[crossfire] Spell proposals

[James Lopeman]

To complicated for the average user, also to abusable. Min-Maxing is
and art .. never underestimate it. If fireball just got bigger/bader we
could get rid of sizes and simplify the game and make it easyer to 
test/adjust the power of the spell.

and OPTIONS after cast :P

Meflin

On Sunday 06 December 2009 10:30:45 am Nicolas Weeger wrote:
> Hello.
> 
> 
> Here are two proposals for spells. They are not totally incompatible, but
> well, even only one could fun IMO :)
> 
> The aim is to reduce the number of spells, and also make it more
>  customizable for players;
> 
> I'll use the fireball spell as an example.
> 
> 
> Spells with options.
> --------------------------
> Basic idea: level 1 fireball does x damage for y ticks on z squares.
> Each spell have defined bonus in damage, duration, range for one level.
> 
> When casting a spell, you can add options, like:
> 
> 1) /cast power 20% fireball
> 2) /cast range 15% fireball
> 3) cast damage 90 fireball
> 4) cast range 5% duration 2% fireball
> 
> 1) means "add (20% of levels over 1) * y ticks to duration, the rest split
> between range and damage"
> 2) means "add (15% of levels over 1) * z to range, the rest split between
> duration and damage"
> 3) means "add (90 * x) to damage, extra levels above split between duration
> and range"
> 4) is left as an exercice to the reader :)
> 
> 
> Obviously, you could then have a client-side interface to tweak spells /
>  help define your spells.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Player-made spells
> --------------------------
> Basic idea: get a spellbook for a standard level 1 fireball.
> Use alchemy (or other means) to tweak the parameters like range per level,
> duration, and such.
> 
> Ingredients to customize could be costly, or different for spells, or
> whatever.
> 
> Once leant, the spell has its own special parameters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What do you think of that?
> 
> 
> Nicolas
>