Casters are still slow...

[Erik-Dirk]

I know someone suggested it before but removing recovery for all spells does look like it'd work much better mechanically:

This essentially allows casting to be sped up without reducing the chance for an interrupt at all.

Line of effect spells would require the ability to prep. move. and release as discussed.

 

Of course armour would need to have two listed penalties, increase spell cast time and increase recovery.

[gGeorg]

MaxQuest:

- should there be a few consistent spell categories, or it's ok to have a ton of them?

Well, I like your analyst work man. Here is an idea.

 

standardize spells/actions to few ranks of categories brings a bit turn based flavor, and readability.

lets have 4 cast time categories

lets set ratio, of each other category

1:1:2:3

 

I can also easy say, that I can cast 3 fast spells  or 1 slow, that readability adds a level of combat tactical decision.

Time planing also supports idea of counter spell, anti magic counters. Now, the spell designer cant say what spell I could counter, because dont know if it is fast enough.

By this awesome thread https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/86684-mechanics-the-big-attack-speed-conundrum/

Total time of a spell is significantly influenced by armor recovery effect. Which means, solid recover time part of a spells, can make professional casters wants to wear clothes. Yay!

 

The ratio for categories must be linear for both parts of spells, (Cast, Recover). Both parts are driven different stats (formulas), so we want to keep ratio. This way we prevent irregularities in clothes and base stats on different spell category for same person. Thanks to this, ratio 1:2:3 will work for everyone. Tought part is, say the total cast time for first category. Based on MaxQuest tab above, shortest animations are about 0,5 also "turn" lenght looks a bit longer than PoE1, so lets say 3,5s. <<< this is number to discus and test.

 

Rough idea of spell time categories:

natural (formerly known as instant)

cast 0,5s / 3,0s recover = 3,5s total

fast

cast 2,0s / 1,5s recover = 3,5s total

average

cast 4,0s / 3,0s recover = 7,0s total

slow

cast 6,0s / 4,5s recover = 10,5s total

 

Get noticed1: Natural category allows semi-instant response, useful for counters or defense spells. (Wizards double, Restore, Arcane Veil, .... ) It looks like the animations for these spells are already done for about 0,4 - 0,5s. So let it round up to 0,5s for all of them, I could just hope that adding an idle animation is doable. Also, we  do comply with a slower game peace, so lets set Total cast time of Natural spells (formerly known as instant) same as the Total cast time of Fast category. e.g. 3,5 seconds is minimum cast time of any spell. Natural category is a bit creep, but it is as it is.

Get noticed2: Slow category 10,5s cast time looks horrible, but apply average bonus for Dex 15 so you get it faster than its now. (10s slowest spell) 

 

Once the spell time ranks/ratios are set, then attach all the spells to them.

The last step, fine tune up a spell to fit total time consumption. (time to power ratio)

 

Similar time categories should work for skills/ abilities. That "turn-based" or "quantum" approach would make combat planing more readable for noobs and tactical for veteran players. Easy to learn, hard to master.

Edited December 31, 2017 by gGeorg

[SaruNi]

One issue with casting before combat starts is that you can't self-buff (aside from using drugs---did the devs assume drugs and other consumables that increase action speed would be more popular?). However, spells with duration that involve multiple attack rolls---for example, Chill Fog---rely on the caster's accuracy and penetration at the time of each attack roll, *not* when the spell was cast. So if you cast Chill Fog and then use Frenzy (Tenacious +2 penetration still applies to spells) or +accuracy abilities (Dance of Death, Sworn Enemy, etc.) subsequent attack rolls will apply the bonuses.

 

In the case of Assassinate, the bonuses will apply if you're in stealth or invisible at the time of each attack---but if you've already cast the spell, the spell's automatic attack tick won't remove you from invisibility. For example you can cast Ray of Fire then use Smoke Veil---fire will continue to pour out of invisible hands and each attack roll will apply Assassinate bonuses.

Edited January 1, 2018 by SaruNi

[MaxQuest]

Let me reiterate that summoned weapons should be instant just in case this wasn't carved in stone already

I agree that 6s is horrendously slow.

But am still not sure how I do feel about it taking just 0s.

 

I was thinking about it taking either:

- 0.5s or

- 1.5s, provided there is also some new talent. Let's say Battlemaster Conjurer: summoned weapons take 1s less to conjure and refund the spellusage when they expire. (or even make them not use spellusages at all)

 

Reason for it being 0.5s instead of 0:

- it allows for showing animation

- it helps against accidental double-click

- it adds some opportunity cost, even if minor

 

Similar thing about wizard self-buffs, like: Mirrored Image, Wizard's Double, Llengrath's Displaced Image, Llengrath's Safeguard, Arcane Veil, etc.

If it was 0, chances are we would just go for subclassless wizards, and set AI Behaviour to use them all at once at the start of every fight.

 

---

I agree we need consistency. A good rules set should be maximally intuitive, which Deadfire's currently isn't. It's fine if it's a complex system, so long as it's internally consistent and players can reliably predict behaviors based on said consistency. Right now casting times and stacking rules are the opposite of that and the game's UI tends to be vague and thrifty when it comes to explaining how things work.

I was thinking about having a few consistent "casting" categories (like instant, fast, average, slow) with recovery duration matching the casting durations.

 

Examples:

 

And then having recovery modifiers indicated in spells tooltip, that would proporti8onally increase or decrease the final value of recovery time.

For example I think that interruption spells should be really fast, but since they have an utility component, means their dps should be lowered down a bit to compensate, either via base numbers or via longer recovery.

At the same time, the recovery of invocations and cipher powers could be lower than of equal spell, because they have a cost attached related to chants/focus build-up. Also chanting is stopped mid invocation recovery.

 

I haven't thought these deep yet. But the idea is that:

- something of weight 0 - can be very-fast cast

- something of weight 1 - can be just fast

- something of weight 2 - can be average

Generally the higher the impact a spell has - the slower it should be. But need to take also cost and ranking into account...

Edited January 1, 2018 by MaxQuest

[Boeroer]

Beautiful!

 

(If I ever decide to complete my paused crpg project I will def. hire you. )

 

I really wonder why it wasn't done like this in the first place. All those slightly different recovery values now! What for?

 

I agree that summoning weapons should take a short amount of time. Comparable to self buffs (basically summoning a weapon IS a self buff), so 0.5 seems like a good value.

Edited January 1, 2018 by Boeroer

[AndreaColombo]

Agree with everything in MaxQuest's post

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

Agree with everything in MaxQuest's post

 

 

Even six seconds seems a bit long to me! 

 

I really like the idea of giving Ciphers and Chanters very short cast times and even shorter recovery times, so that they can wear armor with minimal penalties; both of them really suffer compared to the ex-vancians and they need something to balance out the fact that a Wizard can dump their whole spell book before a Cipher or Chanter gets two casts out. 

[JFutral]

Great job. But again, in the abstract it seems reasonable. But without knowing exactly the thinking (if there is any exact thinking) with the changes as they are it is still kind of difficult to imagine. How does this proposal (or even the current casting mechanics) fit into the current battle mechanics as you understand them? Does it maintain some kind of balance, i.e. nothing is more difficult or too easy?

 

I just ran a party of all spell casters (some multi-class). What it really seems to affect for me (as someone who thinks getting bogged down with math is besides the point of a good RPG) it required different strategies, but nothing was more difficult or insurmountable, per se. Fireball is less the first or quick strike as it used to be, but still a good pre-strike (if I am clear).

 

For me, taking everything you know about the game mechanics (and I can't think of anyone who knows them better than you outside of the developers), does this chart result in a game that is more playable and enjoyable? How does this look in an actual fight?

 

But I am still not a cipher fan, so I don't know the consequences for that class of the new changes.

 

Asked another way, if it is at all possible to pull oneself out of the experience, if PoEII casting were in PoEI and we encountered PoEI casting in PoEII, what would we be saying?

 

Joe

[IndiraLightfoot]

Out of MaxQuest's first three suggestions, I prefer the v1 by far, but I'd change instant to 0 s. We need the system to be simplified, in order to have it as easy and intuitive as possible. 

[AndreaColombo]

Even six seconds seems a bit long to me!

 

Indeed, although with his proposed system only the most powerful spells would have a 6s casting time. They could be made powerful enough to be worth it.

 

The only thing is, I don't think a 6s spell should ever have longer recovery than 1.5s—and even that would be pretty long, considering how much you've waited (and risked) throughout the casting animation.

 

EDIT: I prefer suggestion v2, by the way. 4s is loooooong.

Edited January 1, 2018 by AndreaColombo

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

I like v3 myself, with v2 being a close second and v1 being last because 4s is too long. Having played some more of the beta, I consistently find aoe buffs being impractical because combat demands movement away from the area and even with retargeting can't get the whole party buffed. Reducing this to .5 or 1.5s would go a long way to fixing this issue, with self-buffs being instant. Another thing the proposed casting would improve is the viability of melee fighter evokers, which is a cool concept like Pathfinder's Magus but sucks in PoE2 Beta because outside of that one interrupt spell for Wizards there isn't anything for them to cast which won't get them interrupted in melee.

[SaruNi]

I like having some Druid/Wizard spells with long (or very long) casting times but shorter recovery. This game is adding an interesting stealth / invisibility system that PoE 1 was sorely lacking in, and long casting/short recovery goes well with stealth/smoke veil (not to mention Assassinate...). Also makes it easier to buff accuracy/damage/penetration between the casting of the spell and its attack rolls. And it's good for other playstyles as well (for example, open with powerful spell then spiritshift / self-buff). The "no casting-time opening cast" vs "needing buffs and/or debuffs (like weapon modals) for long casting time spells to actually hit consistently / penetrate" dynamic should lead to an interesting tactical battle with the interrupt system (though long casting spell effects should be improved for this and/or buffs should be made better).

 

Haven't tested a party of Assassin/Evokers and Assassin/Furies yet but they should be able to clear encounters quickly (Assassinate solves the accuracy / penetration / damage issue... the Fury teleport also lets you avoid AoE attacks while invisible, and smoke veil with decently high int / dex gives you just enough time to teleport or self-buff a bit and cast a 6 second spell).

 

(Assassinate doesn't work as well with multiple projectile spells or jump spells though, as it only applies to the initial hit. However AoE spells that hit multiple enemies simultaneously do apply it to the attack roll for each enemy.) 

Edited January 1, 2018 by SaruNi

[dunehunter]

Assassinate works with spells? I tried it in combat, use Smoke Veil then Fan of Flame, didn't work.

[SaruNi]

Assassinate works with spells? I tried it in combat, use Smoke Veil then Fan of Flame, didn't work.

 

Looks like it only works when casting from stealth or for spells already cast when you're in invisibility (if you cast the spell, then become invisible for subsequent attack ticks---tested on Ray of Fire)... if you try to cast a spell from invisibility you emerge from invisibility before casting it and lose the bonus. Possibly related to the bug that prevents Assassinate from working with Ranged weapons from invisibility. 

Edited January 1, 2018 by SaruNi

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

I think there is definitely a place for long-cast (6+ seconds) "ritual" type spells. But they need to refine the concentrate/interrupt mechanic first, those spells need to be pretty potent to the point of being potentially decisive, and they should be high level powers not base level bread and butter stuff. 

[SaruNi]

When you cast Returning Storm and then use Smoke Veil, Assassinate applies to the lightning strikes and their attack rolls won't cause you to leave invisibility. 

Edited January 1, 2018 by SaruNi

[IndiraLightfoot]

Alright guys, you convinced me. I'd love to see v1, but adjusted like this: 0, 1, 2, and 4.

[vanyel54]

Great work, I'm in for the v2 !

And as Dr Hieronymus has already said, a 6s spell must have a real impact on the fight (returning storm ?).

Additionally, if we stay in the STR/RES (vs MIG) model, we could give a speed bonus to the cipher class and use faster casting categories (0s 1s 2s 4s).

I thinks chanters too must be able to cast faster (because that already have to wait to cast it).

[JFutral]

Why in the world does anyone _want_ 6 second spells?

 

I'd rather they all be instantaneous. Wouldn't you?

 

Joe

[hilfazer]

And as Dr Hieronymus has already said, a 6s spell must have a real impact on the fight (returning storm ?).

 

If it works like in PoE1 then definitely no.

 

6s should be for spells with instant effects like Fireball (i hate overused examples) Blast of Frost.

A spell with both instant effect and AoE is even better candidate for long cast time.

 

But a spell that hits random single enemy and needs a lot of time to reach its full potential? No.

[MaxQuest]

Why in the world does anyone _want_ 6 second spells?

If I understood right, Josh wants some spells to be 6s because it increases the time window when you can interrupt them. And because of this drawback these few spells can be buffed for the BAMF effect, making interruption a really important aspect of the game.

 

At the same time, imho there are no spells that worth of 6s cast duration yet. But imagine if there was something like... AoE Disintegration or Overwhelming Wave with the radius of Interdiction.

 

I'd rather they all be instantaneous. Wouldn't you?

- if all spells are instant - spells would become OP also it will be hard to follow what's happening on the field.

- if spells have instant cast duration and long recovery - this would severely disfavor casters from wearing armor

- if spells have long cast duration and instant recovery - there would be no reason for casters to not wear the heaviest of armors

- if spells have long both cast and recovery durations - chances are that fights will be over before the casters will be able to adequately contribute to the fight

 

I like v3 myself, with v2 being a close second and v1 being last because 4s is too long.

Tbh I like them in the same order, and for the same reason.

In PoE1 I avoided casting slow spells, because 4s was literally too slow.

 

On the other hand, since in Deadfire there is no Slow mode at the moment, plus we have a new interruption system which is reliable instead of being chance-based, having 6s cast duration for a few aoe damaging spells (provided that their damage is proportionally buffed) can be quite ok, especially if they deal direct damage / have instant effects, like hilfazer wrote above.

 

So very-slow (6s) is being reserved for them, just like Andrea noted:

Indeed, although with his proposed system only the most powerful spells would have a 6s casting time. They could be made powerful enough to be worth it.

I would gladly have something like:

- Fireball: 3s cast duration + 3s recovery

- Let's say Meteor (think of fireball with x2 damage): 6s cast duration + 3s recovery

- Mental Binding: 3s cast duration + 1.5s recovery

- Whisper of Treason: 1.5s cast duration + 1.5s recovery

- Summoned Weapons: 0.5 or 1.5s cast duration + no recovery

- Thrust of Tattered Veils: 1.5s cast duration + 3s recovery

Edited January 2, 2018 by MaxQuest

[vanyel54]

 

And as Dr Hieronymus has already said, a 6s spell must have a real impact on the fight (returning storm ?).

 

If it works like in PoE1 then definitely no.

 

6s should be for spells with instant effects like Fireball (i hate overused examples) Blast of Frost.

A spell with both instant effect and AoE is even better candidate for long cast time.

 

But a spell that hits random single enemy and needs a lot of time to reach its full potential? No.

 

 

Oh sorry i was thinking about Relentless storm  

I agree with you that a 6s spell must have an immediate and meaningful impact on the fight. So yes i could pay 6s for a blast of frost but not for a fireball.

The problem is that we will have hard times to found candidates for a 6s time in the early levels

[JFutral]

 

Why in the world does anyone _want_ 6 second spells?

If I understood right, Josh wants some spells to be 6s because it increases the time window when you can interrupt them. And because of this drawback these few spells can be buffed for the BAMF effect, making interruption a really important aspect of the game.

 

At the same time, imho there are no spells that worth of 6s cast duration yet. But imagine if there was something like... AoE Disintegration or Overwhelming Wave with the radius of Interdiction.

 

I'd rather they all be instantaneous. Wouldn't you?

- if all spells are instant - spells would become OP also it will be hard to follow what's happening on the field.

- if spells have instant cast duration and long recovery - this would severely disfavor casters from wearing armor

- if spells have long cast duration and instant recovery - there would be no reason for casters to not wear the heaviest of armors

- if spells have long both cast and recovery durations - chances are that fights will be over before the casters will be able to adequately contribute to the fight

  

 

 

Well, exactly, though. As the player I don't want any of my spells interrupted. As a spell caster that's my whole point of being part of the party. If a fighter gets interrupted he just loses the chance for damage, but he still has his weapon to give it another go. As a spell caster I lose my "weapon", the spell is spent.

 

As the player I want my characters to be able to do the most damage with the least chance of failure. I want the odds in my favor. All this talk of balance, for the spellcaster if interrupt is going to be that important, then I want to either have the ability to cast more (as in more than two) short duration, uninterruptible spells and/or not lose a spell that is interrupted. Especially with an enemy AI that knows to target spellcasters.

 

Long duration, big AoE, big Dam spells make sense in battlefield battles. In the close quarters fighting in most CRPGs of this nature long duration spells make no sense and almost have no reason to exist in this environment. And considering I also risk friendly fire with many of those spells, too, why do I have these spells?

 

eta, Also, considering I now _have_ to have more than one spell book to carry my spells around in. All this seems weighted against spell casters.

 

I don't know what the BAMF effect is.

 

Joe

Edited January 2, 2018 by JFutral

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

Why in the world does anyone _want_ 6 second spells?

 

I'd rather they all be instantaneous. Wouldn't you?

 

Joe

 

 

I don't want the NPCs chain-casting instant AoE disintegration at me, no!

 

I want the game to be fun and challenging. A six second "Big Spell Incoming! Siren! Alert! Alert!" type mechanic with a little popup and suddenly I have a limited amount of time to interrupt the enemy caster's Big Incoming Nuke could be a lot of fun. Vice versa too if I have to defend my casters so they can get their Big Nukes off without the enemy interrupting them. 

 

I don't want it to take eight seconds to cast a ten second charm, though. That's not fun it's just lame.

[MaxQuest]

As the player I don't want any of my spells interrupted. As a spell caster that's my whole point of being part of the party. If a fighter gets interrupted he just loses the chance for damage, but he still has his weapon to give it another go. As a spell caster I lose my "weapon", the spell is spent.

Yeap, as offensive side: we don't want to get interrupted. But if that spell is sooo good we can still try and cast it.

And in well-balanced party there should be someone who will help with concentration, or will assist with an AoE hard disable.

 

As defensive side: we want to interrupt enemy spellcasters. If they would be able to unleash all their potential instantly... it would hurt.

 

Long duration, big AoE, big Dam spells make sense in battlefield battles. In the close quarters fighting in most CRPGs of this nature long duration spells make no sense and almost have no reason to exist in this environment. And considering I also risk friendly fire with many of those spells, too, why do I have these spells?

In PoE1 we had many spells at our disposal, and it was a great feeling that I have 5 different general strategies, and that in this given situation I can use this approach or this one. Versatility.

 

In Deadfire though... dunno, we'll have to see. But I can imagine a playstyle around:

- send a tank to gather enemies

- start casting a slow heavy hitting aoe spell that would seal the deal in one crit

- toss a mass disable, and relocate the tank right before impact

 

I don't know what the BAMF effect is.

My bad. Think of something between OOMPF and KABOOM!

Kidding

 

I wrote BAMF just to denote a heavy hitting spell, as that was the first association I had when thinking about the sound it makes on impact.

Edited January 2, 2018 by MaxQuest