[CF-Devel] Spell object idea.

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

Andreas Vogl wrote:
>
     
      What you proposed about spell objects sounds quite good.
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
      One question that came to my mind though is what are you going
     
     >
     
      to do about the magical attacktype component for spells?
     
     
  Just like there is no limitation for other archetypes having more than one 
attacktype set, I'd do the same for the spells.

  Spells that the player will cast (as defined by treasurelists in appearing in 
books) will have the bit in the attacktype set to be magic.  Those cast by 
monsters won't have it set.

  This really isn't much different than now.  Monsters would have things like 
ability_fireball, while players might have it as spell_fireball.

>
     
     
     >
     
      You sure know that spells used to add a magic component to the
     
     >
     
      effect's attacktypes, which makes magic resistance work against spells.
     
     >
     
      AFAIK, only prayers and monster's abilities were non-magic.
     
     
  Yep.  IMO, it is best to do as much as reasonably possible in the archs. 
Thus, if someone at some point wants to make a spell taht doesn't use magic, 
they could.  Developers can always put in unbalanced objects - the same would 
continue here (perhaps a bigger case compared to the magic attacktype set would 
be something like a large fireball that costs 1 sp or the like).


>
     
     
     >
     
      I'm sure it is possible to realize this with the new spell-object code,
     
     >
     
      but you didn't adress it in your first description.
     
     
  Yep - I'm sure there are various bits that are missing that will be realized 
once implementation starts.  The best one can hope is they cover most of the 
important bits, and it seems to make sense.


>
     
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
      Somewhat related to that, the ability object type will need special
     
     >
     
      treatment because of it's extra functionality as long-/short-range
     
     >
     
      spells, and "use-frequency-factor".
     
     
  Well, long and short range can probably be derived from the attacktype (cone = 
short, bolt/ball = long, etc).  IMO, it should be possible to actually make this 
smarter with the new code (since all the relevant details are now in the object, 
one could write a function that returns more detail on the type of spell which 
can't easily be done now).

  I'd have to look at the frequency stuff.  I thought that was largely 
controlled by just having the monster have like 4 firebreaths and 1 fear - thus, 
it would cast firebreath 4 times as often as fear.







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