Fizzlebert the gnome mage

[fizzix]

I think fizzix's approach sounds more workable.

That said, the only complaint I have with buffs currently is that IIRC Haste Self doesn't behave properly when you want to refresh it: instead of resetting to max duration, it adds some puny amount on. So if you currently have Haste Self active, you have to wait for it to expire before you can properly refresh it.

Another thing that I've been meaning to do forever. Thanks for the reminder.

[Derakon]

I think fizzix's approach sounds more workable.

That said, the only complaint I have with buffs currently is that IIRC Haste Self doesn't behave properly when you want to refresh it: instead of resetting to max duration, it adds some puny amount on. So if you currently have Haste Self active, you have to wait for it to expire before you can properly refresh it.

[fizzix]

Sure making buffs permanent is a possibility and could probably be done reasonably well, however, I think it's more appropriate for a higher level version of the spell, one that's available when the simpler version would be close to minimal fail rate anyway. It costs M mana to cast (which is removed from your SP pool) and casts 0 mana to remove and the mana gets added back to your max (but needs to regen).

However, I'm not sure I care enough to code this up. What I do think I may do is make important messages like "you feel yourself slow down" a different color in my message screen. To go into V, colors would have to be pretty consistent and there are a lot of messages to check for, but if it's just for me, I can just pick the few messages I care about and color those.

[buzzkill]

I don't think so, but that ignores the problem of failure rates and the fact that early on you simply can't afford to keep your buffs up indefinitely, especially ones like Haste Self.

But simple buffs, such as bless or prot from evil could be sustained. It just a matter of figuring the cost to max mana. You would need some sort of calculation that involved...

m) mana cost of the spell
s) success rate
r) mana regen rate (per turn)
x) xtra cost for convenience (25% in this case)

((m/s)*x)/r = max mana cost

An experienced caster. Speed lasts 30 turns, costs 50 mana, and has a 30% fail rate, and regen is 1/2 mana per turn.

So. ((50/.7)*1.25)/.5 = 178 (subtracted from max mana)

The numbers here are made up, but the math looks pretty solid. I don't see why it wouldn't work. I'd love to see this in a variant.

[Mikko Lehtinen]

That reminds me: has there ever been any discussion as to making the various buff spells into sustains that simply lop off that much mana from your maximum MP pool versus having to keep on recasting?

I've had that discussion in my head.

[Derakon]

That reminds me: has there ever been any discussion as to making the various buff spells into sustains that simply lop off that much mana from your maximum MP pool versus having to keep on recasting?

I don't think so, but that ignores the problem of failure rates and the fact that early on you simply can't afford to keep your buffs up indefinitely, especially ones like Haste Self.

Later in the game, sure, it's trivial to keep buffs going indefinitely, for the dedicated casters at least. Hybrid casters have to deal with higher failure rates, smaller mana pools, and more expensive spells, so it takes much longer for them to not care about the costs of their buff spells.

[getter77]

That reminds me: has there ever been any discussion as to making the various buff spells into sustains that simply lop off that much mana from your maximum MP pool versus having to keep on recasting?

[fizzix]

Uploaded Part 15 last night but forgot to mention it on here.

[fizzix]

Moving right along. Uploaded Part14

[fizzix]

Part 13 is up. I have a nice backlog of videos now, thanks to some free time this weekend.

[fizzix]

Part 12 is going up. I get trolled by randarts.

[fizzix]

Was the whole Gang of Usually 25 thing an actual thing as far as the number having some sort of lore significance or something? First ever created vault happened to be a 5x5? It just seems like an oddly large number unless it was just a random decision however many years ago that somehow stuck up until perhaps the near future...

This has changed. I think the max used to be completely random between one and 32.

Right now the group monster selection is pretty awful for weak monsters. Basically it picks a random number betwen 1 and 13 and then adds that to the difference between the monster depth and current depth. It caps it at 1 on the low end and 25 on the high end. So if you find a monster that's over 25 levels underdepth (like a group of fire hounds at dlevel 45) it will always be the maximum 25. IMO this is a pretty poor design. I can see the reason for limiting group sizes for tough monsters, but 25 is just too many for large groups.

Especially since these monsters will fill up vault spaces that can be occupied by more interesting monsters!

[getter77]

Was the whole Gang of Usually 25 thing an actual thing as far as the number having some sort of lore significance or something? First ever created vault happened to be a 5x5? It just seems like an oddly large number unless it was just a random decision however many years ago that somehow stuck up until perhaps the near future...

[fizzix]

Part 11 is up.

[fizzix]

Finally had time to record another video, Part 10 is going up now.