Thoughts on Wizard Summoned Weapons

[Boeroer]

Everything that's faith attuned seems to be a priest's summoned weapon. Xoti may have her own variant. I really hope they are not all corrosive because that seems to be boring and not fitting.

[JerekKruger]

I thought that they just didn't fine tune that yet and it's just a beta-thing that all the faith attuned weapons have a corrosive lash instead of a fitting one.

 

Probably. I certainly hope the weapons get more unique graphics.

 

There’s a sickle in the game’s resources; presumably Xoti’s, since that’s the only sickle we know about. It scales with level and has a property called something like “Faith Attuned” which adds a 60% corrosive lash. Looks like that’s the priestly Weapon thing in Deadfire.

 

It also has +3 Deflection against melee weapons as an added bonus too, which is nice.

[AndreaColombo]

It also has +3 Deflection against melee weapons as an added bonus too, which is nice.

 

That's standard for hatchets, though, which the sickle belongs to in Deadfire

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

 

As a side note I'd really like to see the Magranite and Eothasian weapons have burning lashes rather than corrosive ones, and perhaps the Wael one could have shocking (corrosive fits Berath and Skaen reasonably well).

 

 

Yeah, I agree on this also.

[JerekKruger]

That's standard for hatchets, though, which the sickle belongs to in Deadfire

 

Oh my bad. Given the hatchet proficiency doesn't improve your defences I assumed (without checking) that hatchets no longer did either.

[Juodas Varnas]

As a side note I'd really like to see the Magranite and Eothasian weapons have burning lashes rather than corrosive ones, and perhaps the Wael one could have shocking (corrosive fits Berath and Skaen reasonably well).

I agree about Magran and Eothas getting burning lash and Berath keeping the corrosive one, but i feel that maybe Shocking would fit Skaen the most, mostly because he's often associated with torturers and executioners (you know, like the Electric chair?), and  then for Wael i'd give it random lash, because life is like a box of chocolates.

[JerekKruger]

I agree about Magran and Eothas getting burning lash and Berath keeping the corrosive one, but i feel that maybe Shocking would fit Skaen the most, mostly because he's often associated with torturers and executioners (you know, like the Electric chair?), and  then for Wael i'd give it random lash, because life is like a box of chocolates.

 

Yeah Skaen and Wael aren't as obvious as Magran, Eothas and Berath. I like your suggestion for Skaen and if it's not too much hassle a random lash would be great for Wael.

[Gromnir]

Can we all at least agree that the summoned weapons should be instant-cast? No longer than it takes to do a weapon switch?

there is many a cautionary tale 'bout the granting o' wishes.  genie in the lamp. monkey's paw. etc.  

 

grant wish and make instacast, but then reduce extreme long duration to put more in line with other spells?

 

at the moment the priest weapons is doing too much damage and is bugged-- the lash effect is being added to spell damage as well.  with few found weapons in the beta to compare, the priest weapons is clear winners, which is just wrong. am suspecting there will be changes, but as much as folks like priest weapons and hate the rest o' summoned, the current glaring problem is with the priestly spiritual weapons.  

 

oh, and for the firebrand haters, am suspecting if half o' the enemies in the beta were constructs and trolls, people would no doubt be impressed by the firebrand.  am suspecting deadfire will have a similar % o' fire weak enemies as did poe, which will make the firebrand much more effective than some folks imagine. situational very powerful. good.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

 

Can we all at least agree that the summoned weapons should be instant-cast? No longer than it takes to do a weapon switch?

there is many a cautionary tale 'bout the granting o' wishes.  genie in the lamp. monkey's paw. etc.  

 

grant wish and make instacast, but then reduce extreme long duration to put more in line with other spells?

 

 

 

I don't really follow what you're saying here re: "wishing."

 

All the spells need numerous balance changes to durations, cast times, effects, etc. right now., and yeah, there's an obvious bug with the lashes boosting weapon damages and I don't think anyone's saying that should persist. That said, i'm not sure why the duration of the summoned weapon particularly matters. "Long enough to last the whole fight" seems reasonable if it's otherwise equivalent to an appropriate-for-level found weapon.  If it's better, then maybe shorter duration makes sense.

 

*Regardless* though it should be an instant-cast because . . . it's a melee weapon, you have to cast it then attack with it. If it's roughly equivalent with other found items (as I *think* you're arguing for) then a fast cast time and a very long duration would both be indicated, in order to maintain that parity.

 

With longer cast times than "instant" or shorter durations than "the whole fight," it's no longer equivalent to a found item, so you'd need to give the weapon a comparative boost in effectiveness to balance that out.

[Gromnir]

 

 

Can we all at least agree that the summoned weapons should be instant-cast? No longer than it takes to do a weapon switch?

there is many a cautionary tale 'bout the granting o' wishes.  genie in the lamp. monkey's paw. etc.  

 

grant wish and make instacast, but then reduce extreme long duration to put more in line with other spells?

 

 

 

I don't really follow what you're saying here re: "wishing."

 

All the spells need numerous balance changes to durations, cast times, effects, etc. right now., and yeah, there's an obvious bug with the lashes boosting weapon damages and I don't think anyone's saying that should persist. That said, i'm not sure why the duration of the summoned weapon particularly matters. "Long enough to last the whole fight" seems reasonable if it's otherwise equivalent to an appropriate-for-level found weapon.  If it's better, then maybe shorter duration makes sense.

 

*Regardless* though it should be an instant-cast because . . . it's a melee weapon, you have to cast it then attack with it. If it's roughly equivalent with other found items (as I *think* you're arguing for) then a fast cast time and a very long duration would both be indicated, in order to maintain that parity.

 

With longer cast times than "instant" or shorter durations than "the whole fight," it's no longer equivalent to a found item, so you'd need to give the weapon a comparative boost in effectiveness to balance that out.

 

so a spell which creates the equivalent o' a magical shield should get a shorter duration than a summoned magic weapon? reason?  any buff or debuff or weapon enhancement or pretty much anything other than damage producing spells and cleanses, could be utilizing the same "long enough for the whole fight" reason.  hardly convincing. is perfect reasonable that a spell with a long duration should have a longer cast time. spells which does huge relative damage should also have longer cast times.  it's a spell. compare to equippable weapons is specious, particular as the summoned weapons is counting as an additional free weapon set.

 

these is now per-encounter abilities.  thank goodness. idiotic vancian casting meant that other than rest spam, you had to hoard your low-level casting opportunities 'tween rest.  balancing nightmare as a caster, particular at high levels, were far more powerful immediate following a rest.  weak low level. strong high.  other than boss fights, is no reason a poe developer should be believing a caster had immediate rested. balance encounters with vancian casters is obvious is more difficult.  converse, in deadfire we can use spiritual weapons or firebrand or spirit lance every encounter from the moment we acquire the power.  the amount o' time a player o' less than level 10+ is functional able to utilize these summoned weapons 'tween rests has increased dramatically 'tween poe and deadfire. 

 

so yeah, an increased cast time for a per-encounter Spell with an extreme long duration is unreasonable because?  

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Boeroer]

So you're saying that a spell that replaces your great sword with another great sword that replaces slash with burn damage and takes 6 seconds to cast + recovery until you can finally use it, which uses up 1 per-encounter-resource and can be interrupted is a well balanced thing...?

 

In my opinion the Firebrand spell has to either be fast cast OR produce a weapon that does something more special.

 

Also, you can't put a summoned weapon on a level with let's say a self buff. After the summoning process you have to actively use the weapon in order to profit from the spell. A buff will give you a passive bonus and you can go on with whatever is on your mind. If you don't attack with a summoned weapon the spell is simply wasted (time & resource). The duration has to be long because if it weren't long you never would be able to get something out of it in the first place.

If the weapon doesn't do anything special (other than changing the damage type and give you that additonal virtual weapon slot) it's strictly worse than just using the weapon you have at hand. Because you have to invest time to summon it, you can get interrupted and you use a point of your resource and an ability point. 

 

In a party the fights are over quickly, especially at classic difficulty. If you invest 6 or 9 seconds in order to summon a weapon - it either should be powerful (like the faith attuned weapons or the Blights/Lance via auto-AoE) or have some special purpose (like keeping you alive via draining) or whatever could balance out that you have to invest time and resources.
 

In that regard, Firebrand in the momentary implemetation is total crap. And if it stays this way nobody will use it or pick it. Not even Gromnir (if he cares a bit for effectiveness).   

Edited December 9, 2017 by Boeroer

[Gromnir]

So you're saying that a spell that replaces your great sword with another great sword that replaces slash with burn damage and takes 6 seconds to cast + recovery until you can finally use it, which uses up 1 per-encounter-resource and can be interrupted is a well balanced thing...?

 

 

for a second level slot?  sure.  greatswords do slash/pierce. if Gromnir is current stuck with a slash/pierce weapon ''gainst a foe with high slash/pierce armour (which given the greatsword's less than stellar armour penetration is likely) am gonna frequent be thankful we got the firebrand with burn/pierce  and is a weapon with scaling magical quality which counts as a free weapon slot and has a duration of +80 seconds for a "caster" with good intellect.  thanks to some o' the complainers, Gromnir, if he wants to have useful greatsword proficiency, will now likely have to take multiple talents as 'posed to just one... so am gonna want as much use from greatswords as possible. so, yeah, it is well-balanced as it has a high chance o' being useful when your other greatsword/weapons would be rendered useless or o' little use 'cause o' insufficient armour penetration or when you don yet eben have a magical greatsword. is a per encounter option, so gonna be able to use these more often than poe counterparts. oh, and one reason why bittercut were so effective in poe were precise 'cause it were corrode/slash--  is the primary reason it were so effective.   more than a few poe builds in the poe builds thread is based 'round aquisition o' bittercut.  sneer at such a quality in this place when lauding elsewhere is a bit hypocritical, eh? sure, you won't be able to durgan's steel a firebrand, but it is a second level druid spell for chrissakes. 

 

for levels 1-10, we believe firebrand and the other summoned weapons we has seen is perfectly acceptable... with the recognition a few is bugged or too powerful.  firebrand ain't near as bad as you suggest, and if Gromnir has greatsword proficiency, then yeah, am thinking it is a reasonable option to be choosing firebrand, but only if we need consider levels 1-10. 

 

past early and mid levels, if deadfire 1007 keeps pace with poe progression, firebrand and concelhaut's staff will be relegated to relative pointlessness. we has noted repeated how opposite o' what jk suggested, is at high levels when the early summons is gonna suffer by comparison.  unless as part o' the scaling scheme something is added beyond the level we are playing, am suspecting folks will likely exploit respec to dump 'em. 

 

refrain in this thread is little more than poe summoned weapons are better than deadfire versions.  some poe summons were silly powerful and would be game breaking when wielded by a deadfire paladin/_______ or berserker/________.  as long as the summons maintain rough quality parity and add one additional facet not readily available to the player, am thinking they is a win choice.

 

regardless, a spell with one o' the longest durations possible needs instacast?  

 

*chuckle*

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Erik-Dirk]

Why does the potential of summoned weapons being too powerful for multi-class keep coming up?
If summons do not scale with level then they will not be too powerful, as a multiclass will get the spell two whole levels later when you presumably have better regular weapons.
If they do scale then this will most likely be with power level meaning a multiclass will get a weaker variation. 

Pure casters can have a slight more powerful summon weapon, without being a gamebreaker. 

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

 

 

  it's a spell. compare to equippable weapons is specious, particular as the summoned weapons is counting as an additional free weapon set.

 

A summoned weapon really isn't a spell, though. It doesn't target anything, it doesn't *do* anything, until you attack with it like a weapon. Functionally it's equivalent to an extra weapon set, not a spell or a buff.

 

Think about it this way: something like Arcane Shield operates as a buff on top of your currently equipped gear. It doesn't replace your currently equipped shield. If there were a spell that summoned an equippable shield, yeah, the spell should either have an instant cast and be level equivalent -- with some sort of nice bonus effect to justify the cast -- or if long-cast / short duration, be markedly better than other level-equivalent gear.

Edited December 10, 2017 by Dr. Hieronymous Alloy

[Gromnir]

 

 

 

  it's a spell. compare to equippable weapons is specious, particular as the summoned weapons is counting as an additional free weapon set.

 

A summoned weapon really isn't a spell, though. It doesn't target anything, it doesn't *do* anything, until you attack with it like a weapon. Functionally it's equivalent to an extra weapon set, not a spell or a buff.

 

Think about it this way: something like Arcane Shield operates as a buff on top of your currently equipped gear. It doesn't replace your currently equipped shield. If there were a spell that summoned an equippable shield, yeah, the spell should either have an instant cast and be level equivalent -- with some sort of nice bonus effect to justify the cast -- or if long-cast / short duration, be markedly better than other level-equivalent gear.

 

dear lord.  

 

yeah, it's a weapon, which you gain at level-up rather than through 1007ing or purchase and bring into being for a limited period of time via caster spell mechanics, after which it disappears... just like other equipped weapons?  as beoroer notes, the functional weapon switch you is analogizing to can be interrupted... 'cause it is manifesting through the mechanics o' Spell Casting.  furthermore, unlike equipables, the summons can't be upgraded and is only useable by a single class... save for in the case o' firebrand, which is showing up on both druid and priest o' eothas list.  so, two. can't pass the firebrand to a fellow party "long enough to last the entire fight," can you? etc.

 

trying to analogize to actual weapons is swell and all, but am not seeing the point.  is not an equipable weapon.  is a per-encounter power gained at level-up. 

 

...

 

closer analogy for you would be druid spirit shift, no?  functional you actual get armour and weapons with special qualities, though they ain't visible in inventory.  shift for druid is instantaneous... and lasts 20 seconds.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[KDubya]

Why does the potential of summoned weapons being too powerful for multi-class keep coming up?

If summons do not scale with level then they will not be too powerful, as a multiclass will get the spell two whole levels later when you presumably have better regular weapons.

If they do scale then this will most likely be with power level meaning a multiclass will get a weaker variation. 

 

Pure casters can have a slight more powerful summon weapon, without being a gamebreaker. 

 

Power level makes the duration longer, it doesn't change the quality of the summoned weapon.

 

So a tenth level Wizard and a tenth level berserker/Wizard Warlock will have the same summoned staff.

 

A pure Wizard will be a much better caster with access to the highest level spells and will get to the next tier of spells faster than a multi-class. A multi-class will have various synergies with its other class that will make it much different than a pure Wizard. In the case of a Berserker, a Fighter or a Cipher mix the result will be that they are able to be much better in melee combat. If a pure Wizard gets a better weapon such that they are better in melee than a multiclass then what is the point of the multiclass?

 

I am curious as to how Carnage will interact with the AoE of Citzal's Lance, or Citzal's Lance interacting with the Flurry of Blows from a Monk that can proc another hit off of a critical.

[dunehunter]

 

Why does the potential of summoned weapons being too powerful for multi-class keep coming up?

If summons do not scale with level then they will not be too powerful, as a multiclass will get the spell two whole levels later when you presumably have better regular weapons.

If they do scale then this will most likely be with power level meaning a multiclass will get a weaker variation. 

 

Pure casters can have a slight more powerful summon weapon, without being a gamebreaker. 

 

Power level makes the duration longer, it doesn't change the quality of the summoned weapon.

 

So a tenth level Wizard and a tenth level berserker/Wizard Warlock will have the same summoned staff.

 

A pure Wizard will be a much better caster with access to the highest level spells and will get to the next tier of spells faster than a multi-class. A multi-class will have various synergies with its other class that will make it much different than a pure Wizard. In the case of a Berserker, a Fighter or a Cipher mix the result will be that they are able to be much better in melee combat. If a pure Wizard gets a better weapon such that they are better in melee than a multiclass then what is the point of the multiclass?

 

I am curious as to how Carnage will interact with the AoE of Citzal's Lance, or Citzal's Lance interacting with the Flurry of Blows from a Monk that can proc another hit off of a critical.

 

 

AoE of Citzal's Lance doesn't trigger Carnage, the Lance + Swift Flurry is same as Blast + Flurry, causing a damage overflow now

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

 

 

closer analogy for you would be druid spirit shift, no?  functional you actual get armour and weapons with special qualities, though they ain't visible in inventory.  shift for druid is instantaneous... and lasts 20 seconds.

 

 

 

Sure, that's a fair comparison.

 

But druid spiritshift forms. . .are instant-cast, right?  (I haven't bothered to try a druid in Deadfire yet). And they give really big bonuses, in exchange for short durations?  If they gave milder bonuses, they'd need longer durations  . . . 

[Gromnir]

 

 

 

closer analogy for you would be druid spirit shift, no?  functional you actual get armour and weapons with special qualities, though they ain't visible in inventory.  shift for druid is instantaneous... and lasts 20 seconds.

 

 

 

Sure, that's a fair comparison.

 

But druid spiritshift forms. . .are instant-cast, right?  (I haven't bothered to try a druid in Deadfire yet). And they give really big bonuses, in exchange for short durations?  If they gave milder bonuses, they'd need longer durations  . . . 

 

am wondering if you are actual responding to our posts.

 

in any event, sounds as if you are simple quibbling 'bout the appropriate length o' the cast and the duration o' the spell.  firebrand lasts 4x as long as spirit shift. 

 

in any event, is no more analogizing to weapon switch.  congrats.  baby steps.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

ps clarification: firebrand is 4x the duration o' spiritshift, but base spiritshift duration is only 15 seconds... firebrand is 60.

Edited December 10, 2017 by Gromnir

[dunehunter]

Priest's Spiritual Weapon is like a +60% lash damage self-buff to me (with 6 sec casting time, while Monk can get 50% lash instantly, good balance)

Edited December 10, 2017 by dunehunter

[Boeroer]

Gromnir's point is that the summoned weapon lasts longer than Lightning Strikes or Spiritshift. And that's correct.

 

But in those cases you get something powerful quickly for a short amount of time. It helps you to overcome your foes more quickly. You use it because it makes a big difference.

 

Using Firebrand at the moment gives you zero increase in power - unless you meet a foe that is vulnerable to burn. And even then it's debatable if it's not better to simply hack away with your usual weapon for 9 seconds instead of summoning Firebrand which may get interrupted.

 

The only reason to summon it would be that you meet a special foe that you can't harm with your weapon and now you really need burn damage. While this may be useful 2% of times in a solo game it's totally useless in a party setup.

 

Give Firebrand a burning lash and then it's on par with the others. Actually I think they simply forgot this. Because which weapon other than Fire-Brand deserves a burning lash?

 

I would also prefer shorter duration if that would lead to shorter casting time.

 

The others seem to be fine at the moment. But also here I would like them to be summoned more quickly even if that means that they don't last as long.

You can always summon it twice if you need to.

Edited December 10, 2017 by Boeroer

[AndreaColombo]

So, to review my options—

 

I can:

 

- Invest one ability point at level up to get a weapon summoning spell.

- Spend one of my two per-encounter castings of that level to summon the weapon.

- Wait 6 seconds for the weapon to be summoned, while making myself vulnerable to interrupting attacks that will make me lose the spell and per-encounter casting completely.

- (Assuming my spell didn't get interrupted) Acquire a weapon that isn't much better than what I was already wielding in the first place.

 

At this point, I have wasted a per-encounter casting at the opportunity cost of any other spell I have at the same level, and wasted 6 seconds' worth of DPS in order to acquire no advantage whatsoever over my enemies, and a situational and/or little advantage over my regular non-summoned weapon.

 

OR

 

- Enter combat with my regular non-summoned weapon and whack away at my enemies immediately.

 

 

As far as in-game decisions go, this certainly isn't one of the hardest.

 

If summoned weapons retain their current duration and become fast cast, interesting martial builds that focus on them will become viable. If not, those builds will be subpar and therefore not worthy of time or attention.

[tinysalamander]

So, assuming Arms Bearer still exists, is it strictly better than the spell now?

[JerekKruger]

So, assuming Arms Bearer still exists, is it strictly better than the spell now?

 

I don't really think you need Arms Bearer to make the benefit of Firebrand's flaming damage negligible. With two weapon slots you could carry a Great Sword and a Morning Star (or a Pollaxe and a Pike) and cover all three of the physical damage types. I highly doubt there will be any enemies in Deadfire who will be highly resistant to all three physical damage types, so the only time Firebrand will give an advantage is when enemies are specifically weak against flaming attacks. If Firebrand was just another weapon you could carry around with you and pull out in those situations it'd be great (paired with a Pollaxe for example), but at the cost of an ability, a spell cast and whatever casting duration it ends up with it's really not.

 

Gromnir mentions Bittercut as an example of why Burning/Piercing is so good and in doing so completely misses the point. Bittercut was good because it was a Sabre with dual damage types i.e. it still benefited from the Sabres inherent +20% damage whilst no longer having to worry about Slash immune enemies. Great Swords are already dual damage type so moving from Slashing/Piercing to Burning/Piercing is a sidegrade.

[thelee]

I haven't thoroughly played the backer beta, so it's possible I'm missing something.

 

But I just want to chime in a) poe2 summon weapons are underwhelming and b) that I think the people defending or generally supportive of the poe2 summoned weapons are massively undervaluing or ignoring the opportunity cost of a poe2 summoned weapons, which others have have tried to raise.

 

It's not enough for a summoned weapon to be slightly better or distinct, it has to be _significantly_ better, because of all the things people have mentioned, i.e. ability slot, cast time, interrupt risk, etc. I feel like some people are just comparing the stats between a summoned weapon and a real weapon, seeing a lean towards the former (or a niche case for the former) and wiping their hands of it, ignoring all the costs it takes to get (or leave open the option of) the summoned weapon versus the relative "free lunch" you get from a real weapon.

 

EDIT to add: in POE1, the opportunity costs of summoned weapons were much lower, and they were still designed to be pretty strong, because in my mind that's what it takes to make summoned weapons a viable, strong option, even if at the margins it could be arguably too strong (a spell sword wizard with tons of buffs and specialized gear maybe, or firebrand and some tricks maybe). Compare to (A)D&D of the infinity engine games, where there was just so much garbage. Yeah, Shillelagh was strictly better than the club you could get at that spell level, but it was almost never a good choice to save a spell slot for a weapon whose only advantage over a normal club was that you got +1 THAC0 (and one memorized spell slot is still a much lower opportunity cost than in POE2). Don't get me started on Magic Stone.

Edited December 12, 2017 by thelee