellspam more and more.

 

Well, it does give a Wizard something to do during the minor trash mob fights, instead of having to save all their spells for boss battles (or the larger mobs, at lower levels). 

 

That's especially true for a first-time play-through, when you don't know in advance what's coming up next, and how many higher level spells will be needed. A few "free" spells that are tactically useful in every encounter are better than just standing there and going pew pew with the wand, because you're scared to use up too many spells. It doesn't matter that you have so many available to choose from at higher levels. The lower levels should be fun to play too.

 

I do agree that the system needs tweaking. That sudden jump at level 9 doesn't sound good.

[Luckmann]

Wow, I haven't seen the "spells per encounter" mechanic yet (all my guys are level 8 currently) but man, that sounds unnecessarily overpowered. And this coming from a guy who hates when player stuff gets nerfed in single player games.

 

I've got Aloth pimped out with two rings of wizardry so he's got six usage of most spell levels per rest AND I can give him talents to increase that to seven. Seven fire cones (or fireballs) per encounter is pretty damn ridiculous.

 

What do you guys want to bet that this is some kind of debugging thing the devs left in so that QA could blast through the later parts of the game quicker?

 

Actually, it's not. It was mentioned way, way, waaaaay back as an intended mechanic, but it was never tested during the beta because.. well.. it didn't exit. The beta was capped at 8, so no beta-tester really got a chance to try this out.

 

I would prefer the mechanic being reworked somehow, because I want spellcasters to be more differntiated and have more class-specific stuff (like Domain Spells for Priests, a focus on spiritshifting/wildshape for Druids, and whatever makes sense for Wizards) but ultimately, if this entire mechanic was just completely cut, no ifs, buts or maybes, no compensation at all, I would still be fine with it, because spellcasters already become exponentially more powerful as they level.

 

They don't even really need this mechanic at all. I'd prefer it being reworked into something reasonable, but seriously, if that's not feasible, just axe it.

Edited April 10, 2015 by Luckmann

[Kai]

 

It seems there's a little misunderstanding.

 

I'm not suggesting that any specific spell (that you'd get or not get to choose) would become per-encounter. I'm suggesting that you'd have, for example, two per-encounter and two per-rest level one spell slots. This way you could always use two arbitrary level one spells for free in every encounter, but the third and fourth would consume a per-rest slot each.

This is an excellent solution. Priests and Druids do not have spellbooks/spell slots like that, but I would love this for the Wizard. Suddenly one of the slots in the grimoire gets a golden glow, or a new kind of slot opens up, and oh, look, anything in it can now be used Per-Encounter.

I think I would enjoy being able to pick, say 1 or later on a 2nd 1st level wizard spells at lvl 9 that my wizard could cast per encounter, say 2 times instead, and choose it via the leveling screen (and not be  able to change it afterwards). Would make a bit of sense that the wizard have gotten so used to casting that spell he doesn't need to focus as hard as previously to cast it. It wouldn't be the same kind of huge spike in output as it is now, but you could still keep your wizard busy with one or a few low level spell(s) even for the trash mobs  without being screwed when you get to an encounted where you need to unload. 

 

Still think the priest and druid should have a similar system as the wizards, but with a bit less options than wizards since they do have a lot more options for casting as it is at the moment.

[Caerdon]

 

Wow, I haven't seen the "spells per encounter" mechanic yet (all my guys are level 8 currently) but man, that sounds unnecessarily overpowered. And this coming from a guy who hates when player stuff gets nerfed in single player games.

 

I've got Aloth pimped out with two rings of wizardry so he's got six usage of most spell levels per rest AND I can give him talents to increase that to seven. Seven fire cones (or fireballs) per encounter is pretty damn ridiculous.

 

What do you guys want to bet that this is some kind of debugging thing the devs left in so that QA could blast through the later parts of the game quicker?

 

Actually, it's not. It was mentioned way, way, waaaaay back as an intended mechanic, but it was never tested during the beta because.. well.. it didn't exit. The beta was capped at 8, so no beta-tester really got a chance to try this out.

 

Originally low-level spells were ultimately meant to become at-will abilities... maybe we can still get that if we ask nicely?

[scrotiemcb]

Now, it could be argued that even the very idea is flawed from the start, but this isn't what this thread is about. What this thread is about is this:

 

Why in the name of Wael does the entire spell level become per-encounter all at once?

lol, just noticed this. I guess my rant was a derail.

 

The best answer I can give is UI coding. If you have two separate level 1 spell abilities, one per-encounter and one per-rest, it looks ugly. If you don't, then you need to code a set of per-rest abilities that you do not have (or are hidden) when you have per-encounter uses remaining, then pops onto the UI once you're out. But if you do that, how stores the UI indicate how many are left?

 

This is why I'm a strong proponent of removing the ability completely. The UI issues involved in preserving a balanced form of this ability are more work than they're worth. Better to just scrap than beating away at a convoluted system; the whole thing was unnecessary to begin with.

[Odd Hermit]

 

Wow, I haven't seen the "spells per encounter" mechanic yet (all my guys are level 8 currently) but man, that sounds unnecessarily overpowered. And this coming from a guy who hates when player stuff gets nerfed in single player games.

 

I've got Aloth pimped out with two rings of wizardry so he's got six usage of most spell levels per rest AND I can give him talents to increase that to seven. Seven fire cones (or fireballs) per encounter is pretty damn ridiculous.

 

What do you guys want to bet that this is some kind of debugging thing the devs left in so that QA could blast through the later parts of the game quicker?

 

Actually, it's not. It was mentioned way, way, waaaaay back as an intended mechanic, but it was never tested during the beta because.. well.. it didn't exit. The beta was capped at 8, so no beta-tester really got a chance to try this out.

 

I would prefer the mechanic being reworked somehow, because I want spellcasters to be more differntiated and have more class-specific stuff (like Domain Spells for Priests, a focus on spiritshifting/wildshape for Druids, and whatever makes sense for Wizards) but ultimately, if this entire mechanic was just completely cut, no ifs, buts or maybes, no compensation at all, I would still be fine with it, because spellcasters already become exponentially more powerful as they level.

 

 

 

But they shouldn't. This is one thing I thought they were trying to prevent, which is partially, I believe, why level 1 spells are so powerful. Going from total weakling to basically a god was something that I don't think is a desirable thing to carry over from the IE games for casters.

 

Being able to pick maybe 1 spell / encounter every 2 levels would be nice, just to give them something to do other than conserve spells. There's just no reason on many fights to use any, especially if you have a Cipher carrying most of the weight on easy encounters. Possibly a limit for which spells they can get.

 

Right it goes:

 

Do nothing but a few /encounter abilities and shoot ranged weapons @ things. Go all out on difficult fights.

-> Hit level 9/11, spam level 1/2 spells every encounter. Go all out on difficult fights.

 

Neither is good for balance or enjoyability. My cipher in both playthroughs was my most active class throughout the game, up until casters take over @ level 9+

 

____

 

I'd add that if they want shifting to be Druid's per-encounter thing it needs to be at will in/out, and it needs to have scaling accuracy. It quickly becomes garbage right now against anything that's not fully CCed for you. Plus I think some players just want their Druid to be a caster.

 

Priests, it'd be great if they had per-encounter deity abilities although I worry we'd end up with no-brainer deities a little bit.

 

Wizards, well, I'm not really sure what to do there. It seems like they figured wanding stuff between arcane assault would be fun enough but uh...no?

Edited April 10, 2015 by Odd Hermit

[Althernai]

The best answer I can give is UI coding. If you have two separate level 1 spell abilities, one per-encounter and one per-rest, it looks ugly. If you don't, then you need to code a set of per-rest abilities that you do not have (or are hidden) when you have per-encounter uses remaining, then pops onto the UI once you're out. But if you do that, how stores the UI indicate how many are left?

All you need to do is restore N spells at the end of combat. At the moment, it restores all of them all none, but unless the game is coded in a really strange way, the number restored can be arbitrary. Alternatively, you can set the number of available spells to N if the number is currently less than N.

[scrotiemcb]

 

The best answer I can give is UI coding. If you have two separate level 1 spell abilities, one per-encounter and one per-rest, it looks ugly. If you don't, then you need to code a set of per-rest abilities that you do not have (or are hidden) when you have per-encounter uses remaining, then pops onto the UI once you're out. But if you do that, how stores the UI indicate how many are left?

 

All you need to do is restore N spells at the end of combat. At the moment, it restores all of them all none, but unless the game is coded in a really strange way, the number restored can be arbitrary. Alternatively, you can set the number of available spells to N if the number is currently less than N.

That isn't the same thing at all. Use all lvl1 spells first battle. Use none second battle. Have two (not 1) lvl1 spells third battle.