[crossfire] [IDEA] Reagents for cast magic
Mitch Obrian
mikeeusaaa at yahoo.com
Sun Oct 16 12:56:18 CDT 2005
Wouldn't regents just be like talismands?
Perhapse if one doesn't have the regent the spell
should be only be 1/2 or 1/3rd as powerfull then with
the regent (for spells that 'need' regents)?
--- Mark Wedel <
mwedel at sonic.net
> wrote:
>
>
My personal thoughts:
>
>
doing this should be based on gameplay, not
>
sorcery vs witchcraft or any of
>
that type of things.
>
>
I'm a little reluctant to do it food based - for
>
some characters, it is enough a
>
pain just to find enough food on some maps, if I now
>
have to worry that I'm
>
eating the right type of food, that just adds a lot
>
of hassle.
>
>
However, having continued consumption of some food
>
times giving bonuses seems
>
reasonable. At the same time, if a character stops
>
eating those foods, those
>
bonuses should go away. This could perhaps be done
>
by very long lived forces -
>
eating the corresponding food creates the force, and
>
each time you eat it, the
>
duration of the force is increased (to some
>
maximum).
>
>
But to me, that is seperate from the reagants.
>
>
Doing reagants probably wouldn't be hard. But if
>
done, I think the following
>
should be considered:
>
>
1) Prepared reagants for most (all?) spells shoud be
>
available in shops. That
>
said, you may not get reagants for destruction in
>
scorn, but in brest perhaps.
>
It shouldn't be a requirement that I be an alchemist
>
as a spell caster. That
>
said, a caster could make them if he wanted to (and
>
save money).
>
>
(following from economics, if there is demand,
>
people would make it).
>
>
2) PRices for reagants, especially for high level
>
spells, could be quite costly.
>
1000 pp to cast comet?
>
>
3) Reagants should be quite light, so that you can
>
carry a bunch of them without
>
much effect on weight (or perhaps give players a
>
reagant pouch that reduces
>
weight quite a bit).
>
>
4) Not all spells should necessarily require
>
reagants. Most lower level spells
>
perhaps shouldn't, with more requirement for higher
>
level spells.
>
>
5) Use of reagants should be similar to arrows, eg,
>
happens automatically.
>
Player shouldn't have to be fumbling through their
>
inventory for them.
>
>
6) Could perhaps be interesting to have alternate
>
reagants for spells with
>
different effects (less or more powerful, etc).
>
>
>
>
The basic gist of this is don't want to make it
>
such a pain to play
>
spellcasters that no one does so. If I can only
>
carry 50 reagants and have to
>
keep popping back to town, what fun is that?
>
Likewise, if I have to be hunting
>
through the forest looking for some herb for a
>
spell, I'd not consider that
>
especially fun either.
>
>
That said, pricey reagants could certainly make
>
using some spells less appealing.
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
>
crossfire mailing list
>
crossfire at metalforge.org
>
http://mailman.metalforge.org/mailman/listinfo/crossfire
>
__________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page!
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
More information about the crossfire
mailing list