[CF-Devel] more skill/spell musings

[crossfire-devel-admin at archives.real-time.com]

David Hurst wrote:
>>
     
      Note one thought I had is that given the split in skills, we can perhaps 
     
     >>
     
      give exp for successful use of spells which we didn't before.  Eg, if you 
     
     >>
     
     paralyze a creature, you'd get some exp for that for example.  Sure, this 
     
     >>
     
     could be open to some abuses, but there are already otehr abuses out there 
     
     >>
     
     (maps you go in and fire 20 fireballs or whatever).
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
      Would not a better solution be, if you kill a monster while it was paralyzed
     
     >
     
      you get exp to the skill for kill, and same amount of exp to the skill for
     
     >
     
      paralyze?
     
     
  It is probably better that the exp gets split somehow.  I think doubling it 
probably isn't the right.  The main point is that to try and give some credit to 
the skill that helps out.


>
     
     
     >>
     
     summoner - matches the class.  This gets the summon spells, as well as most 
     
     >>
     
     of the item creation spells (build xxx wall, create ..)  Given directors 
     
     >>
     
     are a very popular tactic, this category could be useful just for that.
     
     >>
     
     
     >>
     
     evoker - covers a wide range of damage spells.  Since this is most useful, 
     
     >>
     
     it gets split with:
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
      Pyromancer?
     
     
  Well, really it is skill names:
evocation
summoning
pyromancy
abjuration/divination/transmutation (this follows AD&D - its a bit long - any 
idea of a nice simple name? - the basic idea is this covers the knowledge, 
exploration, and knowledge spells).  The background would be if one could only 
choose one skill, these would be people that could go out and find things out 
and remain safe.  So really any name would be OK, and just write some lore into 
the game about this skill and why people know it.

>
     
     
     >
     
      I thought evokers were mainly direct damage? Or are evokers a seperate
     
     >
     
      class and unrelated to the things below it?
     
     
evokers and pyros basically split the damage spells.  The basic idea is to try 
and spread out the damage spells a bit more, but since there are so many that 
fall into the direct damage, some form of split is necessary IMO.  If you split 
evocation, getting the cold and some other spells, with the pyromancy, which 
gets fire and some other, both of those are large 'arenas' of useful spells.




>
     
     
     >
     
      The diablo II system would work wonders in regards to this. (level
     
     >
     
      dependant and skill dependant, you need to fulfill the requirements of
     
     >
     
      level and of having the 3 (or more or less) skills below it before you can learn the skill.)
     
     
  Not familiar with diablo 2.  Note that this system does _nothing_ on how 
skills are learned - it is really more about how skills work within the game. 
IT just seems to me that if you allow players to easily learn all 4 magic 
skills, it sort of removes some of the interest.  OTOH, unless other skills are 
limited, same arguement can be made (learning priest spells or whatever).  So as 
a first pass, other than finding necessary bits to learn the skill 
(skillscroll), there wouldn't be any real limites.


>
     
     
     >
     
      I don't like the sound of a a different name for the same spell, a small
     
     >
     
      difference can justify a different name but having many different names
     
     >
     
      for one skill is just going to be confusing.
     
     
  There'd be no more than 4 spells of the same/similiar name, as that is how 
many different magic using skills there are.

  Although, interesting enough, as I think about this, you could probably 
associate 'spells' to these non spell casting skills (or maybe more accurately, 
a skill is only defined as a spell casting skill because there are spells 
associated with it.

>
     
     
     >
     
      I'm abit unsure as to what various classes do to get skills from other
     
     >
     
      classes? Currently I would imagine the game would be nigh on impossible
     
     >
     
      without being able to use both ICE spells and FIRE spells.
     
     
  Skills and classes are pretty much unrelated.

  Your class will determine your starting skills, just as now.  But beyond that, 
other than being able to get the bits to learn the skill, there is nothing 
preventing you from learning it.

  Note that the idea I proposed was to limit poeple to 3 of the 4 mana 
spellcasting skills.  So someone could learn evocation, pyro, and summoner. 
He'd just be prevented from the knowledge/protection arena.  Someone else could 
decide to do pyrom, summoner, discover, and thus not be able to get evocation.

  Of course, he can still use rods/wands for the spells he doesn't have.

  I know it won't be possible to completely balance the usefulness of these 
skills.  OTOH, I think it is possible to come up with something that there is 
reason to have the skills.  Eg, you'd never say 'never get XXX skill - it has no 
use'.

  It also creates potentially some more interesting scenarios - might be more 
converstation between players - eg, hey, do you have the divination skill and 
can you make some scrolls for me?  In exchange, I'll make you some evocation 
scrolls'


_______________________________________________
crossfire-devel mailing list
     
     crossfire-devel at lists.real-time.com
     
     
     https://mailman.real-time.com/mailman/listinfo/crossfire-devel